- Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 


Whats your opinion on Innova Evo dog food

March 10th, 2006, 10:16 AM
I was just wondering what you thought about the Innova Evo dog food. This food is 42 percent protein and 22 percent fat with no grains. I read on another forum that dogs on this diet can become chronically ill. Is that true and why would it be. Sounds like an excellent food to me. I am wondering about feeding it to an older less active Shih Ttzu. I'd like your feedback if you know anything about it. Thanks

March 10th, 2006, 03:48 PM
Well I have recently switched from Wellness to Innova Evo and the dogs absolutly love it, even the picky one! It has only been a recent switch but I haven't seen anything negative, just positive.

I think there was another thread a while ago stating that people thought it could be the cause of kidney problems but that hasn't been proven.

I like Innova Evo because it is like a raw diet in kibble form. There is another person on this forum that swears by this food also!

March 10th, 2006, 05:24 PM
Search this site for Evo and you'll see what we think. A few of us don't like it at all.

March 10th, 2006, 07:40 PM
i just bought a small bag to use as kong-stuffers, and both my dogs went crazy for it. even my raw-fed puppy who won't go near kibble with a 10-foot pole ate a handful - i was impressed, LOL! however i would hesitate to feed it as a single diet item... seems un-natural in a way. raw is raw, and kibble is kibble, there is not a single thing common in the two. raw diets average 15% protein BTW, not 42% ;)

anyways, i'll gladly use as treats and diet supplement though. my boy does great on Go! Natural and i don't want to upset the apple cart, he has SUCH a sensitive tummy. oh well!

March 10th, 2006, 07:47 PM
I am feeding it to my 3 dogs , 2 are 8 years old and 1 is 3 years olds, when I transitioned them on to it it went a lot easier than some other foods I tried in the past.

I know that this is a debated subject here , I have read posts here that claims that dogs because very ill as a result but have never seen links to such claims, as I am interested in whether the illnesses are any different than reaction than dogs may have to other foods or if related to kidneys, I would want to know if the person had bloodwork done prior to starting EVO and knew their dogs did not have existing kidney disease. I want to see facts not rumours, I have done some searching on the internet myself and have not found anything horribly negative other than the normal food intolerances. No matter what food is available there is going to be certain dogs that will not tolerate it and some will have serious side effects because of intolerance or allergy, I have a dog who has a violent reaction to foods that contain corn, but I am not going to go around telling everyine that these foods are evil just because my one dog had a reaction to corn, I know there are many dogs that do quite well on corn. I know of some dogs that are allergic to rice but do well on corn.

If you contact Innova they will tell you that it is not recommended for dogs with kidney disease or large breed puppies whose bones are still growing, So my suggestion is first to contact Natura Pets and see if they recommend EVO for small breed senior dogs

A racing greyhound is typically fed a 35% protien diet, a race is only about 30 seconds long and they can only be race every 3 days at most and are crate rested in between , with a 1/2 hour to an hour of outdoor time in a pen for potty breaks and while their kennels are being clean , as a house pet they could actually be expending more energy and getting more exercise if they have access to a yard to run and play daily

At this website you can view these racing greys, pictures were taken just after they arrived from the track, most have raced 3 or 4 years by clicking on a picture of their head shot you will see a full body view, the only one that seems to have a physcial ailment is Valerie, but it appears she has a jaw deformity or maybe an abscessed tooth The

The first picture is Arrow who is almost 8 years old and has raced 6 years, so has had 6 years of a high protein high fat diet and is a glowing picture of health

and this 7 year old looks more like he is a juvenile adult than a senior

Kidney disease is rare in racing greyhounds so it kind of conflicts with what others say about feeding high protein diets, maybe because of the main source of protien is meat, not grains.

I adopted one greyhound who had live in a previous home for 3 years who had bladder stones(struvite), she had been forced to live in a garage so one could assume that her diet was not a premium food. but one made up of mostly grains, At the time I decided to do some research and found a university study where dogs who had reoccuring struvite where tried on different types of protien diets one group was fed a diet of mostly grain protiens and another feed a diet in mostly meat protien the group that was fed the grain protien had higher incidences of redeveloping struvite crystals, as a result I did not feed a lower protein as was recommended but went with one food with 27% and contained mostly meat she never had another re-occurance.

