September 21st, 2006, 04:57 PM
oooo lookit what I found! :thumbs up
i don't know if it's been posted before though (didn't search the stickies) but if not, then great. after the chart is an excellent description of "good" vs "bad" ingredients and why.
tell me what you think! :)
September 21st, 2006, 09:24 PM
anybody else thought this was great? worth a sticky?...
September 21st, 2006, 09:40 PM
I had never realised how baaaaaaad Alpo was (I never bothered to look at the ingredients!!)
ground yellow corn, beef and bone meal, soybean meal, beef tallow (fat) BHA/BHT, animal digest
YIKES!! :eek: :sick:
September 21st, 2006, 09:59 PM
ooo I love the color coding!:)
September 22nd, 2006, 10:47 AM
Unfortunately, it is misleading. The Eagle Pack food it lists is the Natural and not the Holistic which is a premium food and would be on a par with Solid Gold.
September 22nd, 2006, 11:25 AM
well it doesn't say Eagle Pack Holistic... :rolleyes: most pet-food companies offer different "formula qualities" so yes, you have to research. the SG on the list is not Wolf King, either...
but still it's a great article. the desciptors at the bottom of the page rock :thumbs up
September 22nd, 2006, 12:19 PM
I agree with Goldengirl, they only list one formula by brand but use the brand name only they don't give the name of the formula, it creates confusion because it make certain companies look like they are putting out crap only
I have seen much better food comparisons charts in the past, to me this does not come close to being a good dog food comparison chart otherwise the would have list Brand and different formulations under each brand.
this is more of an slanted version to promote this persons favorite brand which was chicken soup for the dog lovers soul and make other brands look bad by taking their worst formulations. For example
I could have taken Diamond Natural which is the same as the Cosco brand Chicken and Rice and removed the Chicken Soup, Merrick and Innova and then promote it as being the best value for the money and according to the chart it would make eagle pack as shown crap and solid gold and wellness as simple being way overpriced foods and the dehydrated foods FORCE and EMBARK as being overpriced and a worst value since they only have one green and the rest as white not taking into account they have vegetables are better than grains and single meat is not necessarily bad Chicken, chicken meal,whole grain brown rice, white rice, cracked pearled barley,
THe chart basically implies the more times you see words in green the better the food is which is not always the case
September 22nd, 2006, 12:44 PM
Chicken Soupô chicken turkey chicken meal turkey meal ground brown rice ground white rice
And what formula is this one? I can't find any with "turkey meal"
And if they were picking the worst of the other makers maybe the should have done the same with Chick soup
Whole grain brown rice, chicken, turkey, chicken meal, ocean fish meal, cracked pearled barley, millet, powdered cellulose (a source of fiber), egg product,
I guess more interesting is that chick Soup is made by Diamond foods which I used for an example earlier :p
September 22nd, 2006, 01:35 PM
I agree with OG. There's no logic behind the selection process of foods within brands. They didn't consistantly choose the best or the worst of each brand, nor did they choose a specific meat formula and use those (ex. only compare lamb based foods). If I had seen that list 2 years ago and was using it to choose a dog food, I can almost guarantee you, I would choose a crappy one because the list isn't very clear at all, and is very misleading.
I think the intentions behind it were good, but in the attempt to simplify it all, a lot of info was lost.
September 22nd, 2006, 01:49 PM
hey what if WE put such a kibble comparison chart together?? it's easy with a spreadsheet, the research on ingredients has already been done & posted here on various threads, we could compare "apples to apples" ... what do you think?? we would need a volunteer to host it on their website maybe? :highfive:
September 22nd, 2006, 02:04 PM
I'd love to see that too. :highfive: I'm hopelessly naive when it comes to computers though. :o So, who is going to volunteer? :fingerscr
September 22nd, 2006, 02:14 PM
if i can find the time... :D
i would need folks to PM me what they would like to see to compile everything. this would mean:
company name, product name, and first 8 ingredients as listed on the bag (dog food only please...). that would save me a ton of time and i could rig up the chart really fast!
so who votes "yes"?... maybe i should start a new thread on this.... :rolleyes:
September 22nd, 2006, 02:24 PM
Hey, I forgot about this:
September 22nd, 2006, 02:30 PM
yep! :highfive: but i still would like folks to send me their Wish List... :o that way everyone gets involved a little and it's a communal project, you know?... just an idea. :)
September 22nd, 2006, 05:51 PM
Hmm, I see an argument coming on, why my brand got bumped from spot x and the like. Not to be a spoilsport but would it not be easier to ammend this one as it seems to me it's pretty accurate anyway.
I'm sure you could get permission to reproduce the charts and just make the additions and ammendments. i for one would like to see Actrium in there along with the Kirkland one. Also one would also like a representave cost of the food, my neighbour said she couldn't afford to feed her dog the same as mine, as it happens $55 for 40lbs is cheaper already and i feed about 2/3 of what she does, we both have pound puppies of the same stature but hers is a 8 months older, my boy is about to take off as his wolfhound genes kick in :D :D unless it's yorkie in him we see in which case he should start shrinking. :shrug:
September 22nd, 2006, 07:42 PM
There used to be a few good ones online but I have a feeling some dog food companies started threatening them with libel lawsuits if they did not shut it down or even did bring legal action against them, Chatting about foods in a public forum is safe because each person his/her own presenting personal views as what is good and what isn't , but when you publish dog food comparisons on a website and tell others that certain ingredients in their food are bad without scientific proof you open yourself to legal ramifications and a company could take you to court for lost sales saying the site misleading the public and slandering them as you have no scientific data to back your claims that a food is bad for this reason or that.
I noticed Earl Wolfs dog food camparisonshttp://www.doberdogs.com/menu.html has changed somewhat over the years, there is no more saying this is good and this is bad, his dissects the label Part 1 and 2 is kept fairly factual without bias and his charts only states what ingredients the foods contain, he includes the comments These charts are meant to give you some idea as to what goes into the food we feed our pets. These charts are**NOT** meant to tell you what to buy or feed your pet. Their purpose is to show you what goes into dog food, and that is all. Only you can determine what to feed your pet!!
and I believe that is the only reason his charts have been able to remain online over the years where as others simply disappeared without a word or explanation.
I would hate to see you spend hours putting it together and getting it online only to have to shut a couple months later and possibly be in legal hotwater as well
September 22nd, 2006, 07:53 PM
OG that makes sense - very wise :-) i should let it drop... i'm too tired anyways, LOL ! :o
September 23rd, 2006, 02:29 PM
Good points, OG. I still like the reviews posted by Mordanna at www.dogfoodproject.com as they are never biased.
September 23rd, 2006, 05:03 PM
I still think the first chart is a good example of how to start out in comparing foods... Rather than rating the food as a whole, you color code it to point out the good, not-so-good and bad ingredients and then compare. Sure more grains isn't as good, but that's why the grains are grey and not green.:shrug: