I'm changing my 7 month old Bichon to a more high quality dry food. Since Thursday I've been mixing a bit of the new food in, but he picks the new food out and leaves the old behind never coming back for his 1st meal. On his 2nd meal I just give the old food back to him and he finishes it off. How do I get him to finish the 1st meal with the old & new? I heard when changing food you want to do it gradually.

It would be nice to make a gradual switch but your little guys has already voided that. When he ate only the new did he have any negative reaction, if not just go with the new food. What did you select for the new?

He had no negative effect. I went with Hills Scientific diet, but I just noticed it has corn as the first ingredience.

Hills Scientific is as good a food as you will get. May not be quite as good as it USED to be. But there is truth in the saying you get what you pay for. Nothing wrong with corn. Premium dog food is better balanced than the diets people eat. How an individual dog handles any particular food is as much dependent on the dog as the food.

Keep in mind that it is the owner, not the dog, that buys the food. Surprisingly, the DF manufacturers know this and tend to say things they think will appeal to the buyers... and make the food into nice enticingly appearing little pieces, as if the dogs care. But, the people do... go figure.

I am more of a fan that lists a meat first on the ingredients. Try the comparison. Blue Buffalo - Compare Dog Food with our Dog Food Comparison Test (http://bluebuffalo.com/dog-food-comparison/test-results)

If it is dry food you might just have to go for it and feed the new food. It is not that bad for them, I always just recommend a slow change more for the owners benefit as some dogs can end up having loose stools.

Science diet isn't great, it's one vets often recommend but in my opinion for the price, you are better off feeding something like Supercoat... half the price, just as good plus with Supercoat the first ingredient is meat.
If your dog does well on it though, stick with it, every dog is different.

Well, not to participate in an argument, Shaz may have something there. When Science changed ownership the emphasis was off quality and performance and on to economics. I suspect Science's Prescription Diets are the best you can get for their purposes. But their standard Science dog, and cat foods are subject to the economics of manufacture, I suspect. Protein is the expensive ingredient in any formula.

All the 'chemistries' reported as being in a food can be reproduced by special manufacturers. Someone the size of Cargill can produce a number of specialized compounds. An amino acid is an amino acid, wherever it comes from, a laboratory, or bean, or cow, or egg. And each protein is just collections of certain combinations of amino acids. The difference between plant and animal protein is really measured in the amino acids that each brings to the table. What is missing in one ingredient can be made up for by the addition of another, different protein source. There are 8 absolutely essential amino acids needed in an animals diet, which means the body cannot synthesize them... they must come from food. And finally, the ration must be BALANCED, or just the right ratio of amino acids to be required by the animal. For an extreme example... if the body requires 12 different amino acids in the diet to completely utilize the protein in the food, and there is one missing, the protein will not be utilized properly. Expecting to avoid this by adding an excess of some amino acids is just as bad... As much as is needed will be used, and the rest have to broken down and used for energy, not building new proteins for growth or tissue repair. Amino acids used for energy leave nitrogen to be excreted by the kidneys, which can be detrimental to the animal. Nutrition is more than labels on the food bag.

In spite of all the writing and numbers on the food labels, the only really accurate evaluation of any diet is a performance trial. Which is... How does the animal 'do' on a given food, as far as performance in the areas the dog is expected to shine in. Show dog, including breeding quality, hunting, guard, work, you name it. This takes time, as you may imagine. How long does it take to make an excellent litter of puppies, considering also that the condition of the dam is directly related to the quality of the puppies? Mama starts her food trial when she is a puppy, ideally sooner with her Mama.

This is not practical for the normal dog owner. ( DUH ! ) So, next best is to see what testing the manufacturer of their choice if ration has done. This isn't the time to compare chemistries... puppies, and performance results, yes. See what is available on their web site. For the really concerned owner, ask the customer service department for any of their performance testing. There is a lot of homework that can be done in order to become an accurate evaluator of a given food.

I am also not a fan of science diet, I too appreciate a food that lists meat as the first ingredient. I have heard wonderful things about Blue Buffalo. I live in Canada so our premium foods are a little different. I haven't heard of super coat, but we may just not have it here where I live. I googled some info on it, and it also seems like a great food. Plus if Shazzy says it's good, I believe it will be good ;)

If your older food is not a very good quality and filled with lots of salt, they aren't going to chose the healthier alternative. It's like giving a kid a choice between McDonalds and a spinach salad, they usually chose the McDonalds. If there is nothing health related as to why your pup won't eat, just put the new food out and walk away. I am a firm believe that no healthy dog will starve themselves. If you stay with your routine, your pup will gradually get used to the new change.

Good luck!