My dogs get bloodwork done annually, so when 2 get it done later this month, I am going to be asking specifically about their creatinine and bun values/ ratios and see how they compare to previous tests. I am suspecting to see a slight rise but nothing outside the norms, If they are then I will switch them to another grain free diet but with lower protein and fat levels

March 10th, 2006, 09:00 PM
My dogs get bloodwork done annually, so when 2 get it done later this month, I am going to be asking specifically about their creatinine and bun values/ ratios and see how they compare to previous tests. I am suspecting to see a slight rise but nothing outside the norms, If they are then I will switch them to another grain free diet but with lower protein and fat levels

Could you let me know how the tests turn out if you dont mind? Im feeding Innova Evo and my dogs love it! One of my dogs came to me with many urinary problems and we got her taken care of and have had no reoccurance!

Im going to stick with Evo as I haven't heard anything concrete yet but am really curious about how your dogs test turn out


March 10th, 2006, 10:29 PM
raw diets average 15% protein BTW, not 42% ;)
Thank you for that! No meat in the world is 42% protein by weight. We already know that not enough protein isn't good for dogs, but what about too much? I'll wait for this generation of dogs' results to come in. And maybe the next before I decide. There is a reason that the biggest testers and profit-seekers (i.e. Iams and Purina) don't have a 42% protein dog food out there.

March 11th, 2006, 02:51 AM
Could you let me know how the tests turn out if you dont mind? Im feeding Innova Evo and my dogs love it! One of my dogs came to me with many urinary problems and we got her taken care of and have had no reoccurance!

Im going to stick with Evo as I haven't heard anything concrete yet but am really curious about how your dogs test turn out


Will do ;)

I found a couple good articles regarding protein and dogs, very informative and I would not be surprised to see over the next few years an increase in protein in dog diets particularily in senior dog diets

This was presented at the 1998 Purina Nutrition Forum

March 11th, 2006, 01:50 PM
I feed my dog First Mate "Maintenance" which is for high energy
breeds...which contains 26 % protein and 15% fat and 4300 cal/kg
of food energy. She does extremely well on this diet, and can
easily maintain her energy level.
She is a super active little dog...runs faster than most
dogs I have ever seen.
I dont know how a 42% protein diet could be harmful...
perhaps consider that many professional athletes consume
a diet of about 40% protein and 15-20% fat.
This results in easy growth of muscle tissue and maintenance
of body energy for extended durations of use.
High levels of protein are also know to be essential
for neuronal and connector tissue development in the
I would worry much much more about robbing your dog (or yourself)
of protein, than of feeding too much.

March 11th, 2006, 03:16 PM
I found a couple good articles regarding protein and dogs, very informative and I would not be surprised to see over the next few years an increase in protein in dog diets particularily in senior dog diets

This was presented at the 1998 Purina Nutrition Forum

What you mentioned earlier about the greys' diets was that they were 35%. Not 42%. And the first link you posted talks about diets around 30%, not 42%. The second article doesn't have any percentages at all, just high or low protein, so we can't know how much protein the guy is talking about (unless I missed it). Being that he's talking with Purina's permission, "high" is probably around 30%. If Evo and the other protein diets were 35%, I don't know that I would have as much difficulty with them. Dogs have been eating diets around 28% for some time now without any ill effects. Purina's studies, that I have read, all say the ideal is around 23%, which is kind of low too. When we buy a piece of meat, it is neither 23% nor 42%. Why can't the kibble be the right balance in between?

March 12th, 2006, 08:20 AM
I wish these articles would actually state what the new recommmended recommended range of protein is

But I did find something form this article I feed too much protein?

The answer to this is yes and no. In theory, if a healthy animal eats too much protein, some gets excreted in the urine and the rest just gets used as calories or is converted to fat and does not cause any harm. If you dog has a kidney problem, however, high protein diets are not recommended. The other factor is that next to marketing, protein is the most expensive ingredient in the food and why pay for more than you need. Most pet food companies strike a happy medium and meet the minimum recommended requirements and add a little extra to be safe.

