Pedigree reply about their food

[dieseldog]

As a concern of what's in the dog foods  we feed our dogs i decided to send some of the company's a email  of what they thought of  ingredients  that are not suitable for our dogs and confusing information that's found on the foods these were just a few  of the questions i asked and below is a reply from pedigree do you think this information is correct as they seem to have a poor rating on here.


   
Susan Hendy
Consumer Care Consultant
Reference :40261374


Please right click on this image and select 'Download image' to view the image.
    
Dear Michael,

Thanks for getting in touch.

I can confirm that we don't use artificial colours or flavours in any of our food and all of the raw materials are passed as fit for human consumption.

Our products are all produced with help from the vets and nutritionists at Waltham; the world's leading authority on petcare and nutrition and we go to a lot of trouble to make sure that they are nutritionally complete and easily digested.

Of course, if your dog is sensitive to one of the ingredients that we use in the food then the product may not suit and a hypo-allergenic diet is a better fit for your dog.

If you'd like any further advice or information, please don't hesitate to let me know.

 
    
Kind regards,

Please right click on this image and select 'Download image' to view the image.
Susan Hendy
Consumer Care Consultant
0800 013 3131

[Psychedelic]

As far as I'm concerned, there's nothing wrong with the ingredients used in the lower end dog foods, it's just impossible to tell what they are. Because of this, it's less likely to suit many dogs, but for those without any tummy issues, I honestly don't see anything wrong with feeding a food, so long as it is one without all the nasty sugars and additives.

I'd never buy pedigree or something of that ilk, though, as you can get a much better feed for the same money, or one of equal quality for less.

[George]

I can confirm that we don't use artificial colours or flavours in any of our food

No, just artificial preservatives. Wouldn't touch them with a bargepole.

and all of the raw materials are passed as fit for human consumption.

Meaningless, applies to all dog foods in the EU, by law.

Our products are all produced with help from the vets and nutritionists at Waltham; the world's leading authority on petcare and nutrition

Means - we consult vets ( who know little about nutrition) and nutritionists, and then use only the advice that we can use cheaply. We ignore the rest. It fools a lot of customers though, which is good for sales and profit.

Of course, if your dog is sensitive to one of the ingredients that we use in the food then the product may not suit

And a hell of a lot of dogs are sensitive to, eg, the unspecified cereals etc they use. Plus, since they are unspecified they can vary from one batch to the next, according to whatever is cheapest at the time, so even if your dog is not sensitive to one batch he could be to the next.

and a hypo-allergenic diet is a better fit for your dog

[extremely rude expletive deleted] !! A decent diet is a better fit for your dog.


Apologies, but that made me very angry. A lot of low to mid price foods can be fine for many dogs, Pedigree is not, it is a profit machine for a company without ethics.

[Tinyplanets]

Interestingly enough, the food I was given for my dog, when she came from dogs trust, was Arden Grange and tinned pedigree. I was advised that she had been having just a spoonful of pedigree in each meal. It became apparent, that pedigree donate food so I suppose as a charity, they can't afford to be too picky. However, it seemed like it was fed in small doses. The 'good dog' 'good food' advert made me do a sharp intake of breath. The first thing I did was stop the chum.

[George]

It became apparent, that pedigree donate food

A generous gesture, on the surface...

but actually, a great marketing technique. If just a tiny %age of adopters think 'the Dogs Trust use it, so it must be good' and go on to buy it for years, then it will make them far more money than it costs them.

[Dottie]

I know someone who is a qualified dog trainer (KC registered) and feeds all but one of her dogs on Chappie - I think it is the complete one.  The one dog that has something else has a dodgy digestion.  The only reason I mention this is because it made me wonder about the quality of dog food and value for money.  Her dogs apparently do well (and look OK) on Chappie so how could you argue with that? It's difficult to say that it's best to feed x, y or z in the face of the anecdotal 'evidence'. 

