All About Dog Food Forum
Other doggy topics => Dog news => Topic started by: Dottie on Apr 24, 2017, 15:12
Trust Me, I'm a Vet (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b08pn5sy) begins next week on BBC2.
Wednesday, 3rd May 2017 at 8pm. Three episodes and the first one includes discussion about food.
Thanks for heads up on this
Dottie, thank you for alerting us regarding "Trust me, I'm a Vet" the three part tv series that starts tonight, here is some further information
Not expecting wonders but will be recording it.
PFMA Statement on 'Trust me, I'm a Vet', regarding the Nottingham University research.
Granted I have been up since 530am today but that was boring to point of yawn inducing.
The food article opened showing some low meat content foods before seemingly just focusing on mineral content.
Allegedly the proposed solution given appeared to be to feed both wet & dry foods, keep changing type/brand & to be mindful that more expensive foods can be sub standard.
I am sure many owners will have seen the programme & are now confused.
I lost interest & turned off after the flea advice article.
The focus regarding the section dedicated to dog food was on the mineral content of wet foods and dry foods. Interestingly the University of Nottingham released results in January of their research into how the correct balance of minerals is significantly important especially to the growing puppy.
By analysing hair samples from healthy dogs (a control group) and from dogs with Elbow dysplasia and MCDP, their results proved that the dogs with these skeletal diseases had lower levels of the minerals Copper (27% lower) and Zinc (21%), and in one particular breed lower Copper, Zinc and Sulphur.
This research also mentioned a study showing the mineral content did not comply with EU guidelines in a high percentage of complete dog food as was mentioned in the program.
The outline of the study is here: https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=npO5djcAAAAJ&sortby=pubdate&citation_for_view=npO5djcAAAAJ:jtusTj6o6osC (https://scholar.google.co.uk/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=npO5djcAAAAJ&sortby=pubdate&citation_for_view=npO5djcAAAAJ:jtusTj6o6osC) with further details of the research and results viewed via the pdf.
There is a BMJ abstract of the study here:
Thank you for the links and information. Re the item on nutrition, I too did not expect much as slots in programmes are usually too short to be meaningful. The subject did take me by surprise though and was informative. Unfortunately it left the concerned pet owner in a quandary. They told us to give variety to the dog then said that changes in food should be done gradually - more guidance would have been useful. IIRC they mentioned mixing wet and dry food as being useful for meeting mineral requirements. I sometimes read of people doing this so wonder if it is becoming a trend. The thing that they failed to mention is that one solution is to give a supplement.
The outcome of the item on dental hygiene was predictable but useful and might hopefully encourage pet owners to brush their dog's teeth. Bones were not entered into the option list, maybe because they are not recommending by veterinary associations. Many people swear by them to clean their pet's teeth. However, the vet pointed out that only brushing will clean the plaque at, and under the teeth/gum margin.
If it does nothing more than encourage people to read the list of ingredients it will have achieved something.
My sister-in-law insists on just feeding her dogs chicken and rice. When I point out that it might be a bit deficient in minerals she looks at me as though I am mad! I am sure she will think that the programme does not apply to her either.
Is there anywhere that I can find the recommended list of vitamins and minerals that my dog should have. I would like to compare it to the bag of dog food that I fee.
I feed Breakthrough which is a complete food aimed at dogs with behaviour problems. I have looked at their website but cannot find a list of ingredients.
Hello and welcome to the forum patp. Is this (http://www.pfma.org.uk/_assets/docs/FEDIAF%20Nutritional%20Guidelines%20-%20September%202008.pdf) of any use to you? It is the F.E.D.I.A.F. Nutritional Guidelines for Complete and Complementary Pet Food for Cats and Dogs.
Welcome to the forum patp!
Further information and a link to the ingredients for the food you asked about is here: http://www.breakthroughdog.co.uk/breakthrough-ingredients/ (http://www.breakthroughdog.co.uk/breakthrough-ingredients/)
Entering these ingredients into the allaboutdogfood Instant Dog Food Reviewer here: https://www.allaboutdogfood.co.uk/instant-dog-food-review.php (https://www.allaboutdogfood.co.uk/instant-dog-food-review.php) gives a score of 2.6 out of 5.
Thank you for your replies. As Breakthrough is designed to help with behaviour problems I don't have much choice really. It is very effective at calming my dog's anxieties.
I have emailed the company to ask for their comments and will inform you of their reply.
If it proves to be deficient in any vital mineral, and giving a variety of dog foods is not an option, what are our options. Is it advisable to feed a mineral supplement?
SF-50 (https://www.viovet.co.uk/SF-50_replaces_SA37/c6487/?quick_find=126928&gclid=CKv87eaH2NMCFYk_GwodTJ8DQA) is a supplement with a wide range of vitamins and minerals.
My worry, now, is that If I give my dog a supplement, on top of his complete food, I may be overdosing him.
I can see your point but am unable to help in this matter. You have messaged the company who make Breakthrough so once you have their response you might be in a better position to decide. If you decide to try a supplement you could also perhaps talk to the manufacturer of the product.
Amongst it's many roles, the European Pet Food Industry (FEDIAF) is "Aiming at a legislative framework for the production of safe, nutritious and palatable pet food".