My moms shih tzu developed kidney disease on 21% protein, which is why I disagreed strongly about protein being the cause, the dog is on the Science Diet prescription and is getting progressively worse. So now as I am reading I am seeing that restricting protien so much is bad as well

Even the large breed puppy protein restriction is out the window

March 12th, 2006, 11:22 AM
My moms shih tzu developed kidney disease on 21% protein, which is why I disagreed strongly about protein being the cause, the dog is on the Science Diet prescription and is getting progressively worse. So now as I am reading I am seeing that restricting protien so much is bad as well Every dog is different though. It could be that 21% was too high for your mom's dog. Maybe the doggy started out with poor or weaker kidneys and could not handle that much protein. From the articles you posted, your mom's doggy probably could have benefitted from an omega 3 supplement her whole life... Maybe... Who knows, eh?

From your quote- the additional protein is excreted in the urine. That means the kidneys have to process it. If the dog is constantly getting too much protein, that would mean the kidneys are working harder than if the dog wasn't getting too much. Right? So it makes total sense then that the kidneys would be affected.

Even the large breed puppy protein restriction is out the window
The last link says that they "found no detrimental effects from protein levels up to 32 percent of the diet." It seems 32% is the magic number for that article.

From the other b-naturals link, this could be helpful to somebody:
In two studies, one from 2000 and the other from 1998, dogs with induced kidney disease showed improvement when they were fed omega-3-rich fish oil supplements, compared to omega-6-rich safflower oil supplements

I didn't find anything in the canismajor link that pertained to a high protein diet though. Only that a low protein diet led to malnutrition in patients with kidney failure. From one of the links, it's clear that low means below 15%.

March 12th, 2006, 12:02 PM
just wanted to interject something here regarding protein %'s... you have to factor in bioavailability in the equation. meaning, a raw diet of 16% protein is 100% digestible, while a kibble diet of 16% protein is NOT entirely digestible - some of that protein is grain-based and everything is cooked, therefore the molecular makeup has been modified, changing the bioavailability of the product. I don't know the exact numbers but for sure, the protein levels in kibble & cooked diets is not 100% bioavailable (look at the stool volume) to the dog, therefore those numbers printed on the bag do not reflect reality in the digestive system.


March 12th, 2006, 01:54 PM
It's "crude" protein, when it's not digestible. Like a clump of hair is 100% crude protein but 0% is digestible.

Corn has protein (even more in corn meal) but none of it is digestible, so it just boosts the numbers. But IMO 15% protein from a raw diet is still less than what 42% breaks down to (i.e. 42% is just not natural, IMO).

March 12th, 2006, 02:07 PM
yes prin i agree. what is difficult in analysing kibble protein levels is, exactly, how much of this protein is actually available to the dog (or cat). no two products are the same, as no two products use the exact ingredients or quantity/quality of ingredients. so it's a challenge, as the #'s don't actually mean much when you break it all down (your example of a clump of hair (or feather!) illustrates this quite well).

March 14th, 2006, 12:14 AM
Here's why I dislike EVO:

They have NO right to call that food a raw substitute!! It is no more "raw" than Kibbles N' Bits. It is fully cooked- what's "raw" about it! (It's a big marketing gimmick)

They don't use grains... that doesn't mean they don't use starch/ carbs! Potatoes are very starchy and have an extremely high glycemic index. No true raw diet would ever include potato.
One of the major parts of feeding a home-made raw diet is to eliminate unnatural starchy foods from the diet- like potatoes.

Potatoes contain solanine,
a toxic substance that is not entirely removed by cooking.
I wouldn't want my dog to eat something that is even slightly potentially toxic day in and day out for every meal.

EVO has an extremely high ash content, which may be a factor in urinary tract disease, lowers the digestibility of the food,and raises the phosphorus content which is a contributing factor in kidney disease.

This is what well respected canine nutrition expert Mary Strauss has to say about my comments regarding Evo:

"I do agree with this, (my comments on ash) and your points about white potatoes may also be valid. I will admit to some concern over reports from people who have fed EVO for some time, whose dogs do not do that well with it (many drink a lot more water with this food than other kibbles, for unknown reasons, and reports of poor coats after a few months on this food also seem common)."

I am also not a fan of Solid Gold's Barking at the moon, Timberwolf Organics Wild n' Natural (most of their formulas are great, though), and Nature's Variety's Raw instinct (same issues but with Tapioca).

