Denissov43
Notable member
http://www.dogsfirst.ie/theres-no-such-thing-as-a-complete-diet-2/
Nutrients in Complete Foods are at the Minimum Required for Growth
It was reading this line above some years ago that made me put down the bag. Your complete food of choice adheres to AAFCO (American Association of Food Control Officials) “Feeding Guidelines for Petfood Manufacturers”. Their guidelines highlight the minimum (and maximum in some cases) amount of vitamins and nutrients required for growth. Not the optimum. While these minimum protocols have brought pet food standards off the floor in some cases, they are hardly ideal.
AAFCO is a non-governmental organisation (NGO). As such it has absolutely no regulatory power whatsoever, capable of neither approving nor banning foods. It has no labs, no investigators, no law and no teeth (Martin 2007). It’s role is purely advisory. Thus not all dog food manufacturers chose to adhere to their minimum guidelines. Hence some supermarket brands state on their bag somewhere, often in tiny print, “for occasional feeding only”.
Unfortunately for reasons of cost AAFCO’s minimum requirements have now become the bar. Adding extra vitamins and minerals is expensive. When it happens you can be sure it will be broadcast across the front of the pack “now with added vitamin E for healthy joint formation!”. Ironically this means all their other products that do not include added vitamin E must not be as good for joint formation. In the same way pet food manufacturers include protein at an average of 20% or less in adult dry foods, the absolute minimum required for maintenance in adult dogs, because protein (meat) is damned expensive compared to carbohydrate (cereal). There isn’t a human on the planet that should be living on the absolute minimum of protein, or any nutrient for that matter. This holds particularly true for a meat needing carnivore.
Nutrients Decline Over Time
Add to this problem, findings by authors that the vitamin content of processed dry food will naturally decline over time. Despite the use of a favourite preservative (lets not even get into them!), vitamin C and E decrease by 30% over the course of 6 months in stored dry food (Hoffman LaRodue 1995, cited in Small Animal Clinical Nutrition 2000). Among their many functions vitamin E enhances immune function while vitamin C will help with stress and tissue repair. Animals in a poor state of health have increased metabolic and nutrient demands for these nutrients to sustain cell turnover and tissue repair. Thus during times of greater need a complete diet with vitamins included at “the minimum required for growth” (AAFCO 1995 feeding guidelines) will be by consequence deficient in these nutrients should your dog need a boost.
Ingredients Bounce off Each Other
We haven’t even begun to discuss the effect of phytic acid (present in cereals) binding key nutrients like zinc, magnesium and calcium in the food, rendering it useless to the body. But you can’t simply include extra zinc in the diet. Extra zinc will bind copper. Cheap iron sulphate is known to deplete vitamin E.
Don’t Forget Genetics…
Recently the role of genetics in an individual’s food requirement is a hot topic in science. From nutrient requirements to metabolic rate and probably most famously, it’s influence in obesity, we are only scratching the surface of our relationship with our food. You needn’t concern yourselves with this and your dogs, there is less and less support for the “one size fits all” approach. Manufacturers exploit this by producing different foods for different breeds but this fails to meet the importance of a nutrient requirements between individuals. If your dogs were mentally sensitive perhaps he would benefit from nice doses of mind calming vitamins A, C and E? If your dog lacks focus why not try high dose vitamin B, works in kids etc. Surely they can’t produce a bag for each dog?! Then again……
Not to mention an individual’s genetic susceptibility to certain proteins, most importantly gluten. Found in wheat, barley and rye gluten is an extremely tough, long chained protein that gives dough it’s bounce. 30% of humans (omnivores adapted to the digestion of some plant material) are still having serious problems with gluten, a result of genetically lacking the appropriate enzymes necessary for it’s digestion. Not that most of us realise but that’s another article. So how is the carnivorous dog faring with it? We’re not quite sure. We assume they must be completely ill adapted to it’s digestion with short, quick digestive systems and few micro flora. Lets say, at the very, very least, 1 dog in 2 is suffering from a gluten sensitivity? This means your dog will suffer poor coat, skin allergy, weepy eyes, sticky ears, poor joint formation and / or plenty of bowel disorder. Not to mention malabsorbtion which will determine exactly how much nutrients an animal can absorb in the first place.
