Too many things could be involved here for anything to be called more likely.
Analyzing without facts is not more likely only an opinion.
Poor quality control of ingredients before bagging and sealing can be questionable.
Preservatives guarantee nothing if produce is not sound before bagging and sealing which is possible even if only in one batch.

I am finding you a contrary Mary when on more than one occasion you claim you do not feed kibble when what you have to say is not being accepted as gospel. Even though raw may be your first choice you have stated on this forum that you feed Orijen kibble for convenience when you are working or travelling!!

Er I am not understanding the "contrary mary" accusation?

I have ALWAYS said I feed raw and I have ALWAYS said I feed Orijen in emergencies ie when I am travelling where I cannot get hold of raw. So I am afraid I cannot see where I have made any contradictory posts, but please feel free to point them out if you feel I am lying!

I think I have NEVER said that I feed Orijen when "I am working" as of course I work full time 5 days a week.

So I am at a loss to understand your point, if you have one?

I have not made any "claims" to anything, I state the FACTS with regard to how I feed my dogs.

IS your point:

That I am lying
That I feed raw
That I feed kibble
That I feed both
That I travel
That I work?

Any clarification of your post would be most welcome as I take umbrage, as would anyone, at being accused of being untruthful, so that would be great.

And I am still unclear what feeding both Orijen and raw has to do with this issue???????

But perhaps I am being dim?

As for not accepting what anything is said as "gospel" of course I do not, I challenge everything I read, hear or see, to determine the accuracy of the data.

And I certainly agree that ALL posts on this thread are only OPINION of the individual posters as NOBODY has the facts with which to make the correct analysis!

You state it here that your dogs are not on dry food , so it is not something that concerns you.

You also stated on another thread practically word for word that you didn't feed kibble and so therefore it didn't concern you.

It is some time ago so you will have to go back in your posts and find a discussion with Azz on a subject referring to kibble.

Your comment then was that you fed raw not kibble so it did not concern you Azz replied that it may not concern you but he was concerned about the effects on dogs in general.

I though it rather an odd remark for you to make at the time as you had made it known you sometimes feed Orijen and that is why I can recall.

If your comments are not a contradiction I don't know what is.

It doesn't matter how often you feed kibble the fact that you do feed it at all means you feed a brand of kibble.

Why don't you feed a cheaper standard kibble instead of being more selective and paying for a more expensive premium kibble if you are not concerned as this is a contradiction in itself.

I would never feed a cheaper standard of kibble as I have several times on this forum over many threads explained what I have against cheap kibbles such as Wafcol.

They are primarily carbohydrate based and there is no proven need for carbohydrates in the dog's diet.

I do not feed my dogs cheap food, as IMHO you cannot make a silk purse out of a sows ear or in this case a first class product out of third class materials.

So I do not try, I feed FIRST class products to my dogs and get FIRST CLASS results!

This is probably one of the reasons none of my dogs have issues with allergies or intolerances and are never put at risk due to their diet being made up of inferior products and those which are unsuitable for feeding to dogs eg lupins to name but one.

Or of course I am just lucky?

Or perhaps I bought my dogs from constitutionally sound breeding stock?

Last time I looked individuals were not only allowed but encouraged to post their views, opinions and outlooks on various subjects as that is, after all, what a forum is for.

I post my views, which have been very helpful for some, on kibbles because I have conducted extensive research on them, their ingredients and analyses.

Sometimes I am asked for those views, sometimes I receive pms on those views and sometimes I offer them up voluntarily.

But you have quite rightly exposed not, as you think, any contradictions in my post, but failings in adequately communicating to others the messages which I wish to convey which I will do by best to resolve in future so that there can be no misunderstanding or false accusations of false representations by individuals such as yourself.

Thank you for bringing my failings to my attention, I will try to do better in future.

My last word on your hissy fit is I am not interested in dragging out this trivia and me thinks you protest too much.

The strong meaty smell didn't seem right to us either This is why I first rang Wafcol, without feeding any of it to Jimmi - they assured me that it was meant to smell like that Also, as Velvet Boxers has pointed out, the salmon content has changed, but not only has it changed the form in which it is used is different too. It is this altered form which the lady at Wafcol said made the kibble darker and meaty smelling. I still don't get it to be honest.
What you have said is very interesting, and makes good sense.

SB - Wafcol is most definitely NOT a cheap kibble, I don't know where you get/got that from. I actually find that remark a bit insulting to think that I would feed my sensitive / dietary intolerant dog/s a cheap food. Wafcol has always been a specialist dietary food and as such we have paid for it. The last time I bought the big bag and only because they didn't have the smaller bags, it was approx £52. That is NOT what I would term a cheap kibble

As for swopping kibble for raw at short notice, I think you have been remarkably lucky with your dogs, not to have had problems - I envy that, it is something I could never do just swopping one food for the other, I would have a very ill dog.

If that is the case why has Harvey's problems not cleared? OR substantially improved? As a last ditch resort and for the want to try something totally different and new - it was recommended I try Orijen! There has not been a big deal of difference to the dog and I hesitate to say this, he does not like it very much, and I find to fill him up I am having to feed a lot more of it so bang goes the theory that you feed less on a better quality food

As for cost - with £10 delivery it came to £68 for the large bag - not a lot of difference between the Wafcol at £52 and the Orijen at £58.............

I really don't think there is any call for that remark, it comes across as rather smug. How is that useful to people with rescue dogs. Some of those dogs will be crossbreeds and mongrels. Sensitivities and intolerances are not confined to pure bred dogs

Differences aside, to give Orijen a fair chance I think he will need to be on it for a while longer - finish the bag anyway

Do you feed your cat Orijen? I got ours a small bag of it from Zooplus as they showed such an interest in Harvey's food.

Well here we are day 5 on Orijen & still pinky red skin & itchy dog, not as bad as when on Wafcol i might add but still very noticeable.

I find it incredibly sad that once again a perfectly innocent thread about dogs with allergies and food intolerances, and the problems ensuing from Wafcol doing something to the recipe, has turned into an excuse for SB to insult and deeply irritate people. I wonder what is lacking in your life SB, that makes you constantly do this? You will roll your eyes and wink, as you always do - but I for one find your comments unhelpful and patronising in the extreme.

Good breeding stock is never something that is taken into consideration when rehoming a dog, as we did, and for those with pedigree dogs brought up from puppies some of your comments are incredibly rude.

No method of feeding, or type of food, is ever going to suit each and every dog. What is good for your dogs may be absolute poison for others, and also as VelvetB has said - the foods under discussion on this thread are anything but cheap. I have wasted enough typing time on this.

VelvetB.......this is not good news really is it, it seems that Harvey's system has been well and truly disrupted and on top of that the increased amount needed of the Orijen plus the fact that he is not overly keen on it, means that perhaps you will have to go back to the drawing board. At least he is not raging red and madly itchy though, so you have some time to consider the options. Jimmi does love the Fish4dogs, but needs less of it - this does not meet with his approval! Still, his skin is no longer pink and the biting and scratching has virtually stopped. His drinking is still more than it was before all this fiasco began, but only by a relatively small amount and of course now that it's hot he is bound to drink more anyway. One of the major factors was his general lethargy and being quite unwell, and he is now back to his normal self thank goodness.......a big relief.

I am glad this is your last word as I find your remarks and veiled accusations distasteful in the extreme.

So ceasing them would the first demonstration of good manners you have displayed.