March 14th, 2006, 11:15 AM
ooo no potatoes in a raw diet... I guess raw means nothing is cooked but it hadn't occurred to me that you wouldn't be able to feed cooked potatoes... Boo would be so upset. He loves potatoes (he stole 6 off a barbeque once and left the meat).

March 14th, 2006, 06:15 PM
Actually, cooked is the ONLY way white potatoes can be served. They can make the dog really sick if fed raw because cooking removes some of the toxins in them.

March 14th, 2006, 06:42 PM
Maybe that's why tato salad eaters always get sick.:sick:

March 14th, 2006, 08:41 PM
I have fed EVO to one of my dogs for over a year and I am very happy with the results. I will only feed Natura products.

March 14th, 2006, 08:45 PM
You will find a lot of good useful information here if you are researching commercial dog foods:

March 14th, 2006, 09:11 PM
There are various views and diet stragedies amongst those the feed raw some will add rice , oatmeal, barley, sweet potato etc to there dogs diets

This study will prove most interesting, an experiment was done feeding dogs who already have reduced renal function, various amounts of protein over a period of time some groups as much as 4 years, Some of the study groups was being fed 44% protein some 14% others as low as 7%
One group was fed a low protein diet, and the other
group received a high protein diet for the subsequent four years.12
Results of this study indicated that there were no adverse effects
from the high protein diet (Table 1), and mortality was actually
higher in the low protein group. A similar study was conducted in
another laboratory and likewise no adverse effect from high protein
diets was detected.13 In the latter study, however, increased mortality
in dogs receiving the low protein diet did not occur.

Check table one on page 4

March 14th, 2006, 09:15 PM
Maybe that's why tato salad eaters always get sick.:sick:

Like any food dogs with have different reactions, If I feed Nikki my eskie boiled potato pieces, she will heave them up an hour or 2 later but if I feed her mashed potatoes she is fine, The other dogs can eat the potato piecees and have not problem with them

March 15th, 2006, 12:08 AM
Heh heh.. I meant people.. I've never been to any party with tato salad where the people who ate it didn't get food poisoning...

I haven't read that whole article (it's hard to follow because the articles skip around from page to page), but did you notice the fine print under the table? In those studies, the dogs had renal failure because they had portions of their kidneys removed. aNX = functional elimination of nephrons, either by infarction or surgical removal. Fraction represents the portion eliminated.:eek: :eek:

March 15th, 2006, 01:22 AM
But IMO 15% protein from a raw diet is still less than what 42% breaks down to (i.e. 42% is just not natural, IMO).

I have a feeling there is a total misunderstanding on how protein percent is calculated , it is measured as a percent of calories per cup or unit if you were feeding the dog a chicken carcass, the only measurable caloric content is protein and fat and a bit of fiber due to the bones, so the only measurable calories will come from protein, fat and fiber which will make the protein percent very high, too high as a food to feed every day, but if you add rice to the dogs dinner the calories will now include carbs which will lower the protien and fat percentages.

Here is some human recipes and give breakdowns, so you can see what I mean, these meals have 30 to 50% protein as is per serving

If you have a serving of one one these meals and added a bread roll and a bowl of salad, the protein grams stays basically the same but the percentage is lower because the total calories of the entire meal has changed.

if you feed you dog a kibble that has 23% protein but also gave you dog a slice bread and 2 cookies every day, you have altered his caloric intake and as well lowered his protein percent to possibly lower than 18% depending on the amount of kibble fed meanwhile the carbs and possibly fat has increased. The percent method only works if you never give your dogs extras. If you feed too many extras and not enough kibble, you could in effect have a malnourished dog who is deficient in protein and fat unless you were sitting down and recalculating the added calories and converting the added grams to see if you are maintaining the right protein/ fat percentages, and adding meat if the protein falls too low. Personally I don't think any owner want to be doing math every time they give their dogs treats to see if their dog is still at a healthy protein/fat level.

Proteins are the building blocks of nutrition and very essential in a dogs diet so as dog owners we would be far better off it there were guidelines telling us how many grams of protien & fat a dog needs daily based on their size and activity level to be healthy, as long as the dog got the necessary grams of each adding treats would not be a big deal other than if the dog was gaining too much weight.

