sandgrubber

I'll bet this is one of those many things where there's no good answer . I feed all pups the same. Some of 'em grow rapidly. Some of 'em grow slow. Some of the rapid growers have ended out with bad hip and elbow scores. Other rapid growers score out well. I suspect genetics has been more important than diet, but perhaps the genetics could have been expressed differently if the diet was tweeked. I doubt you could run a scientific test that began to assess the question for less than a few hundred thousand dollars . . . and it would still leave lots of questions unanswered.

I don't think diabetes can be effectively managed without veterinary monitoring. If they won't change vets, is there any chance of feeding information to the vet? I don't want to dramatise the situation, but I suspect this dog's life is in danger.

If he's diabetic and on insulin and the vet can't figure it out, I'd suggest trying another vet. May be that the dosage is wrong? Or something is going on in the metabolism. I regularly look after a 10 yr old diabetic labbie bitch who could stand to loose 20 kg. She gobbles anything and everything like a normal lab. Gets an insulin shot before each meal. I know they had a rough time with her when the diabetes treatment started -- she lost an eye.

I don't think Lepto is included in a C5. It is included in C7 (maybe C6, not sure) but Lepto is only found in the far northern parts of Australia I believe. My dogs are now on a 3yr booster regime and as persuasive as the vets can be about giving a C5, mine will get a C3 in the future. My vet -- who advises me in reading the certificates that come into the boarding kennel -- tells me that the Australian system has no checks on consistency . . . ie, all C5's don't include the same vaccines. My mind blurred beyond this . . . but bottom line is that it's complicated. But -- yes -- there is now a C3 vaccination that is ok'd for once every third year. My veterinary advice is this is the preferred option . . . and use the adjunct vaccine for kennel cough, etc. if and when you think KC is a problem, or if you need to use a kennel that requires KC vaccination. Of course, if you use the 3 yr stuff and you don't have vet documents that indicate the vaccination is good for three years, boarding kennels will not accept it. (We all have to cover our backsides :rolleyes: ).

Thanks for the reply. Two problems caused me real difficulty before I found a good explanation for what was going on: 1. As I understand it, it has never been proven that epilepsy is hereditary, but neither has the hereditary factor been dismissed. If a nanna and granddaughter both have seizures it raises a lot of questions. Other breeders in my breed won't use an epileptic dog, and are very likely to cull an epileptic bitch. 2. Tongues wag. Even if there's no basis for worry, I don't want to be the person who is blacklisted for having bred from an epileptic bitch.

Of course it's important to treat epilepsy if that's what it is (sounds like the case in this thread is the real thing . . . this response is meant for others who may be reading). . . but it's also important not to jump to conclusions. Seizures aren't easy to diagnose. It's important to look at the full situation and be willing to think outside the box. I came close to neutering my two best bitches because they had seizures . . . only to figure out that the problem isn't hereditary. They've been swimming in and drinking from a fishpond that grows blue green algae (ie, cyanobacteria) and are getting occasional doses of a nerve poison. I'm very grateful to the vet who told me to observe and think before running a lot of tests, which she said were likely to yield no clear answers. But . . . these guys symptoms were not typical of epilepsy and didn't happen but a few times a year . . . commonly with two of them fitting in the same day or a few days apart.

The other problem with minced meat (other than poultry) is that you're likely to be buying bone free meat . . . hence not getting calcium. I can buy a new commercial meat grinder for less than a thousand dollars. The equivalent machine that will take on bone will cost me well over $10,000, even second hand . . . and it will be a nasty brute that I would be scared to use.

I'm not suggesting that you skip vet diagnosis / treatment or alternative therapy. But swimming does marvels for a lot of muscular/skeletal problems. I have worried about minor limps in several pups and they've all rayed out fine. In the most recent case I went to the vet and he said, "can't find anything. Wait till she's a year old and do the Xrays"; meanwhile swim her or exercise her on soft sand. She rayed out fine. But I've had to discard a few pups from breeding because their hip/elbow scores weren't up to it.

