Feeding for Ultimate Health...

[Gypsy Wolf]

Hi all,
I would like everyone's ideas about feeding for the best development possible. For instance, I feed an adult dog kibble (Royal Canin & Taste of the Wild), as well as a few supplements recommended to help joints develop properly and delay onset of osteo-arthritis, as well as preventing developmental problems like Panosteitis.
I use Vitamin C, MSM and a supplement called InFlight Coat Formula which I swear by.
Every night I give a natural rawhide to help keep teeth clean.
Once or twice a week I give raw "soup bones" or chicken backs/necks washed in super-hot water first.
Also, I will give a tablespoon of plain full-fat yogurt or cottage cheese from time to time.
Luna has had soup bones but I have not given her a chicken neck yet...
I would love to hear what others have found to work for their CsV...

[yukidomari]

Feeding for the best development? Personally we do complete prey model raw, and I feel that is most species appropriate. But, I know it's not for everyone. So I won't preach about it.

In terms of kibble, I would not feed Taste of the Wild to a puppy, even though it is labeled as 'all life stages'.. the calcium to phosphorus levels are way too high for a developing puppy, especially one of large breed. In general for a large breed puppy you would want to keep Cals/Phos levels under 1.5% maximum; I have never fed Royal Canin so I don't have comments on that but the only grain free food I would feed as appropriate to puppies would be any line of Orijen excluding their new Red Meat line and their sister grain free line, Acana as their cals/phos levels are appropriate.

It is a myth that a puppy kibble is not appropriate for large breed puppies. Recent studies (I can cite them for you later, if you want) indicate that large and giant breed puppies should be kept on APPROPRIATE puppy kibble for up to 2 years. Sadly, most kibble, even though specifically marketed as puppy or all life stage are not always so - you have to read the guaranteed analysis yourself.

If you are feeding raw recreationally, keep in mind that exposed bone should never be fed to a dog. If you want to feed raw bones, the rule of thumb is that they must be meaty - ie., slathered in meat. This will help to cushion it as they chomp on it, and also in their stomachs. This is perhaps the single largest mistake people make when feeding bones and/or raw, and it contributes a lot to incidences of punctured stomachs, painful bowel movements and broken teeth.

In raw feeding we call these "raw meaty bones" or RMBs; Appropriate RMBs vary from dog to dog depending on jaw strength and size.

Little dogs can have drumstick, turkey or chicken necks, and chicken wings as appropriately sized RMBs, while larger dogs can have something like a pork hocks.

As for supplementation - I would supplement with a good Pacific Salmon oil. For any dog, really. Processed dog food and conventional grain fed meats don't contain nearly as much good fatty acids as they should.. a good Salmon supplement can make up for that.

[pdmcgrane]

Supposedly raw knuckle bones and raw rib bones are the best for keeping their teeth healthy. I've given my American Eskimo raw bones once every 2 weeks and his teeth are in puppy perfect condition. I started my CSV Ciara (Zahara od Uhosti) on raw bones as soon as I got her a few months ago and she absolutely loves them..... as well as all the deer, elk, sheep, goat and caribou bones we find around our house in the woods.

I had been feeding both my 1 year old male American Eskimo and Ciara high grade organic kibble for the longest time and I noticed that they usually always had diarrhea. One day I decided to switch them to an all raw food (dehydrated raw food as well as fresh raw meat and veggies) and within a day their stool became hard and since that very day (months ago) they haven't once had diarrhea.

I admit the cost of feeding them is more expensive than before, but why would I feed them anything else if I noticed an improvement in their health due to the new diet? I also supplement their diet with Nuvet plus vitamins and it certainly doesn't seem to hurt.

[Gypsy Wolf]