March 15th, 2006, 03:13 AM
Actually, it's the other way around. With kibble, they measure protein by weight and not by caloric content. So 23% protein is out of 100g of food, 23 grams is protein (prior to cooking). It looks a helluva lot better that way, because counting the calories involves real protein and not crude protein. It doesn't count as calories if it passes right through (as the corn meal protein does). % Moisture isn't about calories (there aren't any in water). It's all weight in kibble. It's easy and looks good.

When people feed raw or home cooked diets, the recipes tend measure % protein by calories- they don't feel the need to embellish...

March 15th, 2006, 08:45 AM
i found this info on

At minimum, a pet food label must state guarantees for the minimum percentages of crude protein and crude fat, and the maximum percentages of crude fiber and moisture. The "crude" term refers to the specific method of testing the product, not to the quality of the nutrient itself.

Some manufacturers include guarantees for other nutrients as well. The maximum percentage of ash (the mineral component) is often guaranteed, especially on cat foods. Cat foods commonly bear guarantees for taurine and magnesium as well. For dog foods, minimum percentage levels of calcium, phosphorus, sodium, and linoleic acid are found on some products.

Guarantees are declared on an "as fed" or "as is" basis, that is, the amounts present in the product as it is found in the can or bag. This doesn't have much bearing when the guarantees of two products of similar moisture content are compared (for example, a dry dog food versus another dry dog food). However, when comparing the guaranteed analyses between dry and canned products, one will note that the levels of crude protein and most other nutrients are much lower for the canned product. This can be explained by looking at the relative moisture contents. Canned foods typically contain 75-78% moisture, whereas dry foods contain only 10-12% water. To make meaningful comparisons of nutrient levels between a canned and dry product, they should be expressed on the same moisture basis.

based on this, i revert to my original statement about it being very difficult to compare bioavailable protein levels in kibble from product to product, while in a raw diet it's very straightforward as we know the protein % of meat types, calculated from pure raw form (here is an example and fed as such. :) Mother Nature knows best in this case, it's all balanced out.

March 15th, 2006, 04:20 PM
Mother nature also isn't trying to make a profit... At the end of the day, dog food companies are sneaky bastids and we have to read between the lines...

March 15th, 2006, 04:20 PM
When people feed raw or home cooked diets, the recipes tend measure % protein by calories- they don't feel the need to embellish...

For a dog that is fed raw, the greater portion of their diet is meat with some vegetable matter added, that means the total calories will comprise mostly of protein and fat, so saying the diet is only 15% protein is impossible, inorder to achieve that 15% the diet would have to contain at least 80% vegetable and grain matter with vegetables being the main ingredient, since grains also contain protien.

March 15th, 2006, 05:01 PM
A raw diet has a ton of moisture- don't forget that too.

March 15th, 2006, 07:02 PM
but water is zero calories, veggies have a very similiar water content so has no bearing when someone is feeding raw and working out protein based on percent of total calories.

March 15th, 2006, 07:12 PM
Yeah, but when technodoll said 15% she meant by weight because she was comparing it to kibble. (unless I'm misunderstanding)

March 15th, 2006, 09:09 PM
you can get the numbers here, great site! shows the protein % of all meats in a raw form (and yes raw meat is near 80% water) ;)

here is the analysis for 100gr of raw beef heart, for example:

as you can see, raw meat has an average of 15-18% protein - 100% bioavailable to the dog (or cat!).

really cool site! :thumbs up

March 15th, 2006, 09:26 PM
I found one of those sites for Canada a long time ago... I'll have to go find it. It had the break down of a gazillion foods (human foods). They're quite helpful.

March 15th, 2006, 09:31 PM
the usda site is for human foods too - try it, it addictive!
:thumbs up

so... yes i was confirming that a raw diet (well the meat part!) is low in protein, however since it's 100% digestible... you can't compare that to a kibble that claims "23% crude protein" (for example), since nobody knows HOW MUCH of this protein is actually utilised by the dog eating it. make sense?

March 15th, 2006, 09:40 PM
yep. But if you looked at the % of calories that come from protein in raw vs. the % of calories from protein in kibble, it would be a huge difference.

