What you describe are dogs "appearing" healthy in spite of shitty food ... like a 5 year old who "looks normal" even with a shitty diet.
Check back with the "Dollar General" / "Walmart" kids when they're 40 ... and see what they look like compared to well-raised kids ... and check back with any shit-food-feeder when their dogs are 7-9 and compare how they look to optimal feeders
Gotta give your opinion the boot here.
Feeding may be a choice; but shitty feeding = shitty feeding, which (ultimately) is good for NOTHING, not "you" and not "the dog" ...
Everything I said was good, including the living conditions.
That is exactly the kind of thought process I am trying to instill
Optimal Conditions + Optimal Feed = Optimal Results
A person can skimp on as much as he wants on the left side of the equation, but they will affect the right side.
Do people who feed shit feed get good results? Sure.
Most people feed shit feed and have shit practices, and go into others who feed shit and keep their dogs like shit.
But that is not why I created this place, either to skimp or to say it's okay to skimp.
Why? Because such lazy people will invariably lose dogs they didn't need to, have MORE problems (skin/cancer/other) that could have been corrected ... and will have a real tough time beating outstanding dogmen who do everything RIGHT instead of everything wrong ...
Jack