I've had a spell of feeding Chappie to my dogs a few years ago before I was 'into' nutrition and they seemed OK on it.  I wouldn't feed it now but it is hard to convince others that they could be feeding their dogs better if their dog is seemingly doing well on their food of choice.  It demonstrates to me how adaptable dogs are. 

As for the title 'hypoallergenic' if anyone cares to explain that to me I will be glad to listen.  It doesn't make sense to me and I don't see why dogs should need such food.  Why are so many apparently allergic anyway?

Personally, I think it is a challenge to all of us who care about nutrition to spread the word and encourage owners to at least give some careful thought to what they are feeding their pets.

[David]

George's post really says it all. It's true that Pedigree no longer contains artificial colours (it did up until very recently) but it does still contain artificial preservatives - a group of ingredients which includes several of the most controversial additives in pet food. It's also true that their ingredients are "passed fit for human consumption" but in Europe, all animal feed ingredients have to be.

Waltham is actually owned and run by Mars, the same corporation that makes Pedigree so it's no huge surprise that their staff approve of what goes into their own foods.

Overall, the email doesn't really say anything which is fairly typical of the kind of "advice" many of the big manufacturers hand out all the time. Many thanks for posting!

[George]

it is hard to convince others that they could be feeding their dogs better if their dog is seemingly doing well on their food of choice.

It is, Dottie, very hard. What worries me is that many dogs are, as you say, able to adapt, perhaps for long periods of time, but for a lifetime?

I believe not. On the contrary, I have come to believe that very many of our beloved dogs die long before they need to, some from tumours resulting from years of ingesting things they really should not, some from the simple strain put on their systems by dealing with foods they were never designed to eat, some from immune disorders that arise from unsuitable diets... and the owners never make that connection. Because so many dogs in our society have been badly fed for decades we have come to see these conditions that arise in later life as 'normal for dogs'.

I've been as guilty as anyone else of making this mistake in the past, and it breaks my heart to think that I could well have been, albeit unwittingly, to blame for shortening the lives of some of my best friends.

[Dottie]

Where's the 'like' button when you need it?  Spot on George.

[David]

Where's the 'like' button when you need it?  Spot on George.

There should be one on the top right of each post...

[chrishordley]

I agree, just lost my third dog this year and although the previous two were not diet related I am sure that Wally, as a puppy farm rescue, had had 5 year of cheap kibble before me. He had lymphoma in the intestine we found out after just 48 hours of him being poorly. A repeat of another 8 year old terrier lost suddenly 5 years ago. I now think deficient diet, particularly maybe in a growing dog is a factor.  Itchy Spike 5 years ago set me off on wheat free but too late for him. I would not blame lymphoma completely on diet but I remember the 18year old lab cross we had. I'm just researching lymphoma in dogs and it is funny that the Hill's anti cancer food is low carbohydrate. If low carb, good protein plus correct omega 3 balance is proven in cancer treatment why isn't that the recipe for prevention I.e. for normal feed.

[Pegasus]

Re 'Hypoallergenic'
I had to laugh when the Waltham customer service referred to a 'hypoallergenic dog food' as this was a term first promoted by James Wellbeloved - also owned by Mars.

[David]

Re 'Hypoallergenic'
I had to laugh when the Waltham customer service referred to a 'hypoallergenic dog food' as this was a term first promoted by James Wellbeloved - also owned by Mars.

Yes indeed! You can find our brief definition here: http://www.allaboutdogfood.co.uk/dog-food-dictionary.php

[dieseldog]

Of course, if your dog is sensitive to one of the ingredients that we use in the food then the product may not suit and a hypo-allergenic diet is a better fit for your dog.

It was this that stood out for me  all that says to me is its not our problem its yours
the only plus side i give them is that they were the only company who replied to my email out of 7 company's
also this reply from pedigree seems to make out that i was attacking there produce but all i asked in my email what they thought of the ingredients in dog food and is there any concern of some of them so they didn't really answer my questions