Chester loves Pascoes too

I read a book on the agencies that govern animal food, and many don't test. This has led to problems when you buy the food and the palpability has never been applied, only formulas, or recipes. I think it's good if it can't harm the animal. How could it be harmful? Wouldn't the food tested be good? It's all a matter of if it's nutritionally correct I think. If animals are sampling, then I wonder if they should have some sort of supplements to fall back on. But then that could alter the results of knowing if the food is nutritionally correct. Hard question to answer, I don't know enough about the sampling.

Are there horror stories on testing dog food?

Hi Barbara Go to 'Heated Debates' find LELs post 'IAMS 'and you will see where Lel has posted a number of links..... :smt010 :smt010 :smt010 :smt010 :smt010 :smt010 read them and you will have a whole new perspective on dog food.

Oh, I read those, that's right! I don't understand how a dog feeding trial can go so bad It sounds like it should be so simple and so safe.

I'm a sceptic too! Why not promote the fact they don't test??????????