Raw is definitely not for me - not enough scientific studies on it - all of the preaching is anecdotal, and based on poor science. I also personally know several large and giant breed folks who have tried it and have had developmental issues - higher incidences of displaysia in formerly strong lines.
I don't feed puppy formulas due to the risk of Pano. I just don't want to take the risk. Too many large and giant breed friends of mine have had historical problems with it.
I mix TOTW with Royal Canin GSD formula - I don't like Orijen due to it's high protein content - higher protein has been linked to developmental issues in puppies, too, as well as the Cal-Phos ratio.
I am considering trying Royal Canin's GSD puppy formula (new to the market) and a Newfie breeder friend of mine swears by Royal Canin's Large Breed Puppy Digest & Osteo formula (has to be specially ordered though it is not a prescription diet) to start off her pups and follows up with Canidae ALS. She has not had Pano issues with this regimen.
I don't give any weight-bearing bones chicken bones - chicken necks and backs are pretty meaty and the bones scale their teeth better than any other raw pieces - that's the main reason I give it - poor man's dentistry!
The beef soup bones are not terribly meaty - the dogs eat the tissue covering the bone and the marrow inside. Once that is all done, I wash the bones, stuff them with peanut butter and freeze them for a "pupsicle" treat. Squeeze cheeze is good for that, too.
Here is south FL, another favorite is Pedialyte ice cubes to keep them hydrated.

[yukidomari]

Re: raw, all ya gotta do is think about the thousands of years before the advent of kibble which has only been around since '40s for proof.

That, and the fact that dogs are the same species as wolves.

It is not optimal for a dog to eat the equivalent of cereal in lieu of actual food for all its life IMHO.

But, if it's not for you, it's not.

Higher protein has not been linked to developmental problems; it is the high cals/phos traditionally in high protein diets that are responsible for that.

Here are some facts, quoted from a friend in English Mastiffs, that generally dispel the myths surrounding high protein:

"Taken from Relationship of Nutrition to Developmental Skeletal Disease in Young Dogs by Daniel C. Richardson & Phillip W. Toll
It is too little protein that will actually cause skeletal problems in growing puppies.

Unlike other species, protein excess has not been demonstrated to negatively affect calcium metabolism or skeletal development in dogs. Protein deficiency, however, has more impact on the developing skeleton. In Great Dane puppies, a protein level of 14.6% (dry matter basis) with 13% of the dietary energy derived from protein can result in significant decreases in bodyweight and plasma albumin and urea concentrations.9,10 The minimum adequate level of dietary protein depends on digestibility, amino acids, and their availability from protein sources. A growth food should contain > 22% protein (dry matter basis) of high biologic value"

Myth: I need to switch my large breed puppy to an adult food at 4-6 mos of age or else he will grow too fast and get a growth disorder.

Fact: (taken from the same source as above) Adult foods are often calorically less dense and have lower protein levels. Therefore, in order to get all that your puppy needs, you would need to feed more of the food. This causes an increase in the calcium levels, which could then result in a growth disorder.
Often puppies are switched from growth to maintenance-type foods to avoid calcium excess and skeletal disease. However, because some maintenance foods have much lower energy density than growth foods, the puppy must consume more dry matter volume to meet its energy requirement. If the calcium levels are similar (dry matter basis) between the two foods, the puppy will actually consume more calcium when fed the maintenance food. This point is exemplified in the case of switching a 15-week-old, 15-kg male Rottweiler puppy from a growth food containing, on an as fed b asis, 4.0 kcal/g metabolizable energy and 1.35% calcium (1.5% on a dry matter basis) to a maintenance food containing the same amount of calcium but at a lower, 3.2 kcal/g energy density. The puppy would require approximately 1,600 kcal/day. In order to meet this energy need the puppy would consume approximately 400g of the growth food (containing 5.4g of calcium) vs. 500g of the maintenance food (containing approximately 6.7g of calcium)."

Italics are direct quotes from the study.


Here's another:

http://sonic.net/~cdlcruz/GPCC/library/Optimal%20feeding%20of%20large%20breed%20puppies.p df

"The common practice of feeding commercially available adult dog foods to puppies can also be detrimental. The broad category of adult canine maintenance foods contains diets with a wide range of nutrient profiles, caloric densities, and mineral contents. Some foods marketed for adult maintenance have passed AAFCO feeding tests for growth, but some have not."

"Many nutrients have been studied to determine which components of these diets cause problems. Over 30 years ago a significant amount of data was published that established a connection between improper nutrition and a variety of skeletal abnormalities in Great Danes, including hypertrophic osteodystrophy, osteochondrosis dissecans and 'wobbler' syndrome. The experimental diets varied in protein, energy density, and minerals, and it was unclear which factor or combination thereof contributed to the developmental bone diseases observed in the initial studies (Hedhammar, et. al. 1974). The same group went on to investigate the individual dietary components and demonstrated that dietary protein level had no effect on the development of osteochondrosis (Nap, et. al, 1991). For some reason, dietary protein level continues to be incriminated by some owners, breeders, and veterinarians, despite the lack of supportive evidence."