As others have said, depends on the dog and the park and the time of day and the weather and . . . . If you can find some other people with similar age pups in the neighborhood, and make a habit of showing up at a certain time, an off lead park can be a FANTASTIC place for a pup. As a Lab breeder, I generally advise puppy buyers to seek out a good dog park . . . or even better, a beach. Most Labs are naturally social and have good doggie manners . . . ie, they play well with all but aggressive dogs. And many experienced dog owners with social dogs will go toward you when they see you have a Lab. If you can protect the pup against over-rough / aggressive dogs, social life can and should begin when the vaccinations are fully active (usually two weeks after the last required vaccination . . .but consult your vet on that). In general, I'd say, bring a lead. Keep your eyes and ears open. Use the lead if you need to. And try various parks until you find one that is ok.

There is another reason to contact the breeder. Although there are scum bag breeders out there, there are also scum bag vets . . . and a lot of well-meaning vets who didn't learn everything they needed to know in their short time in vet school. If a breeder has had experience with a particular problem they will, if approached in a calm manner, often be able to give guidance as to how to most effectively (and economically) diagnose and treat the problem.

For a healthy dog with reasonable temperament, neither sounds stressful to me. If your dog has travelled in the trailer before, and associates it with something fun, that would be my choice, especially if you yourself are driving the trailer.

How awful for you and your girl! This sort of post usually appears in the Breeder's Forum (you might want to re-post it there). The responses are overwhelmingly in support of 'check up on the breeder' and 'hold the breeder responsible for what they produce'. If you bought on Main Register and it was clear that you were looking for a dog suitable for breeding . . .particularly if you paid a premium price for 'show quality' or the equivalent . . . the breeder is culpable.

This battle has been going for a long time. Some people 'wear gloves' and others don't. If you're feeding lots of dogs, you can't use the same logic (or illogic) as people feeding one or two pets (for whom a price of $100 or so for a 15 or so kg bag seems like a good deal because the bag lasts for a few months) . . . but you can take advantage of bulk buying and -- for rescue people -- goodwill. I get chicken frames directly from the wholesale outfit that supplies filets to restaurants. Cheap and nutritious. (The local dogfood manufacturers are buying from the same source). I also pick up a few cartons for local rescue people and sell the frames on at cost. If you can pick up some sort unprocessed industrial waste from the meat industry before so company adds a lot of cost and decreases the nutritional value (by heating, drying, grinding, etc. and diluting with grain/soy/what have you). you will probably be doing a favour to your dogs.

I disagree, no offence to your breeder/vet, but I am yet to meet a vet who knows anything more than the basics of dog nutrition, I'm sure they exist, but they certainly aren't the norm. You cannot possibly compare the GI tract of a canine with that of a human, there is no similarity at all. The teeth, the saliva, the time food remains in the stomach, the strength of the stomach acids and the actual length of the intestines are all totally different, a dog has a carnivore's digestive system which is designed to deal with flesh and bones. That's not to say that they cannot deal with any carbohydrate, but they do have problems processing large amounts which is why cheap dry foods that are full of fillers and have a high cereal content will produce large amounts of poo and occasionally diarrhoea in some dogs. You will also have to feed twice as much as the nutrition derived from the grain content of the food is minimal. A dog is not designed to process carbohydrate whereas we humans deal with starches very well and diets containing large amounts of fibre (roughage) are actually beneficial, in fact humans who consume minimal amounts of fibre are actually predisposing themselves to a variety of diseases including cancer of the bowel. Fur, feathers and other 'rubbish' are still parts of an animal and are not carbohydrate, I doubt that you will ever see a wild dog grazing in a wheat field or trying to raid a silo. If the OP wishes to feed a dry food as the basis of her dog's diet then I would recommend Eagle Pack Holistic or Nutro, personally I have never found an Australian product that gives the same results as either of the aforementioned products. 1. Dogs are 'designed' (I would prefer to say, 'evolved') to scavange. I didn't say they did well on carbohydrates. My dogs get fat on carbos . . . and on food with too high of fat content (how odd, so do I ). Nor did I say that a human gut would be happy with bones, fur, feathers, herbivore droppings, and other things an omnivore/scavenger canine is happy to eat. Some dogs have been bred to specifications well outside the evolved generic Canis design, and I would not assume that all breeds have the same nutritional requirements. 2. I would be grateful for any evidence from peer reviewed literature saying that a diet that reduces foecal volume is better for a dog. There was a time that human dieticians promoted digestable foods and thought roughage had no nutritional value. Now, after millions of dollars of studies of a sort that are rarely conducted on dogs they tell us to eat fibre cause it's good for the gut and the heart. I am not saying dogs should eat bran . . . although the enthusiasm with which mine go for horse manure suggest to me that undigestable plant matter may be a natural thing for them to eat. It seems plausable that some meat byproducts are very good for the dog, though not highly digestable. But, so far as I can find, the research as not been done and we cannot say whether undigestable matter is good or not good or neutral for a dog. It does mean more pooh to pick up. And more food ingested. But if the price of the 'highly digestable' is three times that of the other food, the 'savings' effect of super premium is lost. 3. I do know that vets make a bundle selling high end dogfood. . . and that vet surgeries themselves consider the cost of picking up dog pooh large in comparison to the cost of feeding dogs. I do know that price of super premium brands reflects additional middlemen and import/export + advertising. I would guess that more than half the price difference between domestic brands and super premiums is due to things that do absolutely nothing for the dog. I wish some Ozzie company would spend a few bob more per kg to make a super premium food . . . but if they did, I'll bet a lot of people would still by the imports due to image factors. 4. If you intelligently fill out a mid-range food with a high protein source and some supplements, you end out with something that is VERY similar in ingredients to a super-premium food.