Last but certainly not least dogs are suspected to elicit an allergic response to a food if left on the same diet for more than 18months (Carlotti et al. (1990). This goes some way to explaining the whole “dogs allergic to beef / chicken” thing, which remains a casually accepted quirk in dogs, like cows being allergic to grass. Clearly they like fresh meat but they can be allergic to it but only once they have been sensitised to it through being repeatedly exposed to a cooked meat protein for more than 18 months.
Anyway, NASA Hasn’t Got it Right…
So complete diets are definitely a science all right. It’s interesting to note that NASA hasn’t being able to develop one for their astranauts yet. In an article entitled “How to feed an astronaut: a talk with NASA’s space food manager” (Nov 18, 2010, www.smartplanet.com/people/blog/pure-genius/how-to-feed-an-astronaut-a-talk-with-nasas-space-food-manager/4966/), Christina Hernandez interviewed Michele Perchonok, the Shuttle Food System Manager at Johnson Space Center in Florida. When asked how do NASA maintain the nutritional value of foods when they require a shelf life of a year, she replied “That is a huge, huge challenge and we’re still not there…some of the vitamins are significantly lost…we do know the methods we’re using to preserve the foods are part of the culprit for losing the nutrition….and, of course, nutrition gets lost over time”. NASA merely desiccate their food rations due to the well established connotations with living on cooked food. This is why fresh food items are on the top of the list when transporting supplies to the Mir Space Station. Not out of want but out of necessity. The NASA scientists could save themselves a lot of time and money if they asked the science arms of the pet food industry for some of their secrets.
Authorities Note Complete Diets Fail to Meet any Scientifically Valid Burden of Proof or Safety
The bottom line is the burden of proving a products safety and claims of nutritional benefit are solely on the food product manufacturer. If manufacturers chose to live up to AAFCO (1995) requirements, they must prove that 6 of 8 caged dogs can make it to the end of a 6 month test on a complete commercial diet. Only two may be removed for non-nutritional reasons – the likes of gum disease and problem behaviours are not nutritional reasons apparently. Also none may lose more than 15% of their body weight. Once four blood measures are taken and approved food is labelled “complete” and millions of tonnes are shipped around the world (AAFCO Feeding Guidelines 1995).
Needless to say this sort of testing could never identify slow to develop nutritional excesses or insufficiencies, let alone poor joint formation or chronic diseases such as cancer. Complete diets have not met any scientifically valid burden of proof or safety. The highest authorities testify to this, independent researchers (Hodgkins and Smart (2008), Mac Millan (2008)) and AAFCO officials included. Dr. Quinton Rogers, DVM, PhD, an AAFCO panel expert, says
“Although the AAFCO profiles are better than nothing, they provide false securities. I don’t know of any studies showing their adequacies and inadequacies.”
AAFCO based it’s requirements of copper, iron, and zinc in dogs based on tolerance levels in swine for heavens sake (AAFCO’s 2003 Official Publication, pg 129)!! Comparing a notorious omnivore for a carnivore. This is the science behind your complete food. Dr. Elizabeth Hodgkins, who once served as Director of Technical Affairs at Hills Pet Nutrition, the largest proprietary pet food manufacturer in the world, said in her recent book “Your Cat: Simple New Secrets to a Longer, Stronger Life” (Hodgkins 2007)
“Virtually all pet foods contain unsubstantiated claims for safety, completeness and balance that no human food in the world would ever be able to”
Unfortunately manufacturers are not required to demonstrate the suitability of their product for long term usage. Nor are they required to demonstrate the efficacy of a miracle “complete” diet over the suitable control, a natural diet, as would be required in conventional food studies. This is what NASA is up against. Until now it’s not required for your dog. In this way your money does not buy you science, suitability or safety.
