This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Vegetarian and vegan dog diet article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
Vet Rec. 2022 Mar;190(6):246. doi: 10.1002/vetr.1609. Vegan diets for companion animals
No authors listed PMID: 35303364 DOI: 10.1002/vetr.1609 No abstract available LinkOut - more resources Full Text Sources
https://bvajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vetr.1609 There may be reason to review these publications for this article. MaynardClark ( talk) 12:14, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
I reverted the removal of "potential" in the risks header, for two main reasons:
First, keeping "potential" in the benefits section and removing it from risks is unbalanced. Second, the risks described here are both potential. Home made food will not apply to most dog's diets, and urinary alkalinisation is scientifically suggested, can be mitigated with urine tests, and depends on the specific ingredients. Sklabb ( talk) 17:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
I've removed content sourced to this [1] journal, WP:MDPI has issues with peer reviewing and this article is one of the more egregious examples. The main author promotes his own website in the article and has an obvious conflict of interest which isn't declared explicitly.
The carcinogenic claim is ultimately irrelevant, it's about humans and there is no evidence in dogs, thus there is no reason to include such information.
I've left the reference in for uncontroversial claims like the definition of veganism but another source could be used for them.
I've rewritten the mention of Kanakubo's study, it did not state 25% failed, in fact it actually states: 'Only 3 and 8 diets (with and without a statement of calorie content as a requirement, respectively) were compliant with all pet food label regulations established by the AAFCO.'
The claims in palatability weren't even made in the MDPI article and a 2003 patent isn't a proper source. Traumnovelle ( talk) 19:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
I think that the role of Good Food Institute in developing alt-proteins, and the possible future of AI (artificial intelligence) contributions to dietary formulations, should be developed in this article.<>ref Good Food Institute</ref> [User:MaynardClark|MaynardClark]] ( talk) 23:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
References
IMO this article needs a section on the role of 'taste testing' with vegetarian and vegan dog diet formulations involving statistically significant samplings of different breeds and sizes of animals in determining formulations and business strategies of companies trying to address these emerging markets. MaynardClark ( talk) 18:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Vegetarian and vegan dog diet article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: 1 |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Vet Rec. 2022 Mar;190(6):246. doi: 10.1002/vetr.1609. Vegan diets for companion animals
No authors listed PMID: 35303364 DOI: 10.1002/vetr.1609 No abstract available LinkOut - more resources Full Text Sources
https://bvajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/vetr.1609 There may be reason to review these publications for this article. MaynardClark ( talk) 12:14, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
I reverted the removal of "potential" in the risks header, for two main reasons:
First, keeping "potential" in the benefits section and removing it from risks is unbalanced. Second, the risks described here are both potential. Home made food will not apply to most dog's diets, and urinary alkalinisation is scientifically suggested, can be mitigated with urine tests, and depends on the specific ingredients. Sklabb ( talk) 17:25, 24 April 2024 (UTC)
I've removed content sourced to this [1] journal, WP:MDPI has issues with peer reviewing and this article is one of the more egregious examples. The main author promotes his own website in the article and has an obvious conflict of interest which isn't declared explicitly.
The carcinogenic claim is ultimately irrelevant, it's about humans and there is no evidence in dogs, thus there is no reason to include such information.
I've left the reference in for uncontroversial claims like the definition of veganism but another source could be used for them.
I've rewritten the mention of Kanakubo's study, it did not state 25% failed, in fact it actually states: 'Only 3 and 8 diets (with and without a statement of calorie content as a requirement, respectively) were compliant with all pet food label regulations established by the AAFCO.'
The claims in palatability weren't even made in the MDPI article and a 2003 patent isn't a proper source. Traumnovelle ( talk) 19:20, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
I think that the role of Good Food Institute in developing alt-proteins, and the possible future of AI (artificial intelligence) contributions to dietary formulations, should be developed in this article.<>ref Good Food Institute</ref> [User:MaynardClark|MaynardClark]] ( talk) 23:26, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
References
IMO this article needs a section on the role of 'taste testing' with vegetarian and vegan dog diet formulations involving statistically significant samplings of different breeds and sizes of animals in determining formulations and business strategies of companies trying to address these emerging markets. MaynardClark ( talk) 18:07, 25 May 2024 (UTC)