Which is the best dry food please?

Skinners is great... Also try the Arden grange I think it's salmon or white fish, my skinny anorexic geriatric lurcher is looking amazing on their chicken and rice one and gobbles it up, he was on deaths door before this
 
Fishmongers probably has the best ratio of fish and has had rave reviews from people who use it. Skinners I wouldn't rate, too high a ratio of rice, unbelievably high! Plus it has oats, pointless IMO and won't put on weight with so low a rate of salmon.

Composition

Whole rice (40%), salmon meal (17.5% dry weight), naked oats, peas, sunflower oil, whole linseed, beet pulp, vitamins and minerals.

Fishmongers Finest Salmon, Sensitive, lots more protein
60% Salmon (Freshly Cooked Salmon 42%, Salmon Meal 12%, Salmon Oil 5%, Salmon Digest 1%), 28% Potato (Potato 14%, Potato Starch 14%), Beet Pulp, Minerals, Vitamins, Brewers Yeast, Mannanoligosaccharides (530 mg/kg), Fructooligosaccharides (530 mg/kg),

Here's the dry dog food index helpfully composed by someone unbiased who researched them:
http://www.horseandhound.co.uk/foru...he-Dry-Dog-Food-Index&p=11176258#post11176258

Another good place to look is Which dog food site, also unbiased.
 
Last edited:
Have you tried Chappie? It was developed for dogs with sensitive stomachs, when mine came here bringing his uber expensive bag of Hills with him, he coped fine with Chappie when he had finished the Hills - and now eats Wagg or other cheap and cheerful brands.
 
Chappie has almost no nutritional value-have you seen the meat ratio?! If you mean the dried stuff, it contains carcinogens, BHT, BHA, as does Wagg. Why on earth would you feed your dog the cheapest, worst quality feed available? Please do check ingredients online before buying. I know they're cheap and easily available whilst doing a weekly shop, but they're seriously poor quality.

Pedigree, Bakers also contain carcinogens. They use them as cheap preservatives.
 
Last edited:
Fishmongers or wafcol they have the better fish ratio and many of ingredients in wafcol are British so that's good too! I use fishmongers on my very very sensitive malamute with success where no thee food had worked!
 
Well, all I can say is I have a fit and active 17 year old JRT who has eaten Chappie or other "cheap" dog foods containing what you class as carcinogens for almost all her life. And that is good enough for me. Dogs don't need meat as such, they are omnivores, so the percentage of meat (or other animal protein) in a dog food isn't a true guide to how beneficial it is for them.
 
Dogs aren't omnivores, they are non-obligate carnivores. I'm sure somebody more knowledgable will correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that dogs still have identical digestive systems to wolves. They can digest carbohydrates more effectively than obligate carnivores like cats, but that doesn't mean that animal protein shouldn't make up the majority of their diets.

Plus I'm pretty sure the sugar and artificial colours/flavours found in foods like Bakers shouldn't be in the diet of any animal.
 
Holding said:
but I was under the impression that dogs still have identical digestive systems to wolves. They can digest carbohydrates more effectively than obligate carnivores like cats, but that doesn't mean that animal protein shouldn't make up the majority of their diets.

Plus I'm pretty sure the sugar and artificial colours/flavours found in foods like Bakers shouldn't be in the diet of any animal.
Click to expand...

Hence why we feed ours 'taste of the wild'.
Can't stand Bakers.
 
Holding said:
Dogs aren't omnivores, they are non-obligate carnivores. I'm sure somebody more knowledgable will correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that dogs still have identical digestive systems to wolves. They can digest carbohydrates more effectively than obligate carnivores like cats, but that doesn't mean that animal protein shouldn't make up the majority of their diets.

Plus I'm pretty sure the sugar and artificial colours/flavours found in foods like Bakers shouldn't be in the diet of any animal.
Click to expand...
^^^^
this exactly - also goes for crappies (sorry typo there, I did of course mean Chappies)!

We feed Applaws - 75% human grade meat and 25% veg. Dogs didn't evolve to eat grain - including rice. That's why so many have allergies and skin conditions and sensitive stomachs ...
 
its_noodles said:
my friends in the US give theirs dry duck!!!
:)
Click to expand...

Is that the dry food version of the DUCK raw complete food?
Both are good but very pricey.

To the OP I have fed all of those and would rate them

1. Fishmongers
2. Skinners
3. Wainwrights
4. Burgess Supadog

None of them are terrible.

I've fed Chappie wet to a dog with a sensitive tum but I wouldn't touch the dry stuff. JMO. When I look at a dog's dentition, there's no way I would say they are not carnivores!!
 
JillA said:
Well, all I can say is I have a fit and active 17 year old JRT who has eaten Chappie or other "cheap" dog foods containing what you class as carcinogens for almost all her life. And that is good enough for me. Dogs don't need meat as such, they are omnivores, so the percentage of meat (or other animal protein) in a dog food isn't a true guide to how beneficial it is for them.
Click to expand...

You do know what carcinogen means, don't you? I assume you do, but I'm just AMAZED that you say that's 'good enough for me'. Dogs aren't obligate carnivores, no, but the majority of their diet should be meat, it's not normal or appropriate for them to eat the same type of diet as a true omnivore. What I class as carcinogens? I didn't decide that these ingredients cause cancer!! They have been proven to do so in many studies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top