Together with guidance from the Nutritional guidelines issued by the FEDIAF plus the ingredients list of a complete dog food we are in a more informed position to decide whether or not to proceed with changing a dog's diet. For example whether or not to further supplement a current diet.
For my part it comes down to how much degree of trust there is that a food packaging accurately reflects what is inside. If I felt at all concerned then I'd not hesitate to contact the manufacturer of the food for further reassurance.
A further useful and informative article (by Sabine Contreras) about minerals can be found here: http://www.dogfoodproject.com/index.php?page=dminerals (http://www.dogfoodproject.com/index.php?page=dminerals)
Thank you very much for the link Meg. It is really interesting and definitely a page to bookmark for future reference. I have passed it on to a friend who has a Lab with hair loss. Vet has done a number of tests with no diagnosis.
On the whole, the first programme seems to have stimulated discussion and has certainly got us thinking. I wasn't particularly interested in some of the items but there does need to be variety .
I didn't expect much re the feature on weight loss in the second programme. I was not wrong. IMO it was of limited use to anyone with an obese dog. Diet was not discussed in depth athough the specialist vet mentioned high protein and fibre. All we saw was a bag of dry food of the prescription variety. I can't even recall advice about weighing food. The result was a foregone conclusion before they started the 'experiment'. I would be interested to read any papers that he has written about dietary management in dogs who need to lose weight or maintain current weight. Such a shame that he wasn't given more time. It could have been such a useful item.
The Schnauzer who had lost weight successfully was used as an example of public perception of correct weight. The vet discussed the fact that some people would think that the dog was too thin although he was a perfect weight/body score. This is because people are so used to seeing overweight dogs.
Thought the items on fish and rabbits were both good and worth watching, particularly for anyone who is thinking of having either of these pets.
Re Episode 2.......
The article on feeding raw showed a bacteria analysis of a hand swab taken after raw meat was handled. I was not surprised to see bacteria. The risk to a human arguably the same as when similarly handling & preparing uncooked meat for a human meal. The article failed to highlight that dogs manage & deal with uncooked bacteria significantly differently than humans do. At the end of the feature the presenting vet proudly declared she would not feed raw food to her dog.......Two days ago a neighbour started trial feeding a quality raw complete to her dog. Today she told me she has already stopped the trial having seen this TV article & being worried about her, (prior poorly), dogs health !
The article on brachycephalic dogs was presented by the same vet that presented the article on feeding raw food. The article highlighted that excessive exercising should be avoided and recognised it can be sensible to coll down an overheating dog by providing water. I acknowledge that the presenting vet briefly acknowledged that some brachycephalic dogs can have more problems than others.....The household Pug here can tackle a 4 hour walk with relative ease & has more energy than many non brachycephalic dogs.
Arguably a few examples of less than perfect health on this TV programme.
On a positive note it was good to see an article touching on reducing bloat risk.
If only we had an accurate and precise way to measure if a dog is obese or not; Professor Alex German, who was in the program stated in his article entitled The Growing Problem of Obesity in Dogs and Cats :
"Ideally, a test [ of Measurement of obesity in companion animals] that is both accurate and precise should be used; however, many tests for body composition are precise but not accurate, whereas some lack both precision and accuracy. Other important aspects of a test are cost, ease of use, acceptance by veterinarians and clients, and invasiveness. Currently, there is no method that cannot be criticized; therefore, the perfect tool for analysis does not yet exist."
Link is here :
.....I apologise if this sounds rather curt yet seeing tape measures and weighing machines used for determining obesity .... somehow doesn't seem appropriate. Sadly if the dogs lost muscle, for example, then that is no obesity improvement, that is muscle loss. And if a dog is showing more movement than usual on a different diet it may not be assumed that the dog is fitter, nor surely be assumed to be solely due to a different diet.
Dr. Nick Thompson, has responded to the "Trust Me, I'm a Vet" programme with an interesting video called "Responsible Raw: Trust ME, I'm A Vet".
You may access this video from the link here :
Thanks Meg and well spotted. It's good to see a vet prepared to speak out.
Cotswold Raw's view on "Trust me I'm a vet". https://www.cotswoldraw.com/blog-headlines/blogart35
Great to see these links posted by Meg & Seaweed.
The second link quite detailed & an interesting read.
Thanks for the link Seaweed.
I've read their response and appreciate the 'compulsion' to produce a reasoned reply, yet, at the same time feel uneasy when the conclusion of a study (which rightly states competing interests), notably an extremely small study, of only 8 dogs, fed different diets for an extremely small amount of time (4 weeks total =2 weeks on one diet, then 2 weeks on another), is then inadequately quoted! ???
I wonder was the quoted study a straightforward comparison of raw food vs kibble as it may at first seem? The raw diet consisted of beef added to a watered down manufactured "complement".
In the link there is a table of the 12 essential minerals. However, It's difficult to accept a comparison of minerals, between the standard accepted source (be that the NRC or the EU) and any manufacturer's "composite" meal!! To be accurate it is the comparison using the actual individual complete meals that would provide the necessary indication of mineral content.