Food for thought (article from Telegraph)

[elaine.e]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/lifestyle/pets/10581715/Battle-lines-drawn-over-the-nations-favourite-dog-food.html

Interesting article. I watched the video too, but I'm not so sure about everything said in it. Even though I'm a raw feeder and made a deliberate decision to stop feeding kibble because I firmly believe that raw is better, I feel that the video is too black and white when she holds up a handful of kibble and compares it to feeding a person with white bread and sugary sweets. Too simplified.

The other bit I don't like is she gives her dog (Labradoodle?) a hide chew so small that he can fit the whole thing in his mouth, and describes white rawhide chews as healthy. I give Louis large white rawhide chews because he's a careful chewer and because the ones I buy are definitely cow hide, unbleached and don't come from China. Louis is an anxious dog and finds them relaxing but I wouldn't call them healthy or even necessarily safe. William doesn't have them because he tries to bite off large chunks and swallow them. Even though Louis is a careful chewer he's never left on his own with a hide chew.

[Jane57]

I didnt feel comfortable with that rawhide either
I think the bit when she mentioned the kibble though was where she said kibble filled with cereal, beet pulp , fillers etc, thats how I took it, ie not good quality kibble was comparable to the sweets and bread.

[Jane57]

Watching again, she didnt make it clear really though did she, we could have presumed she meant all kibble was erm rubbish.

[Joules]

Read the article and was not at all impressed with the comments from the head of the British Vet Association that Pedigree, Bakers and the like are probably a better diet for a dog than anything an owner could make 

[Nicola]

Read the article and was not at all impressed with the comments from the head of the British Vet Association that Pedigree, Bakers and the like are probably a better diet for a dog than anything an owner could make  

I read it earlier and noticed that bit too but while a properly researched and planned home-made diet is vastly preferable to Bakers etc. I guess he's speaking with the average uninformed Joe Public dog owner in mind who might think that making their dog's food themselves means just giving them whatever they're having, or any human food they really like, so they'd end up eating a very unsuitable diet. Crap as Bakers is it's still better than an unbalanced/high fat diet of human food in a 'least bad option' way. Still, he could have made the distinction clear though, it does come across as an endorsement of rubbish foods