Vet Said My Lab Is Too Fat :-(

[Katie and Finn]

Labs and Goldies arn't related, in fact they came from totally different countries! Labs are from Newfoundland and Golden Retrievers from England/Scotland, im always amazed at how many people go 'what a lovely lab you have', and then I explain they arn't labs and they say 'I thought that labs can come with long coats to!'

[Greytmate]

Canned dog food can contain a lot of preservs & stuff

No it doesn't. The canning process preserves the food, there is no preservative added to canned food.

After all, canned food is junk food for dogs, not good for them,

Some canned food is very good for dogs. You cannot judge a food by the way it is packaged, it is what is inside that counts. If you read the labels on canned food you will find that there is a huge difference between different brands.

While there is better quality food available than canned food, some canned food is much more nutritious than many brands of dry food.

For weight reduction, read the labels on any commercial food, and don't feed any that have sugar listed as one of the ingredients.

[Erny]

Greytmate:  Some canned food is very good for dogs. You cannot judge a food by the way it is packaged, it is what is inside that counts. If you read the labels on canned food you will find that there is a huge difference between different brands.

While there is better quality food available than canned food, some canned food is much more nutritious than many brands of dry food.

For weight reduction, read the labels on any commercial food, and don't feed any that have sugar listed as one of the ingredients.

Yeah - but be careful to calculate what the labels give you, as this is based on "wet weight" and not "dry weight". In addition, the heating process of the canned food often destroys the nutrients that might have been put there in the first place.

I found that dry food is often the culprit that puts weight on. After all, it's often sprayed with fat to help make it palatable to the dogs.

IMO, a fresh food (meat & vegies, supplements as required, bones etc.) diet is best. I actually use "Vets All Natural" product, mixed with human grade roo meat, plus Omega Special Blend (also a Vets All Natural product). I've recommended this diet to many a number of people, who have all (except one, whose dog wouldn't eat it) reported back happily the improvement in their dogs, whether that be their skin, weight, coat .... or even behaviour.

Nice looking lab - agree it's hard to tell, but admit it doesn't look, from the photo, as if it's got big weight issues. Looking from overhead, you should be able to see a wasteline, and whilst you don't really want the ribs showing very obviously, you should be able to run the flat of your hand over them and feel them fairly easily. Generally, you should be able to see perhaps the first, or maybe even the second rib. This is all, of course, generalised, and there is variation from breed to breed and individuals within breeds, but it is a 'rule of thumb' to give you an idea.

I know of many people with completely overweight, obese to the point of downright sad, dogs (many of them labradors - seems many unknowing people think that's the way labs are supposed to be) ... and when you mention it, they ignore you (if you're lucky) or hurl abuse. So good on you for at least taking the Vet's comment on board (whether he is right or wrong!) and checking it out.

Edited July 27, 2005 by Erny

[Erny]

One other thing, Roquen, you say how the Vet says your dog is overweight but how people often comment on how "small" she is .... but "small" doesn't necessarily relate to weight. Perhaps she is a small 'type' lab ???

[daisymay]

Hi, I've just joined this evening as the vet today told us our CKCS is way overweight so am trying to pick up the acronyms and so on you're using. Can someone please tell me what the BARF diet is?

Thank you

[Greytmate]

Yeah - but be careful to calculate what the labels give you, as this is based on "wet weight" and not "dry weight". In addition, the heating process of the canned food often destroys the nutrients that might have been put there in the first place.

The ingredients list won't give you the weights.

The heating process may destroy a few of the nutrients, but most will remain. The nutritional information panel on a can of food is based on what is in the can after cooking.

This comment is not directed at you Erny, but I have to say that I find it ridiculous that a lot of people will regard a can of tuna or sardines as a healthy and nutritious food item for human consumption, yet will regard any can of dog food with disdain.

I'm not sure if they realise that the canning process is the same for all food, human or pet food.

It is far safer and more nutritious to give a dog a good brand of canned food than it is to feed them one of the poorer quality fresh 'pet minces' that are available from some butchers.

[MumOf2LabBoys]

BARF = Bones And Raw Food

Its a diet that consists of bones such as chicken necks, wings, plus beef bones etc along with vegies, fruit etc.

Anything 'fresh' really.

There are a lot of threads in this section all about the BARF diet, with really fantastic meal suggestions and ideas.

[Prydenjoy]

Some canned food is very good for dogs. You cannot judge a food by the way it is packaged, it is what is inside that counts. If you read the labels on canned food you will find that there is a huge difference between different brands.

Yes thats true, but what I was getting at is that if you spend the cost of feeding canned food (usually a couple of dollars a day) on a higher quality kibble you'll get a better quality diet

[Rozzie]

Um, Ralphy's mum... Charlie weighs 41kg as of this morning! (He's big boned!)

[Pup's mum]

a good brand of canned food

an oxymoron in itself - I won't EVER feed tinned food (regardless of the brand) because I am only too aware what slop and grub goes into them....likewise I do not buy "pet mince" from most butchers for the same reason.....no regulating of pet foods as there is fopr human foods I'm afraid....

[Tilly]

Roquen - the good old rib feel and the overall look of the dog is the best way of checking weight.

I have a rottie who is in excellent condition. Recently a person from a dog club saw him and asked how much he weighed - they then said he had to lose 5-10kg. Because he is outside the "normal weight" he is considered fat - regardless of his body condition.

This person then showed me their "perfect working condition" rottie who was just skin and bone. You could see the bones of the back and ribs sticking out and this person told me the dog was "out of condition" and had a kg or so to lose. To me that was just far too thin. The coat was dull, the dog was lifeless and totally miserable. They work their dog on 1 cup of PAL dry dog food a day. On the other hand my boy has a beautiful glossy coat, clear bright eyes and face and in perfect health.