I, personally, have a political/economic objection to importing dry dogfood when Australia produces so much meat and meat prices are so low here. Thus I generally settle for a mid-price range domestic dogfood and supplement with high quality chicken frames, mince, eggs, carrots, cabbage, and a fish-based multi-nutrient/trace mineral supplement. Actually, I do the reverse. I feed meat etc. and supplement with dry food. But then, I'm feeding 10 to 50 dogs, so price is a concern. My local vet (who was a breeder before she became a vet) says that the 'digestability' arguement doesn't hold water. Imagine basing your own diet on minimising the amount you deficate ;) . Roughage is part of a natural diet. Wild dogs undoubetedly eat bits of fur, feathers, and other 'rubbish' . . . which just passes through. I'd rather just get a bigger pooper scooper ;) . Because Australia is an old continent and trace mineral deficiencies are ubiquitous, I think that trace mineral supplementation is a good idea. As a scientist I object to any product being marketed as "Science" . In my book that's a joke I don't want to be the butt of ;) . Btw, if you want to read a label that looks really awful, try reading the Eukanuba Veterinary Weight Loss diet bag. If I remember correctly, First ingredient is corn. Second is sorghum. Then there's some chicken by-product.

What is dirt for if not for digging in :D ? I run a boarding kennel and find that concrete -- everywhere -- is the most successful way to stop digging. Grid mesh over specific areas will keep them from digging at that area, but they generally just go to the edge of the grid mesh and commence digging. For my own dogs, I've moved into a bunk bed. I get the [sand free] top bunk and they are free to demolish the lower bunk.

Good to hear that 'ignore' has won out again. I am an early riser (late for me is 6 am) and my dogs all learn to rise early. But when my [late riser] mother was alive and used to dog sit for me, it was amazing how well and how rapidly the dogs learned that 'get up and cuddle time' was more like 9 am.

Ditto. Fidos (I mostly use the 'herbal') has a pleasant and very long lasting smell. May last a week. And it's a good shampoo as well.

Ditto the aforesaid suggestions about reading labels, asking questions, and being wary of overmedication. My more down to earth vet tells me that heartworm treatments (I do the injection, so I can't say for certain about the tabs) give six months of retrospective treatment . . . thus you can get away with doing nothing until they are six months old. She recommends starting heartworm meds at four months (tablets, that is). Many vets are pricey. I don't find much correlation between the price and the quality of service -- indeed, the cheapest vet is often the one who gives best medical care -- though it may not include the friendliest bedside manner of the poshest waiting room. Lots of vets overmedicate and cheerfully onsell to customers all the things the drug and dogfood company salesmen bring by their door. You may want to do a little shopping around.

