Dismiss Notice
Hello Guest, Welcome to the new version of Sheltieforums.com. If you have any questions regarding the new software, please post in the following section: Forum Upgrade

DCM - A take from a vet nutrionist

Discussion in 'Commercial Food' started by k9kreationz, Jul 6, 2019.

  1. KarenCurtis

    KarenCurtis Premium Member

    2,544
    2,184
    280
    Jan 30, 2010
    Massachusetts
    I don't think its hysteria, I think it's being cautious
     
  2. Shelby's mom

    Shelby's mom Forums Enthusiast

    1,014
    359
    130
    Jan 4, 2012
    pennsylvania
    We are almost completely transitioned to the Proplan and I am happy to report there have been no issues. I didn’t want to jump to conclusions either but it just is not worth the risk.
     
    Sharon7 and KarenCurtis like this.
  3. Ann

    Ann Moderator

    6,176
    2,347
    335
    Feb 25, 2008
    Western Connecticut
    I agree that Purina is making some varieties now that have decent ingredients I’d have no problem feeding, but I chose the Nutro I feed because of the pea/legume/etc info months ago and I’m sticking with it.

    It disturbs me, as Dr. Mac said, that quality companies are being smeared by this FDA list, which Nutro is on. It’s not fair to label a company without any specifics on which line or variety is implicated, which is what they’ve done, while also saying there is no evidence yet what the cause is!

    I’m not about to put my dogs at risk, but I’m not throwing the baby out with the bath water either.
     
  4. KarenCurtis

    KarenCurtis Premium Member

    2,544
    2,184
    280
    Jan 30, 2010
    Massachusetts
    Its confusing because ProPlan has a few grain free foods!
     
    Ann likes this.
  5. The Quahog

    The Quahog Forums Enthusiast

    473
    151
    80
    Dec 1, 2009
    Rhode island
    Once again, I am in no way attempting to shield or defend any dog food companies. As you know, I have long argued that one does not need to feed an expensive premium brand. However there are things about this FDA report that really do seem to raise some eyebrows. Consider this -

    <<Between January 1, 2014, when FDA first received a few sporadic reports, and April 30, 2019, the FDA received 524 reports of DCM (515 canine reports, 9 feline reports). The vast majority of the reports were submitted to the FDA after its first public alert in July 2018. >>

    Well, um, no offense to a respected government agency, but - DUH! Of course not many people wrote to the FDA and said 'My dog developed DCM. Just thought you might be interested' before the 'first alert'. It was only when the potential problem was pointed out that people started reporting 'My dog was on one of those foods and got DCM.'

    <<The American Veterinary Medical Association estimates that there are 77 million pet dogs in the United States. Most dogs in the U.S. have been eating pet food without apparently developing DCM. It’s not known how commonly dogs develop DCM, but the increase in reports to FDA signal a potential increase in cases of DCM in dogs not genetically predisposed. >>

    Again, there is no indication here that the number of cases of DCM overall is increasing.Why in heck would you think that 'the increase in reports to the FDA' after sending out an alert prompting people to report problems 'signals a potential increase in cases' ?? Of course I may be missing something here, and ( as I always say when my opinion on a case differs from another veterinarian's) if the guy (or woman) who wrote the report was in the room they may be able to explain that, but it sounds like 'confirmation bias' at its worst. Before calling out these particular companies and driving away their customers in droves I frankly would like to see more evidence.

    One phrase which has always irritated me, as when they close the schools for a prediction of the possibility of 2" of snow is, . 'We always prefer to err on the side of caution.' Why do you want to err at all? Isn't 'erring' bad?
     
  6. Sandy in CT

    Sandy in CT Premium Member

    546
    1,147
    175
    Aug 5, 2018
    CT
    My thing is that this comes out and they put food companies on the list as 'recommended' so at least in my area, vets are pushing these 'recommended brands' like they are the holy grail. I get the whole 'grain free isn't necessary' but to some animals it is as they cannot eat grains. My doxies lived long very healthy lives with no weight issues, no back issues, no health issues on grain free diets, trim waist lines, good teeth, solid poo. I went off grain free before all this after reading a very informative post from you on protein levels in shelties and of course, grain free stuff is high protein. But the this whole thing isn't about BRANDS, its about INGREDIENTS. Oh hey, everyone go buy Science Diet or Purina or .... cuz of this report - it's a 'recommended' brand! Purina DOES have some good recipes out there, but they also have crap ones. Even Science Diet has a recipe that includes GREAT ingredients, but also has many that DON'T! And even if the recipes are good, some of the sourcing of the ingredients is questionable as some of these larger companies are using ingredients from questionable sources because quite simply, the alternate sources are cheaper so the profit margins are higher.

    So this whole thing basically reeks, to me, of a push against the mom and pop corner store and towards the Amazon's of the pet food business instead of looking at individual recipes. If you google DCM and diet, umpteen vet websites will come up pushing diets from these 4 or 5 companies versus avoiding diets with some of the ingredients in question. So what will be the end result? If Purina or Iams or Science Diet profit from consumers switching, do they give a darn about changing recipes that contain questionable ingredients? Just makes you wonder who is paying for this stuff cuz it's certainly apparent who will benefit from hundreds of consumers who won't look past the 4 or 5 'recommended' companies to look further at a healthy diet for their pet. And vets who stock these product right there in their location, are pushing products that they themselves are profiting from the sales of. I agree that the information is necessary and they should be informing consumers of issues, if there are issues, because we as consumers need to be aware and make informed choices, but the recommended brand thing... It's just stinky.....
     
    Last edited: Jul 10, 2019
    RikyR, Calliesmom and Ann like this.
  7. Ann

    Ann Moderator

    6,176
    2,347
    335
    Feb 25, 2008
    Western Connecticut
    Dr. Mac, thanks so much for your continued insight into this very confusing issue for all of us. We really appreciate your input which, as always, makes tons of sense!
     
    Sharon7, KarenCurtis and Calliesmom like this.
  8. The Quahog

    The Quahog Forums Enthusiast

    473
    151
    80
    Dec 1, 2009
    Rhode island
    I have not seen them - but where are these 'recommended brands' lists coming from? This seems like a VERY questionable idea. Hopefully not from the FDA!
    There is no question veterinarians receive an awful lot of 'incentives' from dog food and drug companies to recommend particular products .
     
    Ann and KarenCurtis like this.
  9. KarenCurtis

    KarenCurtis Premium Member

    2,544
    2,184
    280
    Jan 30, 2010
    Massachusetts
    My regular vet didn't recommend anything, he just asked if my puppy was on a quality puppy food. I told him what it was and he said good, and that was it. Sandstorms cardiologist did recommend one of those listed brands, however.
     
  10. Sharon7

    Sharon7 Premium Member

    2,556
    2,298
    290
    Oct 31, 2009
    Southern California
    Dr. Mac, the list came from (hope I have the acronym right) WSAVA. My vet gave me a hand-out from that organization. I tossed the info after doing my own research and deciding to switch to ProPlan when I found a diet with very similar ingredients.
     
    KarenCurtis likes this.

Share This Page