OILFIELDTRASH
Lifer
Can someone explain what makes Kirkland so good compared to the other brands?
What I said was poorly worded. The FDA investigates certain claims (such as containing ingredients and such), but many of the claims, such as "human-grade meat" are nothing but marketing. The fact that you can put a product on the market before FDA approval should be enough to understand just how important the FDA feels pet food is.You have to be trolling at this point and you clearly do not understand WTF you are talking about at the same time.
The FDA does in fact do research into 'claims' http://www.fda.gov/animalveterinary/products/AnimalFoodFeeds/PetFood/default.htm
This is actually a vet's post: http://avetsguidetolife.blogspot.com/2013/04/corn-in-foodno-its-not-bad.html
Can someone explain what makes Kirkland so good compared to the other brands?
Check out dogfoodadvisor.com and read their review of Kirkland's (4-stars) versus other 1-star foods. They also have articles explaining their methodology.
Kirland's:
http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-reviews/kirkland-signature-dog-food/
1-Star Review (Purina):
http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/dog-food-reviews/purina-dog-chow/
Wow on that purina review. I feed my dog Kirkland's. I figured it was good just because everything else I buy at costco is quality stuff. Now it feels good to know it is quality stuff. Thanks.
So, basically, what you'e saying is "despite anecdotal evidence contrary to my beliefs, I choose to believe this because of <insert some witty term for absolutely zero research on the subject> and <quip about how there is literally zero requirements for pet food makers to prove claims made on their products>."
If you do have some research proving that the expensive food makes dogs (or cats) healthier, please do provide it. Otherwise, nobody cares about your flawed McDonalds analogy. Dog food, no matter how expensive, is made from scraps from human food production (no matter what they say on the bag or commercials). Your dog isn't getting fresh from the butcher beef because you pay 5x the amount I do. The only difference is generally in the amount of corn (or grain).
Also, the majority of health issues in humans is caused by obesity. The nutritional value of McDondald's food doesn't contribute nearly as much as how calorie dense it is and the amount consumed by someone. You could be just as unhealthy eating 5000 calories of broccoli a day, although, I'd imagine it would be pretty hard.
Wow on that purina review. I feed my dog Kirkland's. I figured it was good just because everything else I buy at costco is quality stuff. Now it feels good to know it is quality stuff. Thanks.
hmm....it appears that Kirkland Signature and Nature's Domain are different dog foods?
I'm a bit confused...so there's Kirkland Signature and Kirkland Signature Nature's Domain? According to that dogfood advisor site anyway...
https://www.google.com/search?q=kir...TJsASFzYC4CQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1536&bih=709
the Nature's Domain only gets 3.5 stars while the other gets 4 stars.
Also, plenty of people that are not obese still have health issues like high cholesterol which can led to heart disease and it's due to the quality of their diet, not the quantity of the food they ate.
The Nature's Domain food is probably something Costco allowed due to being paid to do it. They are more than likely hoping to cash in off the Kirkland name.
However, 3+ foods are not terrible. I never priced the Nature's Domain brand. If it's significantly cheaper it could be a good deal. I doubt it. I don't have a Costco membership anymore.
See if you can find this near you (grain free): http://www.victordogfood.com/
I have been using it for over 6 months now. It is even better than Orijen in my experience. A lot of the local border collie owners who compete in agility and show use this food as well.