Thousands of Tonnes of Dry Food are Recalled for Nutritional Reasons Each Year
Lacking appropriate science, it is very safe to say complete food is a work in progress. While it continues to be released in this state, pet food recalls will continue. Just take a look at the sheer number of recalls so far recorded by the FDA since the tragic melamine scandal in March 2007 that poisoned an unknown number of pets. Pet food companies respond to issues as they pop up, like adding the amino acid taurine to cat food when a number of owners reported blindness and heart disease in their pets. Or increasing potassium levels when cats begin to drop dead of kidney failure. In the absence of appropriate product surveillance, it takes a multitude of pets getting sick to produce one or two owners with the courage / finances / strength to cry enough, fuelling a recall. Nutrient excesses or insufficiencies are reviewed and off we go again.
Take the Power Back!
We hope we have shown that a complete food, be it for astronauts or dogs, does not exist in any real sense. The only difference between NASA and pet food manufactures, asides NASA’s food is extensively tested over years before being fed to astronauts, is that NASA admit the best they can come up is no alternative to fresh food.
We’re all getting it a little wrong, and a little right. Hopefully you’ll end up somewhere close to the middle. If you’re a bit off one month he’s not going to explode all over your new kitchen. If you seen our videos on “Carnivore or Omnivore? Part I – IV” you should now have a good idea of what your dog requires from his diet. Fresh meat and lots of it! For information on suitable ingredients take a look at what we recommend on “Making Your Own Dog Food” and the extremely handy “Dog Food Calculator” for tips of what, how and how much. In short these articles advise you to feed your dog a diet of 70-80% meat and bone with the remainder of cooked vegetables (to cover any possible nutrient deficiencies).
Forget supplements, oils and tablets. Forget “not having enough of something”. If you vary the ingredients as much as possible, your dog is going to thrive. This might sound all too simple but you have been deliberately confused by bags of pet food manufacturers. Fancy bags boast complicated terminology, adding an air of complexity to the contents therein. This renders you incapable of deciding for yourself what is needed. A vast amount of industry money has been spent to get you in this state.
Take the power back people! Feeding dogs is as easy as feeding yourself or your kids. The idea is not to achieve balance in a single meal but to achieve balance over time. Easy.
Share this on: Mixx Delicious Digg Facebook Twitter
It was reading this line above some years ago that made me put down the bag. Your complete food of choice adheres to AAFCO (American Association of Food Control Officials) “Feeding Guidelines for Petfood Manufacturers”. Their guidelines highlight the minimum (and maximum in some cases) amount of vitamins and nutrients required for growth. Not the optimum. While these minimum protocols have brought pet food standards off the floor in some cases, they are hardly ideal.
AAFCO is a non-governmental organisation (NGO). As such it has absolutely no regulatory power whatsoever, capable of neither approving nor banning foods. It has no labs, no investigators, no law and no teeth (Martin 2007). It’s role is purely advisory. Thus not all dog food manufacturers chose to adhere to their minimum guidelines. Hence some supermarket brands state on their bag somewhere, often in tiny print, “for occasional feeding only”.
Unfortunately for reasons of cost AAFCO’s minimum requirements have now become the bar. Adding extra vitamins and minerals is expensive. When it happens you can be sure it will be broadcast across the front of the pack “now with added vitamin E for healthy joint formation!”. Ironically this means all their other products that do not include added vitamin E must not be as good for joint formation. In the same way pet food manufacturers include protein at an average of 20% or less in adult dry foods, the absolute minimum required for maintenance in adult dogs, because protein (meat) is damned expensive compared to carbohydrate (cereal). There isn’t a human on the planet that should be living on the absolute minimum of protein, or any nutrient for that matter. This holds particularly true for a meat needing carnivore.
Nutrients Decline Over Time
Add to this problem, findings by authors that the vitamin content of processed dry food will naturally decline over time. Despite the use of a favourite preservative (lets not even get into them!), vitamin C and E decrease by 30% over the course of 6 months in stored dry food (Hoffman LaRodue 1995, cited in Small Animal Clinical Nutrition 2000). Among their many functions vitamin E enhances immune function while vitamin C will help with stress and tissue repair. Animals in a poor state of health have increased metabolic and nutrient demands for these nutrients to sustain cell turnover and tissue repair. Thus during times of greater need a complete diet with vitamins included at “the minimum required for growth” (AAFCO 1995 feeding guidelines) will be by consequence deficient in these nutrients should your dog need a boost.
