Originally Posted by grammadidi
While I agree that the moderator should not prevent the open discussion of alternative diets I also feel there is a time and a place for it, and I DO feel that this thread is an excellent time and place. I did not read the original post that the moderator deleted, so I am unable to comment upon whether or not it was appropriate. I also agree that all moderator's personal biases need to be held in check enough to ensure that the original poster and other readers can draw from all responses in order to make a well-informed decision based upon those responses. This can be done by providing their own response and supportive documentation if necessary and should not be done by randomly editing posts. (I am NOT saying that this is what happened in this particular case as I do not know!)
I personally feel that unless the advice posted is deemed to be dangerous, abusive, blatantly offensive, obscene or is obvious solicitation it should not be removed or altered by the moderators (particularly if it is just that they disagree). This kind of defeats the purpose of the site. Having people being able to read and comment upon those posts generally can give the OP and other readers an idea of which direction they should go. Advice and opinions are as varied as the people who give them. Doctors, lawyers, the clergy, veterinarians, breeders, teachers - they all have their own views and opinions upon things. (I think that's what makes us human?) However, if I post a question and get 30 different responses and 25 of them disagree with one person's response and agree with anothers then I pretty much can figure out which is the best advice for me to consider. I can then narrow it down further by seeing how much respect a person seems to have for and by others, and further by what their background and credentials are. I am all for free speech. :)
As for your point on the wild wolves, while I wanted to scream out "Touché!!" I also must make mention of the fact that when wolves are eating raw meat and bone, this is not their exclusive diet. They also eat a very high concentration of grains & other vegetation which is usually embedded within the stomachs of what they are ingesting. Neither man nor dog can live by meat alone. I suspect a huge part of the problems with both commercial and home-made dog foods are not the ingredients, per se, but due to technological error, ignorance and man-made materials (teflon, melamine, etc).
Now, I believe the topic here is actually about commercial dog chow, not Labman's abilities, knowledge or biases. How about we put the focus back on the original topic because I believe that many here have a lot of good information to offer. I also think the difference between commercial dog chow and canned food needs to be addressed. Obviously, the majority of the deaths so far have been attributed to prepared, canned foods, although I see more and more dried products being suspect it sure makes one wonder where all of this will lead?
Food for thought - if we can't ensure that OUR own human food is safe for human consumption, how can we believe that our pet foods are?
Didi