Professional Plus Dog Kibble.. Anyone Use It?

[FlyingFeathers]

Has anyone here used this brand with success? It's what the GAP in Tassie use. I've never heard of it before so just after any experience/reviews. I'm guessing it's fairly new to the market?

Link to site about food!!

Thank you!!

[Cuko13]

Not sure what this forums general consensus is on kibble, but I'm against any form of it. It's crappy refined meat-flavoured dietary supplement that causes more problems than anything else. Every dog I owned always did 100x better on raw food despite trying numeous kibble brands.

[sas]

The top 5 ingredients are what we want to look at:

Chicken - Good, however, will lose a lot of water weight when cooked so will probably not be in the number 1 position so this is potentially misleading.

Chicken meal - Cooked down into a meal, so processed but still a specific meat protein in the top 5 ingredients which is what we want to see.

Peas - Filler.

Ground white rice - Filler.

Pea flour - Filler.

So I'd comfortably rate it at 2.5-3 out of 5, it's not something IMO you would feed for improved health & mobility 5-10 years down the track. It's a survival not thrive food, dogs can't thrive on food like this no matter what people who feed it say, they feed it because it's:

• Probably cheap
• Donated
• Get a discount on it
• All that's available
• Unfortunately believe its a good food.

Edited January 6, 2017 by sas

[JulesP]

I personally class peas as a protein source not as a filler.

[JulesP]

Not sure what this forums general consensus is on kibble, but I'm against any form of it. It's crappy refined meat-flavoured dietary supplement that causes more problems than anything else. Every dog I owned always did 100x better on raw food despite trying numeous kibble brands.

I think the general consensus is to feed what your dog does best on. If people want info about raw feeding that is provided. If they want info on a kibble that is provided. Then people cam make their own minds up.

[Maddy]

Personally, I wouldn't even consider feeding it to greyhounds, from looking at the ingredients.

With so many better options available, even in Tasmania, I don't know why GAP would, either.

[persephone]

Personally, I wouldn't even consider feeding it to greyhounds, from looking at the ingredients.

With so many better options available, even in Tasmania, I don't know why GAP would, either.

maybe the company is kind to them ?

[Maddy]

Personally, I wouldn't even consider feeding it to greyhounds, from looking at the ingredients.

With so many better options available, even in Tasmania, I don't know why GAP would, either.

maybe the company is kind to them ?

Possibly, but many local companies would be too, if asked. But even if it's free or cheap, you'd think good nutrition should still come first.

It actually reminds me of what happened with our local RSPCA- they used to accept all food donations and our local pet meat lady would donate literally trailer-loads of meaty bones and other goodies to them. Then, Hills started sponsoring that branch, all other food donations were refused and now the dogs live on a diet of plain kibble. RSPCA benefits financially, dogs lose lots of mental stimulation and access to an interesting, varied and nutritious diet.

[persephone]

Personally, I wouldn't even consider feeding it to greyhounds, from looking at the ingredients.

With so many better options available, even in Tasmania, I don't know why GAP would, either.

maybe the company is kind to them ?

Possibly, but many local companies would be too, if asked. But even if it's free or cheap, you'd think good nutrition should still come first.

It actually reminds me of what happened with our local RSPCA- they used to accept all food donations and our local pet meat lady would donate literally trailer-loads of meaty bones and other goodies to them. Then, Hills started sponsoring that branch, all other food donations were refused and now the dogs live on a diet of plain kibble. RSPCA benefits financially, dogs lose lots of mental stimulation and access to an interesting, varied and nutritious diet.

[sas]

Not sure what this forums general consensus is on kibble, but I'm against any form of it. It's crappy refined meat-flavoured dietary supplement that causes more problems than anything else. Every dog I owned always did 100x better on raw food despite trying numeous kibble brands.

I think the general consensus is to feed what your dog does best on. If people want info about raw feeding that is provided. If they want info on a kibble that is provided. Then people cam make their own minds up.

It's probably one statement that irkes me. People could feed Coperice and think they're dog is doing 'best' on it when in reality it's not, it's can't. They see the 'Now' not the 5-10 years down the track.

People's interpretation of 'best' is different for many people, often it means good poos.

[sas]

I personally class peas as a protein source not as a filler.

It becomes a low cost filler when it's not species appropriate.

[JulesP]

*

Edited January 12, 2017 by JulesP

[Dave-o]

On 1/10/2017 at 10:31 AM, sas said:

It becomes a low cost filler when it's not species appropriate.

 

I'd be interested to know why you think peas aren't appropriate for dogs sas? There's very little evidence of negative effects of peas (and lectin proteins) on dogs, and as far as kibble ingredients go there's a lot worse out there. I see a problem when they're overused or included as a substitute for meat proteins, but as an ingredient they're a good (read: not great) source of protein and fibre.

[sas]

Dave, Species appropriate and very little evidence of negative effects aren't the same.  We can feed dogs lot's of things that we 'believe' have very little negative effect but that doesn't mean it is 'species appropriate for them' especially in larger quantities i.e. the top 5 ingredients of a kibble.  Species appropriate means what that species is meant to eat....kibble isn't it to start with but that's another topic.

"A lot worse" is a comment that doesn't sit well with me because it infers that it's ok because there's worse out there.

Edited January 17, 2017 by sas

[sas]

Jules, you didn't need to delete your comment.  You're more than welcome to disagree with something.  Although I didn't say 'you' irk me, I said your comment irked me.  Why not have a polite debate about what we both feel, isn't that how we expand our knowledge if both are willing?

[alpha bet]

Millions of years of evolution have developed a dog to be a carnivore and an opportunist (meaning they will also eat fruits, plant material, nuts, insects and dead things they find).
One interesting fact... dogs on a full raw diet have a gut pH of around 2 (highly acidic) dogs on a commercial diet will have a gut pH of around 5 (neutral). Hence take each of these dogs and they eat a mouldy old dead bird (yummy) and the dog with the low pH has the acid to break down and destroy any bad bacteria before it gets into the system and causes longer term trouble.

NO KIBBLE can recreate the food values of raw.... all the nutritional value that is written on the label is all PRIOR TO COOKING.... and anyone who watches any cooking show knows that we change the food when we cook.