"One common misconception is that commercially prepared premium dog foods contain excessive quantities of protein that may be detrimental to the growing larger breed dog by supporting too rapid a growth rate. This is not
confirmed by controlled research, and fortunately, support for this misconception is diminishing. Much of the research presented in this chapter
has been conducted in the growing Great Dane. Although this is obviously a non-sporting breed, its use as a model for other large breeds,
including the sporting breeds, is considered very appropriate due to its extremely rapid growth rate.
Growing Great Danes consuming diets with identical calorie content, but providing a broad range of dietary protein (31.6%, 23.1% or
14.6% protein), from weaning to 18 weeks displayed no evidence of protein effect on calcium metabolism or skeletal development.1,2 Changes
consistent with disturbed bone development were observed to be equally distributed across diet groups, indicating no specific effect of
dietary protein concentration. Although the high-protein diet did not promote any detectable negative effect on skeletal development, the
low-protein diet was considered only marginally sufficient for the growing Great Dane in these diets, providing approximately 3,600 kcal
metabolizable energy (ME)/kg of diet.

Body weight was significantly reduced in the dogs consuming the low-protein (14.6%) diet, relative to those fed the high-protein diet
(31.6%) at 13 and 15 weeks of age, while plasma albumin concentrations, which are important for good overall health, remained with the low-protein diet throughout the study. This demonstrates that the protein concentration typically incorporated into premium dog foods does not increase the manifestation of skeletal disease in the growing large breed dog, but that it is possible to reduce the dietary protein level
to a point where the provision of nutrients is marginal. When evaluating the dietary protein concentration, balance of the protein and energy
is the most important concern in commercial diets for growing large breed dogs."

http://www.eukanuba-scienceonline.co...d/slibrary/Spo rting%20Dog_2002.pdf

"High dietary protein levels have long been implicated with
disturbances in the development of the skeleton in growing
dogs resulting in disabling conditions like osteochondrosis
and elbow dysplasia.Both in breeder and laymen discussions,
but also amongst veterinarians, this myth was communicated
without any scientific substantiation."

"Research concerning growth and calcium metabolism in
giant and small breed dogs has lead to the conclusion
that giant and large breed dogs are more prone to
disorders of the skeletal development compared to small
breed dogs if they consume a high calcium content
food1,14"

http://www.eukanuba-scienceonline.co...eding_high.pdf


A paper from University of Pennsylvania Veterinary Medical school, one of the leading veterinary schools in the nation:

"Why Have We Chosen to Keep the Reduced Protein Myth?

The myth has been maintained even in the past decade
despite negative scientific evidence because the dogma has
persisted about its value for the past 40 years. If we as professionals
are uncertain about the facts concerning a controversy,
we are likely to put ourselves in someone else’s
hands who appears to have authority. Power to command
this authority is in the hands of commercial advertisements
that promote these special products with misleading messages.
Marketing is aggressively aimed at veterinarians and
owners alike. There is a profit motive for veterinarians to
sell these diets. The public has a nutritional mania and preoccupation
with diet in our society. Dietary change has assumed
the status of medical treatment using such terms as
intervention, maintenance, and correction. The profession
and the public do not appreciate that advertising claims
come without proof in the case of diets. Owners can easily
be enrolled to accept such diet change because they feel
they are involved in doing something constructive. Professional
responsibility has been lost in this case. The situation
can remind us that we are part of an uncritical profession
with little review or standards. When scientific proof fails
to justify a practice, a false myth may likely live on.
In conclusion, the continued existence of this false myth
about dietary protein is an uncomfortable reminder of the
lack of sophistication, lack of critical thought, and reliance
on oversimplified and attractive dogma that persists in our
profession. This is only one example of many false myths,
misinformation, and partial truths that are repeated from
decade to decade. Until a more critical approach with standards
and oversight are brought to bear in our profession,
we will likely continue to be ensnared in false myths despite
the presence of sound science.
References"

http://www.orijen.ca/orijen/Myths_of_High_Protein.pdf

[Gypsy Wolf]

