I only feed raw - would certainly agree that feeding the dogs the kitchen table would be better than Bakers.
The below comes from a dog food analysis page.
Highest rating is 6*
BARKINGHEADS 4*
Pros: First and third ingredients are named meat products, generally good quality ingredients
Cons: Minimum acceptable meat content
The first ingredient of this food is a named meat product. This is inclusive of water content (about 80%). Once that is removed, as it must be to create a dehydrated product, the ingredient will weigh around 20% of the wet weight. It is thus likely that in dry form this ingredient does not make up 26% of the food as suggested, but somewhere in the region of 5-6%. There is a second meat ingredient, this time in dry (meal) form third on the ingredient list and comprising at least 26% of the dry weight of the food. The total meat content is thus probably a little over 30%. This is greater than many products on the market, but still minimally acceptable.
The major ingredient in this food is rice; with oats as a secondary grain. Although more plentiful than we'd ideally like, both are good quality grains. We have no particular concerns with remaining minority ingredients.
Overall, this product appears to use good quality ingredients. Our sole concern arises from the limited meat content, which users could address by adding real meat to the diet.
BAKERS 1*
Pros: None
Cons: Inadequate meat content for feeding a canine, use of carcinogenic chemical preservatives, artificial colourants
This food receives a 1-star rating simply because there is nothing lower.
We cannot comprehend feeding a dog on a mixture of cereals and “derivatives” of animal or vegetable origin. There are no official definitions for those ingredients, and assurances that there is a minimum of 4% chicken, green vegetables and carrots in the food does nothing to decrease our horror at the idea of feeding this food to a canine.
We note that BHA, BHT and propyl gallate are chemical preservatives. The first two are known to be carcinogenic and have been banned from use in human foods in most countries for around 50 years. We would never consider feeding our pets on foods containing those chemicals. Propyl gallate is believed to cause skin irritations and gastric upsets. It is not permitted in foods for infants and small children, because of the propensity of gallates to cause blood disorders. There is no need to add artificial colourants to pet food either – some of these are believed to be carcinogenic and cause hyperactivity disorders and are banned from use in many countries. See the main page for more explanation of the dangers of chemical additives to pet foods.