Belle is right, no healthy dog will starve to death. And, the best food in the world is no good on the outside of the dog. I am not advocating Science diet except the specialty diets, P/d, for whatever nutritional need a pet may need. Most of my prior post dealt with nutrition and foods "in general", regardless of brand.

I never understood how the prescription diets were good when the companies that make them, produce less than quality food.. Hmmm...

Anyway, if your pup is eating the new food without any GI upsets, then JUST feed the new food.

As far as science diet goes, you can do better. Science diet is very low quality with lots of fillers. It use to be good, waaay back in the day.. but now it is awful food to feed. Our dogs are not pigs, they do not need to eat corn as a main ingredient. I've had a lot of luck with Taste of the Wild which is an all stages formula, meaning, there is no puppy food to purchase, just regular food. Wellness is pretty good if your dog likes the taste of it. Natural Balance is another good all stages diet, I'm a fan of Innova which comes in a puppy formula or an all stages diet... The list can go on.. :)

Lucky, your knowledge of nutrition and biochemistry is showing.

'All stage' foods must be inadequate for some ages and excessive for others, in order for it to be recommended for any age, right? Or is it your understanding that there are no age differences in nutritional requirements? Sure, pups can grow and apparently do 'fine' on adult foods, but that does not mean they can't do better with 'puppy' foods. Same works for any 'age specific' food as well.

As for corn is only for pigs... does that go for the humans that may not feel the same? Must be bad for us, too. So far, allergies in animals are caused by, generally, the same things that cause them in people. Thhat would be both airborne and dietary allergies.

I know I'll get nowhere upholding additives in foods. Without them, food would be spoiling before you could get it into a home, as they are preservatives and antioxidants. I guess it's easier to be led by various proponents and detractors than it is to go and learn for ones self. BARF diets are the latest fad. Done properly, they can work fine for some people and their animals, but look at some of the problems we have seen here... wondering what could be wrong with their puppies, who were being fed on bones and raw foods (BARF) because they understood it was 'better' for dogs. Like I said, works for SOME people.

I never once suggested the RAW and BARF diets.. I think that those diets aren't done right because people lack the knowledge in what supplements to give.

If all stage diets are so bad, then why is it that dog foods that are superior to Science diet and other such foods and only vet clinics and veterinarians suggest, make it? I'm sorry Paleo, but I have fed my own dogs the all stage diets and they have done BETTER than on puppy food... I guess it just comes down to preference...

Any disease can be treated with a natural food. And I don't mean RAW or BARF diets.. A lot of sicknesses have been cured by nutrition alone, and it was never Science diet or Purina MD that did it. Those foods are pure chemicals and other crap.

And.. the white part of the corn is what is healthy... "Ground yellow corn" doesn't sound like the inner white part of corn.. Corn is low calories.. which is why its so great for people, and pets, who want to diet to load up on fiber, hence the term "filler". We are not talking about people here, we are talking about dogs.

Not claiming to be a nutritonal expert, but I do know some things about food.. Sorry you find them to be more than wrong..

Yes, since we're talking about specific diets and feeding I will comment on the RAW or BARF diet. I fed my dogs this diet for a good 6-7 months, and not only is very important to balance the diet with the right amount of added supplements and grains, it's INCREDIBLY time consuming and expensive. I found it did wonders for my dogs allergies. They were the best smelling, energetic and very healthy and full looking, but if I wasn't tedious enough with my daily routine, my dogs would have suffered. I have since switched to a holistic food here called Acana. They have responded wonderfully to it, and it is full of great ingredients.

I really like holistic foods, but there are great single grain feeds out there, that are **cough, cough** cheaper than SD. Like Ballengerb mentioned Blue Buffalo is a great brand, it is an all stages food, which when you are feeding a high protein food, they don't require a switch while they age. Lower quality chows sell different stage feeds because they don't have the high-quality proteins brands such as Blue Buffalo, Canidae, Wellness etc... have.Puppy chow usually contains more protien(in different stage foods) than say a senior food, which will be lower in fats. Even with all stage dog foods, there are lower cal versions. It costs more money to have protein then a filler. I have heard that corn is a healthy alternative for a filler. It is much better than say wheat or by-product. I still prefer a food with a high protein meat source listed as the main ingredient and a single grain such as brown rice or oats. Even in the wild dogs got their dose of grain when they ate the stomachs of their prey.

What ever food you feed, the most important thing is that it agrees with your dog and he is healthy from it. Observe your dog carefully when trying a new food. Some dogs need more protein and some need less, just as some dogs need to eat more than others, depending on activity level. Look for changes in coat and skin, along with stool consistency.

Well, surprise to all... I don't feed Science either!!