Though dogs and wolves are the same species, dogs are technically a sub-species. A sub species that evolved eating our refuse, scavenging carcasses and latrine areas.
If the raw folks REALLY want to get back to basics - to the food that dogs evolved on, they would take them to the local dump. That's what dogs evolved eating.
Instead raw folks use pristine cuts of meat (in the wild, dogs eat the diseased, dying or very young prey, rife with worms), etc.... the real wild diet includes DUNG, hair, hide, antlers, developing eggs, rotten fruit, entire digestive tracts of large prey animals or the ENTIRE small prey animal, beaks, feathers, feet... they eat MAYBE once or twice a week. Real wild dogs and wolves do not have their hips checked. They have worms of all kinds. Intestinal, heart, et al. They are not expected to exceed 5 years, if they are lucky.
We have created a sub-species far removed from the wolf and I do not think there is any way to really feed dogs what they evolved eating. And feeding them like wolves is not necessarily in their best interests either. Wolves have a short life-span and not necessarily the best health.
Dog food companies have done tons of research to find out what the minimum requirements are. Again, I have not seen any long-term studies done on raw diets or any comparing them to commercial diets. Instead there are a ton of different raw schools of thought - as well as there are a ton of different commercial dog food recipes.
The lifespan and general health of wild dogs doesn't impress me as something to strive for. I want my dog worm-free and to live a long life. Certainly dogs nowadays greatly outlive their predecessors.
The folks that bash kibble ironically bash some of the "bad fillers" when, in reality, that's exactly what a dog would be eating in the wild - from feet to beaks to hair and feathers - and scavenging the dead, diseased and dying animals... so perhaps what goes into kibble *IS* closer to what dogs evolved eating than an "organic, grass-fed raw diet".....

[Gypsy Wolf]

Also, if I were so inclined, I can find studies that find the opposite conclusions of the ones you've quoted. Statistics are easily manipulated to support a point of view.
I am simply going on what I have personally seen in 17 years of dogs - my own, my friends' dogs, etc. That said, another point is EVERY DOG IS DIFFERENT so their metabolism is different too. Some dogs do better on one diet over another. I have tried just about every premium food on the market (as well as having tried raw back 10 years ago for about a year) and there are some whose recipe I like better but the bottom line is how my dogs do on the diet - it might be a better food according to experts, but if my dogs do not do well on it, it's worthless to me.
So I go by their coat, stool, energy level, muscle tone, mucous membranes, breath, scent and tartar build-up, if any. So far I have kept coming back to Royal Canin formulas time and time again as my dogs seem to do the best on it overall. I like Taste of the Wild's recipe, though, so I use that, too. I do not ascribe to feeding a dog just one kibble, I think that leads to potential gaps in nutrition.
And though some folks may say that large breed puppy food is OK, I am not willing to take that chance - I've been safe with what I've done so far and I am satisfied with that. I would feel so stupid if I tried a puppy formula and my dog came up with Pano - because I knew better!
So I am slow to change what I think is working just fine. If I see good reason to, I have no problem doing it, but otherwise I will stick with what works for my guys.

[yukidomari]

Raw asides, you asked for an opinion, I provided one, with studies.

Wolves have a short life-span in the wild due to factors beyond diet.. ask zoos and/or zookeepers.

Even if you don't trust raw, kibble is nothing more than more-convenient home-cooked (which people do too & that's cool too). And if you read the guaranteed analysis for kibble, you can match vitamin level for vitamin level, protein level for protein level, and mineral for mineral if you were to research and balance a raw diet. The USDA site provides nutrient breakdowns on all sorts of meats & cuts. Personally I don't need a study to show that eating fresh food (cooked or otherwise) is better than eating a cereal when done right.

Either way, the sources I posted apply to kibble & otherwise so there's no reason not to read them if you actually want to know more about current studies in feeding dogs.

(just read your most recent post - please post sources, I'd like to read it)

[Gypsy Wolf]

I did say "if I were so inclined" which I am not... takes too much work to dredge up other veterinarian's articles manipulating data to their point of view - plus, as I mentioned, a lot of it is my own experience and other dog friends' experiences that have influenced my decision.
And yes, I do want to know what others feed, whether it is raw or not, but I did not want a "raw vs kibble" debate - I think each camp is quite entrenched in their opinion, though I did want to point out that unless you are taking your dog to the city dump, it is not eating what it's ancestors did.
That's where I take exception to the argument that it's "better because it's more natural"...
I was totally grossed out by Luna eating all the sheep poo, she will also try to eat dead critters she finds (the deader, the better) but dogs have been DOMESTICATED... I don't want her worm-ridden and trying to kiss me with poo in her teeth.
For a semester in college I studied coyotes on Mount Desert Island in Maine. They ate anything, of course, and their scat was typically what we dog owners would term "blow-out diarrhea"... can't imagine I would want to mimic that diet and deal with the consequences in an urban environment.
But I do like a lively discussion and other people's take on the topic, and wonder if the raw folks encourage their dogs to eat poo like in the wild.

