Protein
So Franklin is close to finishing his current bag of food and I'm going to be buying a new bag. I am not going to mention the food he is getting, as I don't want this to become a discussion about what brand/type/etc to feed, but my question is....how much protein is enough and how much is too much in a adult dog food? I had thought that around 30% give or take was the perfect amount, but I'm beginning to read a lot about dogs not needing very much protein and that the ideal percentage is more around 20-25%. The brand of food I feed Franklin has varieties of either 32% or 25%. I had previously been feeding the 32% variety because I thought that was in a better range for him, but now I'm wondering if I should actually be feeding the 25%. One of the things that got me started thinking about this topic is that I started supplementing Franklin's food with The Honest Kitchen. Many of their foods are around 25% (with some being as low as around 20%), I was thinking that was low and actually e-mailed the company out of curiosity as to why they formulate so many of their diets with the lower percentage of protein. I got a great response from a vet explaining that they had done a ton of research on the topic and found that the lower protein percentage was closer to ideal. What are your thoughts? Also, if anybody has any scientific research to base their answers on that would be great too. I'm just wanting to do what's best for my pup and I feel we have this new trend/fad going on with dog food with the whole grain-free, organic, high protein and as with many fads (think South Beach Diet, Atkins, and now the current HCG diet craze in humans) this current diet trend may not be in the pet's best interest. On his current food, Franklin is of great weight, has a beautiful shiny low shed coat, perfect pearly white teeth, and firm lean muscle, so I'm not wanting to change much with his food, just wondering about the actual protein content.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Rachael & Waffle on
-
I like the part about the Ca:P amounts being most important in skeletal health of a growing dog... another reason to steer clear of the BARF-RMB diet for doggies. RMB is the absolute worst way to feed raw, but it's the way most people do. Bleh.
I don't like how they discussed the PUFAs in this article. They mention 5:1 and 10:1 ratios being adequate, but handily leave out the ideal range, which is between 2:1 and 4:1, and the differences between and effectiveness of ALA/EPA/DHA in eliciting the desired anti-inflammatory response. They also fail to discuss the ramifications of the anti-inflammatory nature of a proper PUFA ratio.
It's interesting they mention the brand names of the foods in the Hunting Dog Performance section. That's generally taboo in scientific literature, but I suppose this isn't a scientific document insofar that it isn't published in a journal. This doesn't mean anything, it's just not something I've come across and I find it kind of strange.
Overall, very informative, though missing some info on PUFA.
It's nice to read compiled info on all this instead of reading the individual studies for once.
-
Permalink Reply by Beth on
-
http://www.purinavets.eu/PDFs/ResearchReport_vol6-issue2.pdf
Also interesting. Percent protein for immune response has to do with percent protein of all calories, and actually varies based on fat content. Handy chart included.
-
-
http://www.eukanuba-breeder.be/sebodhtml/documenten/rd0037.pdf#page=12
Interesting bit at the end about carb sources an glucose.
Most of what I'm finding in the scholarly searches is either Iam's or Purina. They seem to be the only ones doing regular diet research.
That's it for me. Been reading diet studies all night.
-
-
Where are you looking for articles where you can see who funded the research? I have funding information for less than 5% of my library. :[ Of those, the two funded by Purina are conflicts of interest (funded by Purina and a major contributor to the article/research is a Purina employee, which is bad science).
-
-
Melissa, I am so glad you started this line of questioning because it really motivated me to get out of google's regular section and go into the scholarly articles, and wow have I learned a lot!
Honestly I was beginning to think of switching away from Iam's because the general social consensus online was starting to wear on me, but after all this reading I really think I'm staying with them. I know that's not an answer to your question, but I really wonder if all these other boutique companies put this sort of research into food? One of the links I posted is to an 80-page compilation of info on hunting dogs from Eukanuba (Iam's). It seems that the TYPE of fat in the food can actually impact the dog's scenting capabilities, for instance. And the stuff about glycemic index was a real eye-opener. I have read so much (spurred by sites like DogFoodAnalysis and others) about the "digestibility" of grains that I never considered the glycemic index, and now I understand better why the food I use blends several grains + fiber (rice, sorghum, corn) instead of using just one--- it gives a combination of readily available energy with a moderation in the glucose spikes seen just from rice.
And then the immune stuff (fat/protein ratio), and the importance of the ratio of Omega 6 to Omega 3 really was something I never thought about either.
Throw in the one I already knew, about Iam's being the primary researcher into the importance of DHA in growing puppies and lactating bitches, and my mind is made up.I guess it's all way more complicated than I thought originally. I will continue to add stuff like scrambled eggs and canned sardines to my dogs' diets, because it's such a small percent of their total diet, but I have a new respect for all these big companies do, and am all the more cautious of the trends that are out there now.
So thanks again! Hope you find some of the studies (or articles based on studies) half as interesting as I did.