Ingredients Bounce off Each Other
We haven’t even begun to discuss the effect of phytic acid (present in cereals) binding key nutrients like zinc, magnesium and calcium in the food, rendering it useless to the body. But you can’t simply include extra zinc in the diet. Extra zinc will bind copper. Cheap iron sulphate is known to deplete vitamin E.
Don’t Forget Genetics…
Recently the role of genetics in an individual’s food requirement is a hot topic in science. From nutrient requirements to metabolic rate and probably most famously, it’s influence in obesity, we are only scratching the surface of our relationship with our food. You needn’t concern yourselves with this and your dogs, there is less and less support for the “one size fits all” approach. Manufacturers exploit this by producing different foods for different breeds but this fails to meet the importance of a nutrient requirements between individuals. If your dogs were mentally sensitive perhaps he would benefit from nice doses of mind calming vitamins A, C and E? If your dog lacks focus why not try high dose vitamin B, works in kids etc. Surely they can’t produce a bag for each dog?! Then again……
Not to mention an individual’s genetic susceptibility to certain proteins, most importantly gluten. Found in wheat, barley and rye gluten is an extremely tough, long chained protein that gives dough it’s bounce. 30% of humans (omnivores adapted to the digestion of some plant material) are still having serious problems with gluten, a result of genetically lacking the appropriate enzymes necessary for it’s digestion. Not that most of us realise but that’s another article. So how is the carnivorous dog faring with it? We’re not quite sure. We assume they must be completely ill adapted to it’s digestion with short, quick digestive systems and few micro flora. Lets say, at the very, very least, 1 dog in 2 is suffering from a gluten sensitivity? This means your dog will suffer poor coat, skin allergy, weepy eyes, sticky ears, poor joint formation and / or plenty of bowel disorder. Not to mention malabsorbtion which will determine exactly how much nutrients an animal can absorb in the first place.
Last but certainly not least dogs are suspected to elicit an allergic response to a food if left on the same diet for more than 18months (Carlotti et al. (1990). This goes some way to explaining the whole “dogs allergic to beef / chicken” thing, which remains a casually accepted quirk in dogs, like cows being allergic to grass. Clearly they like fresh meat but they can be allergic to it but only once they have been sensitised to it through being repeatedly exposed to a cooked meat protein for more than 18 months.
Anyway, NASA Hasn’t Got it Right…
So complete diets are definitely a science all right. It’s interesting to note that NASA hasn’t being able to develop one for their astranauts yet. In an article entitled “How to feed an astronaut: a talk with NASA’s space food manager” (Nov 18, 2010, www.smartplanet.com/people/blog/pure-genius/how-to-feed-an-astronaut-a-talk-with-nasas-space-food-manager/4966/), Christina Hernandez interviewed Michele Perchonok, the Shuttle Food System Manager at Johnson Space Center in Florida. When asked how do NASA maintain the nutritional value of foods when they require a shelf life of a year, she replied “That is a huge, huge challenge and we’re still not there…some of the vitamins are significantly lost…we do know the methods we’re using to preserve the foods are part of the culprit for losing the nutrition….and, of course, nutrition gets lost over time”. NASA merely desiccate their food rations due to the well established connotations with living on cooked food. This is why fresh food items are on the top of the list when transporting supplies to the Mir Space Station. Not out of want but out of necessity. The NASA scientists could save themselves a lot of time and money if they asked the science arms of the pet food industry for some of their secrets.
Authorities Note Complete Diets Fail to Meet any Scientifically Valid Burden of Proof or Safety
The bottom line is the burden of proving a products safety and claims of nutritional benefit are solely on the food product manufacturer. If manufacturers chose to live up to AAFCO (1995) requirements, they must prove that 6 of 8 caged dogs can make it to the end of a 6 month test on a complete commercial diet. Only two may be removed for non-nutritional reasons – the likes of gum disease and problem behaviours are not nutritional reasons apparently. Also none may lose more than 15% of their body weight. Once four blood measures are taken and approved food is labelled “complete” and millions of tonnes are shipped around the world (AAFCO Feeding Guidelines 1995).