[yukidomari]

Dogs are opportunistic eaters - pretty much they'll eat anything even slightly edible, poop & antifreeze alike.

I don't think either poop OR antifreeze is optimal to their diet, although they will eat both. I would refrain from feeding the dog antifreeze, JMHO.

What they will eat and what they are physically built for are different, of course.

Either way, even when we fed kibble, we did not feed, say, Ol' Roy, even though they passed the same AAFCO standards as TOTW or otherwise. It is up to the human to read the ingredient label and pick the one most biologically appropriate.

A lot of us raw feeders do feed what is considered .. well, not optimal meat. We do accept road kill from wildlife services, as well as years old freezer burnt meat as freecycle. Dingos and other feral dogs will scavenge, they will also hunt & eat fresh meat.

Again RAW ASIDES, at the very least you should realize that protein level is not a concern when feeding dogs.. there is no safe upper limit when it comes to that. As well as safe calcium/phosphorus.. which adult food really is not suitable for.

[Gypsy Wolf]

Here's a Veterinarian who thinks it's better for your dog to eat poo and dead carcasses than a raw diet...
<shrug>
Not that I am particularly impressed by his opinion, as I think a healthy immune system and the stomach's hydrochloric acid should be sufficient to the task, but...
http://www.therapydogs.org/documents...Eat%20Poop.pdf

[yukidomari]

That's an article, but it cites no actual study. Yeah, dogs shed Salmonella et al in their feces on raw, but so do dogs on kibble.
BTW many of those links I posted are from one of those large food companies - Eukanuba, to be exact.

[Gypsy Wolf]

I do also remember reading that there certainly *IS* such thing as too much protein... just anecdotally, as a Vet Tech (I'll see if I can find any articles on it), high protein was always taken into account when it came to renal issues and Pano, among other things... Interestingly, a few years ago, there was quite a difference of opinion in "Senior" diet recipes - some insisted on lower protein due to it's affect on aging kidneys, stone formation, etc. - particularly in breeds prone to it like Dalmatians, where others promoted the idea of higher protein as older dogs have a tougher time assimilating protein (and their muscles get all stringy)...
And in the case of Dalmatians, for instance, Dal folks insist on low Protein diets as 100% of Dals have a uric acid production defect and protein in the diet ends up as sludge and then stones in the bladder. The lower the protein, the better, and most Dal folks I know prefer NON-ANIMAL protein sources, saying that in their experience, vegetarian diets seem to be better when it comes to the Uric Acid issue....
As an aside, the Dal folks DID introduce an English Pointer into select lines about 35 years ago (the Back Cross project) to introduce normal uric acid production genetics - they are not "recognized" by AKC even though they are 99.99% pure Dalmatian at this point - the purists consider them "mixes"... even though they are the only way to bring in the genetics to end the uric acid defect... talk about shooting yourself in the foot...

[yukidomari]

Re: renal failure & seniors - that was addressed in the UPenn article I posted already.


And Dals.. again, it's not protein level, but rather it's purines. Just that purines are extremely high in things like organ meats, commonly in high protein diets. So, no, our Dal friends cannot feed organs regularly as other raw feeders do. (Dal raw feeders are heavy on the white meat - low in purines - and substitute organs with supplemental vegetable shakes).


Dal breeders who don't believe in the backcross project.. sad... we know of the backcross project & friends with Dals have met dogs out of the backcross project and can't tell that they are mixed at all.

[Gypsy Wolf]

Again, my own anecdotal experience really does influence me more than a study. You know that old saying "should I believe you or my lying eyes?"...
I have a dog friend with both "pure" and BC Dals - no difference, well, actually, I think the BC Dals she has have better markings, technically, than the "pure" ones...
That's one thing about having a limited genepool that is worrisome. Nutrition aside, our basic building blocks are the genetics.
And as far as food goes, really - I use premium foods. I know lots of folks who have dogs with food allergies, intolerances, etc...
Not that I recommend brands like Ol' Roy, but I don't like to see food allergies/intolerances as "acceptable." A dog really should be able to eat anything. "Soy" is not a four-letter word! I don't like the idea of breeding dogs with such issues - immune-related, no doubt.
There are some recipes I wouldn't feed my dogs, but I also would be very wary of keeping dogs that need specialized diets in the gene pool. No better than a hothouse flower!
Certainly a wild dog/wolf with a food allergy would be weeded out of the gene pool...