[poodlefan]

Tilly, did you read the 'fatdogs' link I posted.

You SHOULD be able to see the last three ribs on a dog, if it is in ideal 'working condition'. If that Rottie you saw does a lot of athletic pursuits eg jumping, then the owner is doing it a favour keeping it very lean.

Working condition for a Rottie can be a heck of a lot less weight than 'show' conditon. I'm frequently gobsmacked at how much weight some breeds are expected to carry in the show ring.

Personally, I dont' think you should be able to see vertebrae though.

[Prydenjoy]

Everyone has a different view on a dogs "ideal" weight. To me a "perfect" condition dog is just bones and muscle. Thats what Merlins father looks like (even though he is shown, in fact he is a grand champion) and I was stunned, most of the show dogs have a layer (or two) of fat, especially in the larger breeds this isn't always ideal - for the dog. In winter I allow my dogs to get a little extra fat on them to keep warm, but that's it. Unfortunately if I were to keep my dogs as lean as I like them, the Whippet at least, would look horrible for "show", the Boxer is still a pup so I've got no idea what he'll look good at (weight wise) when he is older. The Papillon isn't shown, so I try to keep him at a healthy, agile 1.5kg, anything more and he looses energy, but it is hard to keep him from pinching the big dogs food occasionally

[cavNrott]

.

Edited May 7, 2009 by cavNrott

[MumOf2LabBoys]

Um, Ralphy's mum... Charlie weighs 41kg as of this morning! (He's big boned!)

then they will be dieting together Rozzie, as they are both boofas!!

They can have their own diet-off...

[Tilly]

Tilly, did you read the 'fatdogs' link I posted.

You SHOULD be able to see the last three ribs on a dog, if it is in ideal 'working condition'. If that Rottie you saw does a lot of athletic pursuits eg jumping, then the owner is doing it a favour keeping it very lean.

Working condition for a Rottie can be a heck of a lot less weight than 'show' conditon. I'm frequently gobsmacked at how much weight some breeds are expected to carry in the show ring.

Personally, I dont' think you should be able to see vertebrae though.

I will search for the link.

I don't show dogs so I can't comment on that. Our dogs work security so they are all fairly heavy solid dogs. They all are in a good healthy condition (shiny coat etc) but we call still see the slight indentations outlining the ribs etc. We do allow them a bit more condition in winter (particularly the older ones) otherwise they just get too cold.

I think there is a big difference between lean and looking half starved. A lean dog still has a look of "health" about them.

The half starved dog (like the "perfect working condition" rottie) had a dull coat, lifeless, glazed eyes etc - definately not a sign of good health.

[Prydenjoy]

Well I didn't mean litterally bone and muscle, it depends a lot on the breed eg my Whippet when he is just bone and muscle looks like a skeleton, but Boxers and many rotties just get a hard feel to them, not the soft feel that they have when they have a layer or two of fat, but certainly not showing all their ribs etc. I can't comment on the "perfect working condition" rotty, or your own because I can't see them, but thats the best explaination I can give

The fatdog link is on the first page of this thread.

[Erny]

Yeah - but be careful to calculate what the labels give you, as this is based on "wet weight" and not "dry weight". In addition, the heating process of the canned food often destroys the nutrients that might have been put there in the first place.

The ingredients list won't give you the weights.

The heating process may destroy a few of the nutrients, but most will remain. The nutritional information panel on a can of food is based on what is in the can after cooking.

This comment is not directed at you Erny, but I have to say that I find it ridiculous that a lot of people will regard a can of tuna or sardines as a healthy and nutritious food item for human consumption, yet will regard any can of dog food with disdain.

I'm not sure if they realise that the canning process is the same for all food, human or pet food.

It is far safer and more nutritious to give a dog a good brand of canned food than it is to feed them one of the poorer quality fresh 'pet minces' that are available from some butchers.

It gives you % of nutrients/additives etc.

I did a (limited) study on dog (canned) food comparison. Eg. on Brand A : Can revealed minimum 8% fat content. When calculated to dry weight basis, fat content actually 25%. You work out the wet to dry ratio based on the % of water, which most labels reveal (unless they've changed - I haven't touched a can of dog food for quite a while, other than to do this study, which was about 1 or 1.5 years ago!) Studying a different food value, Brand A revealed on its label that the sale content was 0.1%. The optimum percentage intake for dogs is 0.4% on a dry-matter basis. When the 0.1% is calculated to dry weight basis, it works out to be 0.31%. So, Brand A was fairly close to optimum percentage intake. However, Brand B, which showed 1% on wet-weight basis, actually calculates out to be 4.54% on dry weight basis, an amount far exceeding optimum.

I guess I've read too much and heard too much about what is and isn't in canned food, and the long term affects on dogs it can have, to bear risking feeding it to my dog. She is fed human grade roo meat. Earlier, I used human grade beef mince. In fact, I pulled down a meal I'd frozen some time ago. Thought it was Cheow Min (spelling?) .... given the absence of curry powder and the like, I think I actually ended up eating one of the dog's meals I'd prepared and kept!! Doesn't worry me - her meals are as good as mine! (Except I wouldn't like to eat roo mince ... yick! )

I hear what you're saying about most nutrients being retained even after the high heating process canned food is put through, but most of what I've read negates that. If I eat any form of canned food, I tend to regard it as a "fast food" with minimal nutritional value. I can't comment on tuna etc...... I'm allergic to fish!