Raw & Protein

[Scott_B]

Copied this from a user on the raw feeding list. good read

First, let me say that I think a raw whole prey or prey model diet is
the absolute best thing for our carnivore cat and dog pals to eat.
It makes logical sense as well as being proven through the practical
experience of the many, many raw feeders on this list. And, as many
posts have said the smartest research has shown that low protein
diets are not good for carnivores, even for dogs/cats with failing
kidneys etc. For kidney issues, it is the phosphorus level that is
of concern and the dog or cat will lose muscle mass if fed a low
protein diet.

I definitely disagree with the prevailing comments that whole prey or
prey model is a low protein (or not a high protein) diet, but that is
not bad. We don't want them eating a low protein diet. The high
protein/high fat of a whole prey or prey model diet IS what they need
because that's what an animal (the prey they are eating) is made of.
And the high protein and high fat (plus the bones) is why it's so
good for the carnivores to eat.

In fact, one of the reasons why kibble is so bad is because the
manufacturers throw in all the carbohydrates (grains) that are not
found in a normal carnivore's diet. Carbohydrates are not what an
animal (the prey) is made of. Our carnivores need protein and fat
plus the minerals and other goodies in the bone which is what they
get when they eat another animal.

If you look at the USDA listings that people keep quoting, there is
no carbohydrate in, for example, a pork picnic roast.
http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcom...st_nut_edit.pl
It is water 62.06%,
protein 16.69%
fat 20.19%
ash 00.84%
99.78%

(Of course, the USDA isn't including what's in the bone because most
people don't generally consume the bones when they eat a pork roast.
Right? I recall that in some places the USDA site tells how much is
bone and maybe I should have calculated the percentages including
bone, but you still get the picture. Pretend this is a meaty meal
and they're not consuming bone this meal, just chewing tissue off the
bone. OK?)

To see actual numbers/percentages that demonstrate why whole prey or
prey model is not low protein you need to mathematically remove the
water because, as someone else wisely wrote:
>Water does not enter into the equation because water is non-nutritive
>(sp) A gram of protein is a gram of protein even if you put it in a
>bucket of water you still only have a gram of protein .

Think of it this way:
If you have two 100g pork picnic roasts and you feed one to dog A and
the other plus a bucket of water to dog B, both have consumed the
same amount of protein (16.69g from table above) and fat(20.19g). If
you include the weight of the water that dog B consumed in your %
calculation, you'd say that dog B had a much lower percent of protein
and fat consumed than dog A. Well, you know logically the water
isn't really relative. (Yes, water is essential to life, but it is
non-caloric.) The dogs both ate the same amount of pork roast so
they ate the same amount of protein and fat. (But dog B will do a
whole lot more peeing after he drinks all that water! LOL)

Another example:
If the amount of water you consumed with a meal (or as water
contained in the foods of a meal) "counted" then you could eat a
piece of cheesecake and drink a whole bunch of water and eventually
make it a "low fat" piece of cheesecake. Wouldn't that be nice?
Nice idea, but no cigar.

So, in order to compare apples to apples, if you want a percent value
you must "remove" the amount that's water from the given foods to
compare them.

For the 100g picnic roast, removing the 62.06% water (that's 62.06g
out of a 100g roast) you are left with 16.69g protein, 20.19g fat and
.84g ash (plus the little tiny bit of error since it doesn't exactly
add up to 100%).

So, 16.69 protein
20.19 fat
00.84 ash
37.72g of food (ie, not water)

So, the protein is 16.69/37.72 of the food, which comes out to
44.25% protein.

And, the fat is 20.19/37.72 of the food, which comes out to 53.53% fat.

The ash is 0,84/37.72 % of the food, which is 2.22% ash.

But, that is GOOD. We want them eating protein and fat (plus the
bones) because that is what they are SUPPOSED to be eating.

Even without the calculations, if you look at the numbers for the
pork picnic roast, you can see that there is a bit more fat than
protein and the ash is negligible. So, the fat is a little over half
and the protein is a little under half. And, that's what a pork
picnic roast is. We don't need to apologize for what it is. We
already know it's good for our carnivores.

If you picked a different cut of meat that was leaner or fattier,
then the percentages of protein and fat would vary accordingly.

There is a website that explains these calculations too. Maybe they
have said it better than I have, though in their example they are
comparing kibble to canned food. In fact, the percentages of protein
and fat in a better quality canned food are quite similar to the
percentages of protein and fat in whole prey/prey model because
canned food generally has much less carbohydrate (grain) in it than
kibble.
http://www.thepetcenter.com/imtop/dm.html

I am not trying to offend anyone or create a problem by disagreeing
with the statement that the diets are low protein, but I do think it
is very inaccurate and actually a disservice to the whole prey/prey
model diet.

I don't think anyone could logically argue that 44% protein and 54%
fat is low protein or low fat. There is no need to try to hide the
fact that the raw diets we feed our cats/dogs (and ferrets too) are
high protein and high fat. The diet is what it is because that's
what their prey is. And that's what Mother Nature designed them to
eat. Right?

If a vet wanted to argue that whole prey was bad because it had too
much protein, you could argue back that the percentages of protein or
fat in whole prey or prey model are rather similar to percentages of
protein and fat in canned food (depending on how good or bad or how
much carbohydrate they throw into the canned food.) (See the example
of the hypothetical canned food in the website's calculations. These
are pretty realistic numbers; I've checked.)

But, even more of a bottom line is that carnivores are supposed to
eat protein and fat (plus the bone), not corn and wheat and barley
and heaven knows what else.

[technodoll]

nice! thanks scott!

i still stick to my guns in believing our dogs are NOT eating 44% protein (or what have you) in a meal, because they are ingesting all the moisture that goes with it, hence diluting the protein punch. sure if you fed dehydrated meat it would be high protein but... raw is not dry

[Scott_B]

Yeah..i found it interesting. The whole thing about cake & water though..makes sense.

[technodoll]

if you drink alot of water with your cake, you'll be fuller sooner and won't eat as much cake, so yeah less calories in the end at least that is my lame trick, LOL!

[Scott_B]

[JohnB]

Very interesting, trying to learn whatever i can as im still new to raw.

Thanks for sharing.