-
Permalink Reply by Melissa and Franklin! on
-
Beth, Thank you so much for all the articles! All so interesting, I haven't read them all but I do intend to. I guess I just can't help wondering how its is that pretty much EVERY SINGLE VETERINARIAN in the entire U.S. has it wrong by recommending Iams, Purina, and Hills, and how every pet owner with access to the internet has suddenly become a nutritionist and knows more about pet food than the person who went to school for 8+ years. Being in the veterinary profession, and actually sitting and talking with some of the best veterinarians and veterinary nutritionists in California, I tend to bristle a bit when people say vets are only out for the money and only recommend these "horrible" foods because they in some way benefit. This simply isn't true, they didn't go $100,000+ into debt with schooling because of a desire to make money, they did it for the love of animals. Many vets actually only make about $20-25/hr when all is said and done. As I got more and more into reading websites from these boutique companies I started to wonder more and more what they were basing their findings on. It is very interesting to note that it is these three big name companies that continue to come up over and over and over and over regarding research on animal nutrition. Thanks again for the time spent finding these articles! I look forward to reading the rest of them. Franklin thanks you too! :-)
-
-
I really enjoyed reading it all. To be honest, none of them answer your original question about "ideal." However, knowing that dogs use protein as an energy source, and knowing how high-energy Jack is on his current low-20's protein food, I'm not sure I want to mess around with anything higher.
On the other hand, the information about injuries in sporting dogs has me wondering now about agility. It seems a slightly higher protein level helped protect against injury during exertion, though I don't know that we practice often enough (or jump high enough) to fall into that range; his muscles have plenty of time to heal fully between periods of exercise. Since I'm stuck with non-chicken, my options are a bit more limited though. Something to ponder over the winter.
I agree with you about the vets. I don't know how they got a bad rap online regarding food, except to say that it's human nature that if an authority figure does not back your claims, then the next step is to try to discredit the authority figure. We see that trend often enough regarding other subjects.
Off-topic, but I read about an awful disease called Alabama Rot in greyhounds that is most likely caused by a toxin produced by bacteria found in raw meat. I've never seen mention of it on a single one of the pro-raw sites I've read.
-
-
I think the first links you posted kind of answer my question. Since they are on husbandry of captive wolves. They seem to agree that 20-25% protein seems to be what they are choosing to feed. Makes me feel better about my decision to go back to the lower protein formula. I may even consider switching back and forth each bag just to be safe :-)
-
-
Alabama Rot is a moot point if you feed your dog meat that you know the history of and has been stored properly, and hasn't been ground up. It sounds like something you'd get from old meat that's been out of the fridge too long and has a questionable background, and that risk is tenfold if it's ground.
-
Permalink Reply by Aber, Ragnar and Kelso on
-
Just to continue being cynical (because it's fun :)---really I mean no disrespect). We are currently searching for a new vet, so I'm probably especially cynical about them at this point. I think vets are very much like medical doctors for people. I believe and have personally met many doctors who didn't go into the profession for the love of people--they did it for the money. They take on just as much debt and they aren't going to take that debt on out of pure altruistic love of humanity. Certainly some do, but many want to be able to pay those loans off AND drive nice cars and have big houses. In very rural areas, I'm sure they do end up making less, but I've never seen one hurting for cash, and the new terrible vet who has joined our now ex-vet's practice sold a $350,000 house in Colorado to move out here. She's maybe in her mid-30s so I think she was doing pretty well for herself. Perhaps there's the clue to it all: the ones motivated by money-earning potential are the ones who aren't all that good at it. They don't take the time to really think about their practice and all that goes along with treating animals.
And as for nutrition training, I haven't met many doctors who know much about nutrition. It's actually fairly shocking what they don't know.
Finally, and this is another beef I have with our health care system in general for everyone. Because health care is a for profit venture, and many of the aspects involved have shareholders to keep happy, I think by and large medicine has become a system that treats illnesses and is not very interesting in curing them. Drug companies can make a lot of money by putting people on maintenance drugs for life for all sorts of conditions, but they won't make nearly as much if those conditions actually get cured. As long as healthcare remains a for-profit gambit, I don't see this changing.
I recently read this article, which was very revealing and didn't really help make me feel more charitably inclined in my opinions:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1232217/Why-Im-ashamed-vet-...
All this being said, I have had at least one wonderful dedicated vet.
-
Permalink Reply by Sunni A. on
-
Eddy seemed to have soft stool 24/7 until I started feeding him food w/ 20% or less protein. The pet store people (locally owned) suggested it to me when I explained his problem. The brand I buy has 2 varieties w/ 20% or less protein, so I just meander between those two, salmon and lamb. Seemed to work right away, and so I stuck to it. He gets salmon treats, bones, bullies, occasional wet food as a treat, as well. Just wanted to briefly offer my experience.
-
-
Thank you for your input. I am buying his food today and have decided to go with the lower protein formula since the research seems to be overwhelmingly pro lower protein. He's done fine on all four of the brand's varieties and protein levels, so I'll just try a lower protein formula for a bit and maybe switch it up next bag. The bags are 30 pounds so they last FOREVER since he only gets the kibble for breakfast.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
Rescue Store
Stay Connected
FDA Recall
Canadian Food Inspection Agency Recall
Groups
We support...
Badge
© 2024 Created by Sam Tsang.
Powered by