March 15th, 2006, 09:52 PM
well of course. a substantial part of the protein in kibble comes from grains, not meat, and grains = carbs = more calories than meat.

it's like comparing apples and oranges, other than both being fruit... ya ain't got much to work with, LOL! damn, it's like trying to nail jello to a tree, LOL!

March 15th, 2006, 09:57 PM
No, more like comparing grains to meats...:D And it's hard to know exactly which grains are used and which aren't. That's one thing about biology (one of the bad things), we get to learn about proteins in depth (way too much depth) and before that, you think protein is just protein. Well, protein is basically the product of genes, and when you think of all our genes can do, imagine all the different proteins involved. So which ones benefit us and which don't? Until we remove profits from the equation, I don't think we'll ever know.

hee hee jello to a tree.:D

March 15th, 2006, 10:45 PM
hail hail! :D oh lordy i just prepared the doggies' treats for tomorrow... what to do with those stale-ish ends of breads... you slather on some peanut-butter, fold in half and stick 'em in the freezer overnight... so they each have a frozen whole wheat pb sammich for their day treat - wonder what the protein content is for that?? LOL - i'll bet the doggies don't care! (and as i type this the little one is chewing away at a peice of raw beef heart... THAT i know is 17% protein! ha ha)

ok getting carried away here, sorry :o (nothing much to do with innova evo anymore... thread hijacking... oooops)

March 16th, 2006, 03:23 AM
So if raw meat protein as total percent of weight

and kibble protein is a percent of overall ingredient contents, they are non comparable when looking at the percent numbers, because the percentages are based on different forms of measure which is why the numbers vary so much which was the point I was trying to make earlier

So you have to convert if you want to compare kibbles with raw , so you are measuring percent on the same basis

so lets convert EVO using the FAO documents

Evo is made of chicken protein 12% turkey 13.5% potatoes 1.7%, herring 20% , you would have to combine all those ingredient in the ratio's that is used when processing,Turkey, Chicken ,Turkey Meal, Chicken Meal, Potatoes, Herring Meal
mash it all together then scoop out 100 mg and then measure the protein , taking in consideration that some of the meat is meal, it will likely be around 17 % still comparable to raw

lets do the same with Nutro Natural Choice Lamb and Rice

Lamb Meal, Ground Rice, Rice Flour, Rice Bran,
Here you will notice there are 3 forms of rice, in reality rice is the main ingredient but to make it appear that Lamb is the main ingredient manufacturers found a way to get around the labeling in a legal manner by doing what is called grain splitting, in this food close to 3/4 of the overall contents is actually rice which means the dog is getting very little protein from meat. This holds true when only the first ingredient is meat and the next 2 or 3 ingredients following are grains of various sources. Proteins that comes mainly from grains are a poor source of amino acids nor will they sufficient quantities of all 10 amino acids that a dog requires

so with the Nutro, Rice is 7.1 % lamb 12.8 % since rice makes up about 3/4 of the diet (3 x7.1) + 12.8 / 4 = 8.5% protein :eek:
Wolf King Bison | Salmon Meal | Brown Rice | Millet | Cracked Pearled Barley | Oatmeal | Rice Bran
with 2 meat sources followed by 5 grains, the grains are going to make up more than 50% of the diet but I will use 50% for calculating , luckily the Salmon is before the grains and is an excellent protein source and an excellent source of amino acids
[(Buffalo 12.8%, salmon 20%) x2 + (brown rice 7.5, millet 9.7, barley 9, oatmeal 13, rice bran 7.1 ) X 2 / 4 = 15.9 % protein(actual amount will be a little higher because % are not given for meat meals) so again this is equivalent to raw and EVO

I noticed Solid Gold also has a new high protein food but seeing that it uses a lot of salmon it will likely be closer to 18% protein if calculated using the figures from FAO

Science Diet Large Breed -- is ridiculously heavy on corn and uses soy as their main protien source allowing them to use very little meat therefore creating a high profit, it is lacking the amino acids , but it keeps the protein in line with raw with it's use of soy, so as much as I hate to say it( and it makes me want to choke on these words :o ) is better than Nutro at meeting a dogs protein requirements, by adding a couple salmon oil capsules each day to the dogs diet you can make up for the lacking amino acids and have a healthier dog as long as they can tolerate the corn.