[yukidomari]

Reasonable opinion.. but my take on it is that dogs should be able to eat everything biologically appropriate. To me, it's odd when a dog is allergic or sensitive or a meat-based protein.

But it is not in a dog to eat soy or corn syrup or corn. Just like it is not in us to eat grass, though cows can do it fine with their multiple stomach. In fact it's not even really in humans to eat corn (eat a lot of corn on the cobs and you'll see why.. )

Cellulose as in plant matter is just not something that a dog's comparatively short digestive track is equipped to break down. Their teeth don't lend pre-digestion grinding. Our English Mastiff friend fed her dog a whole strawberry once and no joke, it popped out the other side pretty much undigested

But, no, seriously raw asides, I do think that you are a reasonable person. When you have time, give the articles a read over, .. they apply to kibble too (we fed kibble and we aren't against it.. it is just like cereal to us and we do sometimes feed it still). Even if you think that all of these things are opinions and can be written to reflect whatever viewpoint they believe in..

[Silvester]

Originally posted by yukidomari :

"But it is not in a dog to eat soy or corn syrup or corn. Just like it is not in us to eat grass, though cows can do it fine with their multiple stomach. In fact it's not even really in humans to eat corn (eat a lot of corn on the cobs and you'll see why.. )"


This is completely correct !

I agree also to yuki´s other postings - of course meaty bones and raw food is better than artifical man- made kibbles...

It can not really be a question, i think.

May be only for sick dogs, i mean sick by desease as well as sick by genetics , you can have a real reason to feed an artifical food .

[Mikael]

Originally Posted by Lunas Mom

Royal Canin GSD formula

I did ask my veterinarian if he think this food was good for Hronec as a puppy, He tolled me NO definitely not, that food is for GSD and all health problem it has whit bad bone and fur. Hronec looks healthy and has good fur and bone structure...

He recommended a high quality puppy food and feeding of raw meat bones as extra diet.

But I mix meat into the food to and egg, omega 3, olive oil, and sometimes my own food...

In Sweden I think dog kibble is kind of new, I think it goot very popular here as late as in 1980.

Best regards / Mikael

[pdmcgrane]

I don't think there would be as many issues with tainted meat if we processed it ourselves. I personally strive to buy my meat locally from farms who let their animals free-range as I don't think it's natural to feed cows corn/grain their whole lives when their stomachs aren't even made for digesting it properly. I see no issues with feeding my dog meat that was personally acquired from a reliable source vs feeding it meat from an unknown/questionable source in a supermarket. My mother and her parents all raised their own food and they couldn't be healthier individuals. I hope to in the next year practice more of what I preach and start growing all my food and acquiring my meat through hunting- as it is a more sustainable and natural way of living.

[Mikael]

I like puppy food whit high meat % if I only are to feed kibble.
I think this ones are good, and wonder what you all think about them, as I’m no expert on pet food.

I’m probably going to feed my next puppy kibble mix whit meat, and maybe then "Magnussons pet food" will be a little bit to mush of the good ???

When Hronec was young I fed him "Purina pro plan large athletic lamb and rice" mixed whit meat and when he was 24 month I changed it to "Hill’s lamb and rice" because of that it was more lamb in it and he did not need puppy food no more.

But fore the moment I feed a basic kennel food that I mix whit about 60 % meat = deer, wild pig, pig, lamb, chicken, cow

.................................................. .....

Anyway, what do you all think about this puppy food…

Purina pro plan large athletic >>> http://www.purina-proplan.com/eu/uk/dog/puppyLargeBreedAthletic.asp

Hill’s puppy food large breed >>> http://www.hillspet.co.uk/adult/products/product.aspx?pid=4&packform=Bag&sc_lang=en-GB

Magnussons Puppy Pet Food >>> http://www.hundmat.com/en/complete-food-meat-a-biscuit/15

Very best regards / Mikael

.................................................. .......

Hronec whit half a lamb front on 2,8kg, that is "Feeding for Ultimate Health" I think