Looking for a nutritionist’s/scientist’s opinion on product quality

[xavier363]

@gabriel201 The only "suspect" ingredients are the flours (if you're using whole grains, there's no reason to also have flours from the same grains). The "fresh" meats are actually substantially less nutritious per unit weight, and they actually cheat the ingredient listing.

What I mean by that is that the dry animal proteins (also known as meal) are substantially more nutrient dense due to their infinitely lower water content.

For example:

100g of Food A is comprised of 40g Fresh chicken, 30g of Barley, 15g Egg, and 15g vitamin blend. The ingredients would be in that order, since they are listed by weight in the finished product. However, chicken is ~70-75% water weight, meaning you're actually only getting 10g of "chicken" in the food.

100g of Food B is comprised of 40g Chicken Meal (Dry Chicken Protein), 30g of Corn, 15g Egg, and 15g vitamin blend. That means food B actually contains 36-38g of "Chicken", nearly 4x that of Food A.

The addition of "fresh" ingredients is simply a way to move those ingredients up higher in the ingredient list, effectively cheating the consumer.

Yes, "Fresh" ingredients are more expensive for the manufacturer, but when you convince the consumer that they are somehow better or more nutritious (they aren't), you can adjust your price accordingly and still make tons of money.

So if you want to look at which foods "substitute" protein more, it's actually the foods with Fresh animal proteins, simply because they have to use the dry protein amendments (legumes, grains, etc) to get the protein up to a comparable level. I'll also add that after you adjust for moisture content of the ingredients before mixing/extrusion, the food with "fresh" ingredients is likely going to have a higher percentage of grains, making it the grain based food.

I agree the generic "fish oil" is a little odd, but many manufacturers use that verbage because they are using whatever fish oils are available. It's easier to label it generically than change your label every month when your supply changes.

Obviously if your dog is doing well on those foods, there isn't a big reason to switch away but they genuinely do not offer a scientific benefit in any way.

Full Disclosures: I do not feed RC (and it's my least favorite of the big name brands). I also have a little shy of a decade of experience as a Food Microbiologist/Food Scientist in the Pet Food Industry, primarily as a consultant for several different manufacturers.

 

[plamp]

@xavier363 What do you have to say about using by-products or unnamed meats?

 

[xavier363]

@plamp I'll have to ask you to define by-products first, because many people use it as a buzzword that means "anything other than fresh meat". Specific examples will help me answer more accurately for you.

As for unnamed meats, I'd never buy a food that didn't explicitly state the source outright in the ingredient listing, but I've also never seen meats left unnamed on a label (and I'm fairly certain that isn't compliant with FDA or EU regulation). If a food states "meat meal", it should have a statement elsewhere on the bag listing what that meal is comprised of (generally it'll be beef and chicken). You're into the cheapest of cheap food if the source isn't directly labeled in the ingredients, because that manufacturer is going to be using whatever is available (cheapest) based on that time of year, similar to the generically labeled Fish Oil I explained above.

 

[gabriel201]

@xavier363 Thanks for your answer.

I see where you’re going with your examples with the chicken meal being more stable, but the protein from Orijen for example doesn’t come only from the chicken meat, but also from the liver, turkey and herring, and down the list we have turkey and chicken hearts, flounder.

Then again looking at your examples and comparing the feeding guides (not really accurate because the ingredients don’t match 100%), we’d be feeding a 20 kg active dog around 150 g of food A or 200 g of food B. On that line of thought, wouldn’t someone be over feeding or under feeding protein depending on the food?

You’ve named 2 oddities with RC: the flours and the generic fish oil, which I understand in the context of using different types of oils, but I’d rather know for sure what they’re using.

I don’t agree with the part on which foods substitutes protein more due to the fact that looking at the Orijen example legumes and fruits are at the bottom of the list, right before the vitamins. Only pea fiber is mentioned the 6th in top 10 ingredients. I agree some grain free foods might substitute that protein with other legumes.

I would like to know your top 3 dog brands if you’d like to share.

 

[xavier363]

@gabriel201 Sure, but you're running into the same issues there. Adjust for moisture and they move way below the grains and legumes.

They weren't a 1:1 comparison, just an example. You wouldn't necessarily be under or overfeeding protein. If you're comparing foods with similar protein percentages, then you'll generally be feeding the same amount of protein to the dog.

I agree, I'd rather them call out the exact oil, but ultimately fish oil doesn't matter what specifies it comes from since you're really looking at the fatty acids.

Again, adjust for moisture and you'll see that those protein substitutes jump WAY up the ingredient list, often to number 1 or 2. I'd have to get an exact formulation to know for sure, but basing their ingredient list to a similar formulation from a brand I worked for, I can comfortably say that pea ingredient is likely the #2 ingredient by dry weight.

I'm sure I'll get flamed, but I'm a fan of Pro Plan (not all Purina foods, only Pro Plan), Eukanuba Performance line, and Inukshuk. My biggest requirements are Vet Nutritionist Formulation and extensively research backed.

Inukshuk does not meet the majority of the things I generally require to recommend a food, so I won't recommend it to others. But one of my Chesapeake Bay Retrievers absolutely will not gain weight (I've spent thousands chasing bloodwork and having him tested all across the country, with no health issues being found), so I had to resort to their 32/32 formula (the highest I can find on the market) to even keep weight on him during hunting season. I've had nothing but wonderful results, but that's anecdotal and a sample size of 1 dog under very specific circumstances.

I have never worked for any of the "Big 4" brands, but I have enough experience in the industry to understand the processes involved and to understand the ingredients.

 

[plamp]

@xavier363 What do you think of raw feeding (when done properly/safely)?

 

[xavier363]

@plamp I have no issue with raw feeding when done with veterinary guidance (and consultation with a nutritionist) as well as routine bloodwork to prevent deficiencies.

That being said, raw food at its best is equal to a well formulated kibble. It's perfectly suitable, but in no way is it "better".

 

[imagebeastmarkbeast]

@xavier363 Do you mind sharing why you're a fan of Purina pro plan but not Purina one for example? Their ingredients lists seem pretty similar upon first glance but I'd love to hear from someone with an expert eye.

 

[hollan]

@gabriel201 20.0 kg is 44.05 lbs

 

[evnhope]

@plamp You could try r/explainlikeimfive, a lot of people on there are scientific to an extent, and take questions of all kinds. I also find they explain it in a rounded way that helps you understand better