{Ground Whole Grain Corn 9.5 x 3},+ Chicken By-Product Meal 12.3, + Soybean Meal 38% /5 = 15.7 %

The ways foods are currently labeled confuses the heckout of buyers and makes it hard to tell if the food they are feeding is nutritionally healthy or just sufficient to keep the dog surviving

By converting the kibble diets in this manner, you start to get a more realistic view, though as I found maybe not the results I had even expected with some foods prior to calculating

March 16th, 2006, 03:43 AM
Pretty elaborate calculations... But that's not including the fact that some proteins are not digested at all. Like the corn... That would lower it, too (I think it's far less than 1/2 digestible). I think it would bring science diet below nutro...

I did one of those for Iams a while back (post 19):
I tried to deduce how much of the food's protein came from sources that were not useful to the dog... I used the canadian food breakdown website back then for the nutritional breakdowns.

March 16th, 2006, 08:37 AM
good post ontariogreys! however i will have to disagree, again you are trying to compare apples to oranges. pure raw meat protein %'s cannot be compared to kibble protein %'s no matter how you flip that pancake, because they are two VERY different biological realities. kibble is cooked. kibble contains grains, vegetable matter, etc. all this alters the bioavailability of the nutrients. you can crack your head trying to analyse & break matter down to comparable bits, but the truth of the matter is: raw meat and kibble are digested & absorbed in completely different ways. it takes a dog 4 hours to digest meat & bones, and 12-16 hours to digest kibble (no matter the brand). that, alone, says a lot.

and strangely, from the mouth of the devil - ooops i mean purina itself (
Quality control during pet food processing is important. Protein may be damaged by heat processing, but most reputable pet food manufacturers use proper cooking methods and employ quality control measures to ensure that products are made properly. Because information about protein digestibility cannot be listed on pet food labels, the manufacturer's reputation is important.

and i just found this disturbing statement from
Statement of Nutritional Adequacy:
This statement indicates how the food was tested (feeding versus laboratory analysis or formulation) and for which life stage the food is intended. AAFCO recognizes only 4 life stages: growth, maintenance, gestation, and lactation. The term “all life stages” is frequently used on a label and indicates that the product has been either formulated or tested for growth. By default, it is anticipated that such a food would also pass a maintenance protocol because testing a food for growth generally includes gestation and lactation. There are no AAFCO-approved nutrient profiles for geriatric, senior, or weight loss stages.

The statement “complete and balanced” indicates the product contains all nutrients presently known to be required by dogs or cats and that these nutrients are properly balanced to the energy density of the diet. The “complete and balanced” claim must be substantiated by successfully completing AAFCO feeding trials, or the food must contain at least the minimal amount of each nutrient recommended by AAFCO. There are cautions “against the use of these requirements (levels) without demonstration of nutrient availability” because some of the requirements are based on studies in which the nutrients were supplied as purified ingredients and, therefore, are not representative of ingredients used in commercial pet foods. Laboratory analysis does not address the issue of bioavailability.
:eek: :eek:

March 31st, 2006, 09:51 PM
wow! I think I need a master's in biology and mathematics to read this thread!!
I wonder if the people buying Ol'Roy at Walmart have conversations about protein % in their dog's diet.....

March 31st, 2006, 10:36 PM
i'm glad this thread has been revived... i think education is very important since marketing hype tries its best to pull the wool over our eyes... sharing knowledge = power to the people!


March 31st, 2006, 10:37 PM
wow! I think I need a master's in biology and mathematics to read this thread!!

I agree, someone should have started a new thread to discuss this. Poor bklevar never did get an answer to her question posted march 10/06 and I think she`s given up.

March 31st, 2006, 10:45 PM
yeah the discussion did branch out somewhat - but it's still all tied IMO. the question was, is it safe to feed such a high-protein food long-term to a dog, specially to a less-active housedog. i personally believe that we will see the answer to that in 10 or so years, when dogs have been eating this artificially-boosted food for that long. until then it's anyone's guess, unless someone can provide a scientific research that spanned the normal life-cycle of dogs that were fed this food the whole time...

i believe that the closer to nature we feed ourselves and our pets, the better off we all are. 'nuff said...

March 31st, 2006, 11:43 PM
Yeah, I'm waiting and seeing before feeding Evo to my dogs.;)