If Your Dog Food Contains Corn

Neither does mine, it's also something to be concerned about for your own health though as most human foods contain corn in some form.
 
My cats and dogs food has corn in it, but it's all my mom can afford :( Maybe when I get a job I'll be able to buy better food.
 
:eek::eek::mad::cry::eek: That's HORRIBLE!!!!! OMD!!! I never knew that corn can cause these kinds of problems!! Thankfully, none of Shivon's, many, many foods (LOL:LOL:;)) contain corn.
 
Thank you Rouen. Will check my dog's food. Don't think it contains corn. Will have to check this out. Awful what they put into dog food, despite all the evidence that it causes so many preventable but ghastly dis-eases.
 
We raw feed so now corn here. I don't understand why dog food has to have so much grain in it. Dogs don't naturally eat grain.
 
Dioritt said:
Apparently, feeding a dog regularly on Pedigree is like feeding a child regularly on McDonald's.
Click to expand...
Yes it is Dioritt. I was told this years ago by one of the trainers at a Dog School where I originally learned dog training. And still nothing has been done about it. What makes me so mad is that Vets endorse these products!:mad:
 
Checked my dog food and it says 'cereal' low down on the list but doesn't list any specific type. Am changing the food, even though they don't have it often, I feed predominantly raw.
 
I only feed kibble when we're away for a night, because it's easier than taking raw food along, but at home I always feed raw. There is cereal (also unspecified) in mine, too, but as Alf has it so rarely I don't think that's too much to worry about.

Totally agree re vets endorsing these foods. The trouble is, vets learn very little about nutrition at college so what they know is predominantly what they learn through seminars etc held by the feed manufacturers and obviously they're not going to tell the full story. This is why a lot of vets advice against raw feeding - they simply don't know enough about it.
 
Dioritt said:
I only feed kibble when we're away for a night, because it's easier than taking raw food along, but at home I always feed raw. There is cereal (also unspecified) in mine, too, but as Alf has it so rarely I don't think that's too much to worry about.

Totally agree re vets endorsing these foods. The trouble is, vets learn very little about nutrition at college so what they know is predominantly what they learn through seminars etc held by the feed manufacturers and obviously they're not going to tell the full story. This is why a lot of vets advice against raw feeding - they simply don't know enough about it.
Click to expand...
I too have to feed kibble when going away, raw makes such a mess in the car and can 'stink' too and I hate the smell of meat. I will try not to worry in future, as mine too, have very little kibble.

Unfortunately, all you've said about vets is so right, they should really have a unit or two on dog nutrition during their time at University and NOT given by the dog food manufacturers.
 
The study on GM corn that rouen refers to has serious flaws (something rouen also points out), including the fact that they released the study only to journalists who signed a confidentiality agreement, an agreement which prohibited them from asking other scientists about it until the article was officially released. The problem with this is that the study makes news (GM Corn Causes Cancer OMG) and the rebuttal, which can't happen till other qualified people can read the article, does not.

You can read about the study's flaws here, read about the secrecy hubbub here, and listen to a story about it here. [That last link is to On The Media, an NPR program which probes topics in the media (journalism, media manipulation, etc.) and is generally pretty eye-opening and interesting.]

Anyway the crux of the criticism is that the study had too few participants (10 rats per group) and the rats used were of a strain known to spontaneously develop cancer! Some of the 'control' (untreated) rats died during the study, too. So while GM corn may contribute to cancer, no one knows that because this study is so flawed as to give no good information. Also, it is super fishy that the research group required a confidentiality agreement -- it looks like they knew there was a stink to their study, and preferred to manipulate the story rather than do proper research. This is an important topic and one that we'd love to have more info on, so to waste people's time and money this way is not cool. IMO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top