I was a BIG fan of the STRESS diet they had, about 1974 & for several years. (Waaaay back enuff?) Came in a 10# plastic tub and cost, as memory serves, $20. Came as close to a 'no poop' food as any made. That 10#s would go as far as 25-30#s of regular food. Was great for the stresses of being at a dog show, and EVERY dog tried on it would wolf it down. (Better than cat food). This was the Science Diet (not just Stress) made for Performance, not economics.

Belle and Lucky, you both have conducted your own feed trials and have concluded that the diet you used is working as well or better than you could have hoped for. But, there are probably others that would do as well, were you to have the time and desire to look and try, right?

As to 'chemicals' in foods (and elsewhere) how would you describe what we are talking about... FOOD? If you say that food (and lets call it a natural, raw diet, like Belle and Lucky have used so successfully) was a mixture of proteins, carbohydrates, fats, trace minerals, and other UNKNOWN factors, you would be accurate, but not completely correct. Those proteins, CHO's, fats, and trace elements are ALL chemicals, i.e, combinations of the elements carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, sulfur, nitrogen, various minerals, and trace elements which are even more elements, and who knows about the factors.

Given reason and reward enough, the world of technology can and does reproduce each chemical identified in feeds exactly, and, if it is inexpensive enough, uses it in the manufacture of feeds. Many of these things are too expensive to manufacture for food use, but are readily available naturally, and are therefore used instead of the man made stuff. The one 'ingredient' not available in manufactured foods is/are (I don't know how many there could be) the unknown 'factors' (for lack of a better term) appearing in natural plant and animal materials. It is expected and assumed that these factors also play a role in nutrition, we just don't understand what or how... yet. My answer for an example would probably be the BARF type diet. (RAW too, I just like to call it BARF) there is something 'special' in natural foods that all animals respond to. This is sort of akin to the 1800's when Man was just learning about the transmission of diseases. Malaria or Yellow Fever, as examples, were thought to have something to do with the fog or vapors around swampy areas. Close... but no cigars.

Basic Nutrition is a topic that makes people's eyes glaze over, even those interested in it. Since it is a common everyday topic in mainly human life, many people have an interest and are subjected to all sorts of advertisements and other claims of benefits, which are usually no better than other advertising... not reliable sources of factual information.

So, when you say you would like to be rid of the 'chemicals' in foods, you wouldn't have much left over. People put all sorts of 'stuff' in their systems every day that are more harmful than the additives that get used today. Plus, we know that this 'stuff' can be harmful, but continue to do it anyway.

This incrimination of things that have made life easier and safer is poorly founded, such as the uproar of preservatives in vaccines. It has gone so far as to cause people to try and give their kids actual cases of measles and chicken pox, just so they can avoid the vaccinations. Sending contaminated objects through the mail, on a 'mail order' basis is how they are doing it out West. But, that is OT, so...

We could talk about our different opinions in what to feed forever, no-one will ever agree as it is such an opinion based subject.
Some people will only feed raw diets and their dogs do great on them, others don't like raw and their dogs do the best on commercial food.

Back when my parents were breeding, their dogs were fed exclusively on Pedigree PAL, yep PAL, the food everyone says is junk. Their dogs were best in show winners.

I feed Supercoat,l but I just realized it is an Australian branch of Purina so it may not be available there. I used to feed Royal Canin but discovered that the results of feeding Supercoat (at over half the price of Royal Canin) was exactly the same, if not better.

When I read the packaging on a dog food I look for meat as the first ingredient, and whether it contains colors. I don't look for things like corn or wheat as I know if meat is the first ingredient, it is the highest content.
If I have a dog with an allergy THEN I start looking at other factors such as grains and certain preservatives. Like with my mini poodle, I eliminated a lot of different factors, I switched around foods a lot before I decided to try BARF. Well when I started feeding raw beef that's when his allergies came to a head. I also found that with him I needed a lower protein diet for him to be in peak condition, while my Crested requires a higher protein, high fat diet. My third dog is a bit like the one Lucky described... Iron gut... So she can eat whatever food is offered and thrive.

I am definitely not a nutritional expert, I only know from experience what foods my dogs do well on.
If you want to talk health benefits I think my Crested is a perfect example, you can't always see how healthy a dogs skin is, you have to go on whether you see flakes in the fur or whether the coat is shiny. I'll attach a picture of him, you can't get healthier skin than this:

Paleo, I totally agree with you as far as chemicals are concerned. And Shazzy you are right, we would be here all day until we are blue in the face. And here's a shocker too, we get HUGE discounts from Iams, so that's what the shelter uses as food. 95% of the dogs respond wonderfully to it. It's cheap (about $40 for the biggest bag) and it fills the void. At the clinic I work at they rep Science Diet. I know the only reason they do this is because they get a commission off it, and that's all I will say about that.