Needless to say this sort of testing could never identify slow to develop nutritional excesses or insufficiencies, let alone poor joint formation or chronic diseases such as cancer. Complete diets have not met any scientifically valid burden of proof or safety. The highest authorities testify to this, independent researchers (Hodgkins and Smart (2008), Mac Millan (2008)) and AAFCO officials included. Dr. Quinton Rogers, DVM, PhD, an AAFCO panel expert, says
“Although the AAFCO profiles are better than nothing, they provide false securities. I don’t know of any studies showing their adequacies and inadequacies.”
Smith (1993)
AAFCO based it’s requirements of copper, iron, and zinc in dogs based on tolerance levels in swine for heavens sake (AAFCO’s 2003 Official Publication, pg 129)!! Comparing a notorious omnivore for a carnivore. This is the science behind your complete food. Dr. Elizabeth Hodgkins, who once served as Director of Technical Affairs at Hills Pet Nutrition, the largest proprietary pet food manufacturer in the world, said in her recent book “Your Cat: Simple New Secrets to a Longer, Stronger Life” (Hodgkins 2007)
“Virtually all pet foods contain unsubstantiated claims for safety, completeness and balance that no human food in the world would ever be able to”
Unfortunately manufacturers are not required to demonstrate the suitability of their product for long term usage. Nor are they required to demonstrate the efficacy of a miracle “complete” diet over the suitable control, a natural diet, as would be required in conventional food studies. This is what NASA is up against. Until now it’s not required for your dog. In this way your money does not buy you science, suitability or safety.
Thousands of Tonnes of Dry Food are Recalled for Nutritional Reasons Each Year
Lacking appropriate science, it is very safe to say complete food is a work in progress. While it continues to be released in this state, pet food recalls will continue. Just take a look at the sheer number of recalls so far recorded by the FDA since the tragic melamine scandal in March 2007 that poisoned an unknown number of pets. Pet food companies respond to issues as they pop up, like adding the amino acid taurine to cat food when a number of owners reported blindness and heart disease in their pets. Or increasing potassium levels when cats begin to drop dead of kidney failure. In the absence of appropriate product surveillance, it takes a multitude of pets getting sick to produce one or two owners with the courage / finances / strength to cry enough, fuelling a recall. Nutrient excesses or insufficiencies are reviewed and off we go again.
Take the Power Back!
We hope we have shown that a complete food, be it for astronauts or dogs, does not exist in any real sense. The only difference between NASA and pet food manufactures, asides NASA’s food is extensively tested over years before being fed to astronauts, is that NASA admit the best they can come up is no alternative to fresh food.
We’re all getting it a little wrong, and a little right. Hopefully you’ll end up somewhere close to the middle. If you’re a bit off one month he’s not going to explode all over your new kitchen. If you seen our videos on “Carnivore or Omnivore? Part I – IV” you should now have a good idea of what your dog requires from his diet. Fresh meat and lots of it! For information on suitable ingredients take a look at what we recommend on “Making Your Own Dog Food” and the extremely handy “Dog Food Calculator” for tips of what, how and how much. In short these articles advise you to feed your dog a diet of 70-80% meat and bone with the remainder of cooked vegetables (to cover any possible nutrient deficiencies).
Forget supplements, oils and tablets. Forget “not having enough of something”. If you vary the ingredients as much as possible, your dog is going to thrive. This might sound all too simple but you have been deliberately confused by bags of pet food manufacturers. Fancy bags boast complicated terminology, adding an air of complexity to the contents therein. This renders you incapable of deciding for yourself what is needed. A vast amount of industry money has been spent to get you in this state.
Take the power back people! Feeding dogs is as easy as feeding yourself or your kids. The idea is not to achieve balance in a single meal but to achieve balance over time. Easy.
Share this on: Mixx Delicious Digg Facebook Twitter