I would guess that up until 100 years ago, all dogs had fleas. They are not fatal, though they may cause some nasty skin problems. Your vet may or may not be right . . . but it's a case where you can afford to experiment if you don't like the vet solution. Some vets err strongly on the side of caution . . . or perhaps the meds companies have been very good in teaching people to sell their products . . . or perhaps some people are so upset about the slightest flea problem that vets feel a need to use overkill every time.

Thanks everybody for giving another kick at the dry dogfood 'dead horse'. Damn! I was hoping for a simple answer I would consider 6 mo (as used by AAFCO) a long trial if I was paying for it, but as a breeder . . . or for puppy buyers as a pet owner, I don't consider it very long. Also it would be interesting to know what they consider 'signs of nutrition related diseases'. A dry coat is not a disease, nor is high volume of foecal matter. So presumably the things people find 'bad' about SC could pass muster in such trials. I guess in the long run it comes down to reading as much as you can, evaluating, and making decisions based on your experience plus outside information. Which puts me back where I began . . . thinking that a lower price dogfood used as a supplement to fresh meats and a few veg's is a pretty good diet.

Not really. Australian dog foods get AAFCO certified too, which is the standard the site talks about rather than American laws. SuperCoat included. True for foods manufactured here, not so for the imported products. Sorry, I'm not good at quotes within quotes. I'm looking at bags from SuperCoat and CopRice. Neither says it is AAFCO certified. Rather, they say "formulated to meet AAFCO nutritional standards". I can't see that this means they are labelled according to AAFCO rules. Not to be cynical, but I've noticed some companies treat standards with lip service and a wink. Previous discussion of this subject at: http://forums.dogzonline.com.au/lofiversio...php/t27075.html seems to have come to the conclusion that PFIAA was the relevant body in Australia. The PFIAA code of conduct: http://www.pfiaa.com.au/default.asp?d=67698&p=54227 Says nothing about labelling, and nothing about enforcement. I suspect this boils down to voluntary compliance.

Jeez, that's a great way to ensure that you're spending more on import fees and middle men (or women) than on dogfood ! Isn't there a descent locally made dogfood

I like the Dog Food Project site -- good basic science -- but am not confident about applying US information in Australia. Two problems. 1. Different Labelling Laws. Can anyone point to a description of Australian labelling laws as applied to pet foods? For example, if US laws applied here, I don't think SuperCoat would advertise their product as 'with real beef' or 'with real chicken' -- doing so would imply that meat was a small fraction and they go out of their way to project the image that it's the main ingredient. It would be particularly useful to know how water is counted as an ingredient . . . as the Dogfood Project people point out, meat tends to be 80% water, so having meat as a first ingredient on the label doesn't prove there's a lot of meat in the stuff. 2. Different biogeochemistry. Australia is an old continent that is highly deficient in trace minerals. Trace mineral deficiencies in introduced livestock species are widespread. On the other hand North America is a very young continent (most of the US and Canada is freshly weathered since the last glaciation) and trace mineral deficiencies are almost unknown. I think we have to pay more attention to trace minerals than Norte Americanos.

I'm forever looking for a better dry food that doesn't cost a bundle. I notice people often say 'read the label' -- which I always do. But I find labels confusing. Eg, I recently bought a bag of ProPlan Puppy -- which gets good recommendations -- and was horrified to read that it is 1.5% salt !!!! In my book that's the junk food range (and dogs love it). I notice everyone dumping on SuperCoat, but its ingredients look fine to me. I don't mind if pooh volume is large. It doesn't take me any longer to scrape up a big one than a little one . Ok 22% protein isn't heaps, but I can up this by feeding mince(~$3/kg) and chicken frames (~$.70/kg). The dogs like fresh stuff better than super premium ($7/kg and up). In playing around with supplements I've found that selenium and zinc appear to be important for coat. But for trace minerals, the quantities and form (eg digestability) must matter and you can't get them off a label. Simpler to forget them in the dry food and use a supplement you trust. Also 'by products' seem to be a no-no in many people's books, but blood and bone are by-products, and I would think they provide good nutrition, particularly if they aren't cooked to death. Indeed, I would consider the chicken carcasses I feed so freely to be 'meat by products'. I don't like the fatty by products -- but if the fat content is specified that's taken care of. So . . . For those people who advise reading the label . . . what do you look for?