Burns v hills dog food

I’ve two pugs (sisters) ages 6,
Last year one of them got peritonitis which the vet said was caused by her food, she was eating bakers dry food at the time , since then they have been on hill’s prescription diet dental care dry food as per vets instructions . However now one of them (not the dog which had the peritonitis) has gone off her food and will not eat it, she will eat anything else , she’s been to the vet and isn’t sick .
I was thinking about feeding them burns dry food ? Would this be of good enough quality? Similar to the hills food?
Thanks :blush:

Hello and welcome to the forum. Which of the Burns products do you wish to feed? Have a look at the reviews on the Dog Food Directory. The nutritional ratings are not good. They tend to contain an awful lot of carbohydrate. Dogs are able to cope with some carbohydrates but not too much. They are not natural for canine digestion. It would be better if you could find a food with higher meat content and the source of it at the top of the list of ingredients.

You need to look a bit deeper into the fundamentals of sourcing a good quality dog food. There is plenty of information on this website but as a start, have a look here and here. Spending some time studying this subject will pay dividends in terms of the health of your pets and reduced veterinary visits.

Fortunately, the Dog Food Directory is a great tool for sourcing suitable food for your dogs. You just have to select the filters that you require and it will return results based on that. First of all you need to select ‘clearly labelled’ and no red/yellow ingredients.

Please let us know if we can be of any further help.

I was feeding the prescription version of this
And I have bought both of these
And also a burns grain free kibble (I don’t see it on here )

Would they atleast be better than hills?

Bakers dog food in the past has cause my dog to have peritonitis and was very sick I don’t want this to happen again
Thank you

The Hill’s food that you are using is reviewed here. It has a nutritional rating of 56%. For more information about prescription diets, read David’s blog - here.

Burns grain free food is not reviewed on the Dog Food Directory so I have used the Instant Review Generator, inputting the information from the company website, using Turkey and Potato Adult. It returns a nutritional rating of 66%, slightly better than the Hills but still low.

You ask if the Burns food will be better than the Hills. To help you make up your mind, look at the ingredient list: Potato (46%), Buckwheat (27%), Turkey Meal (20%), Turkey Fat, Seaweed, Minerals. You will see that it has the carbohydrate sources (potato) at the top of the list. Add this to the buckwheat and you will see that 73% of the recipe is in a form that is not easily digested by dogs. Only 20% of the recipe contains actual meat (turkey meal). As you will see in the links that I gave you, the protein source (meat/fish/poultry) should be at the top of the ingredient list. Dogs need meat - they can digest it more easily. Dogs can digest some carbohydrate, but not too much. The food you are suggest is in that category.

There are better quality foods available that have a higher meat content. You can source these using the Dog Food Directory. If you find this difficult, please ask and I will try to help.