Shaz, Cyrus looks amazing. Very healthy indeed. And that just streses my last point on the my last post:
What ever food you feed, the most important thing is that it agrees with your dog and he is healthy from it. Observe your dog carefully when trying a new food. Some dogs need more protein and some need less, just as some dogs need to eat more than others, depending on activity level. Look for changes in coat and skin, along with stool consistency.


And since we're sharing, I will add Lady and Max, cause they also look pretty darn healthy and shiney! :D

What a handsome dude! Max is the bigger one he was Am Staff, and Lady is the darker smaller one on the right. She is boxer staffy (but who really knows) mix.

The shelter told me Levi was Am Staff but when his original papers came from South Carolina they read Plott Hound mix. Who ever knows.

That's very true! His coulorings remind me of a bully breed, his face definitely reads plott or other hound! He's gorgeous regardless.

I don't know what there is to argue about... There are a lot of wonderful foods out there that don't have the toxic ingredience that the "popular" vet brands and pet food stores have.

I fed my pup EVO redmeat because I wanted her to gain muscle mass.. Once she came into herself, I switched her over to the all stages food by Innova and my dog looks great, feels great, smells good and so on...

But, as with all foods, sometimes a particular food works for that dog, and other times it doesn't... I agree with Bella, feed what your dog can handle without buying the cheapest stuff out on the market...

I attached a photo of my pup

Seems it is coming out that most/all of us agree that giving some type of feeding trial seems to be the best way to evaluate the quality of a particular feed. None of us are looking for the guaranteed, highest quality feed, regardless of price... just the one that seems to work best for our animals. This works for all animals, from kittens to goats to swine, or cattle, with only a few eccentric exceptions.

All animals are just "conversion machines", meaning they take whatever food they eat, do a preliminary intestinal breakdown and absorb whatever is possible. Once inside the body (within the 'gut' from stem to stern is considered to still be outside the body) it is further deconstructed (metabolized) into it's components. The body then takes what it needs to meet it's requirements, whether it's for growth, tissue repair, fighting disease, or just energy to accomplish all it's tasks, including moving and staying warm (and cool... takes energy, too). Most animals also construct some of the materials they need that are not supplied in their diets, like some amino acids used in building certain proteins.

Energy is the greatest demand a body has to meet daily. Excess energy is converted into fatty products (triglycerides and fatty acids) that are further 'converted' and stashed away as body fat (adipose tissue) to be used... whenever. All of what is left, both in the intestines, and what has not been metabolized, has to be excreted, either directly, or again converted into something else in the kidneys or liver and passed on out.

Some feeds are obviously better than others, but it is neither fair nor accurate to describe any feed as 'junk', or any of the feedstuffs going into it's manufacture as toxic or other misleading terms. Animal foods are strictly regulated, and must meet standards of manufacture and nutritional value. Failures to do this do result in recalls. Anything truly toxic is not allowed, and melamine is the latest I can recall... from China? Intentionally introduced as a supplement. If anyone believes something is truly toxic or otherwise 'bad', it should be reported. A low quality (nutritionally) item will create no alarm, however.

Use of derogatory terms to describe most of the foods currently on the grocery store shelves is uncalled for and inaccurate. Most of our OP's get their foods off those shelves and it does no one a service to disparage their choices. Make a suggestion, not an evaluation. One's own personal experiences are just that... personal. True malnutrition, other than an inadequate amount of food being given, is seldom seen in practice, and usually is associated with 'home cooked' foods using formulas sometimes concocted out of 'logic and "common sense" '. There are many examples passing through clinics of food 'inadequacies' that result in skin and coat conditions, or reproductive problems that are not acceptable to owners (as example, but not limited to.) This may be either the fault of the feed, or the particular animal, or breed.

The Public's pet world is replete with inaccurate or inadequate information regarding nutrition. Where we can, let's try not to contribute to it. End of minor rant (and TMI?)

Great discussion guys! Very interesting info here. Great info for the OP as well!

I switched him to Innova and again he wouldn't eat. I'll put out the Hills and he downs it within a min. I guess I'll keep feeding him the Hills. I think he likes the Hills because it has a stronger smell and it's softer. Thought?

It's highly possible. If you want to feed something different try putting the dry food in the microwave for about 10-20 seconds, it releases the oils and makes it smell stronger.

You could also try soaking the dry in water to make it softer. Usually the ration is 1 cup of dry to 1/2 cup of water but I think you could go with much less water just to soften up the outside.

It surly could be the texture he is liking. Remember that with hard food it also acts like a tooth brush, so if you will be softening his food, make sure to feed lots of crunchy treats and bones to get his teeth cleaned.