A lot of good post from everyone...and not just hearsay but from there own experience. Those that even try to compare the kibble to raw really have no clue!
A lot of good post from everyone...and not just hearsay but from there own experience. Those that even try to compare the kibble to raw really have no clue!
Surprised Limey's not popped up yet.
^^LOL^^
I had a "old-timer" get PISSED at me not agreeing with him about raw vs. kibble. He went as far as to ban me from his board because he said raw says in the system to long and would make the dog sick. I called a few different vets who gave me links that proved him wrong. I posted them to his board and he banned me. LMAO!!
It's actually the opposite: raw is in-and-out of a dog much faster than kibble ...
Oh I know this but this fool was gonna fight me on the subject and the biggest problem I have is that he has a following of knuckle heads who think his word is law. Matter of fact I think the 1st person I called looking for documentation was Scratchingdog.Originally Posted by CA Jack
That is the trouble: people "repeat what they hear," like parrots, without really knowing what they're talking about and without really conducting their own serious research.
Necessary? No. Theoretically-speaking, if you are feeding a full spectrum of food with all the vitamins exactly in place, you don't "need" an extra vitamin pill.
But, that said, adding a vitamin is basically a $0.02 additive that has a full spectrum of vitamins "just in case" ... which is why every dogfood known to man also has vitamins added to to it on the backside
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
