# Kinda surprised...



## DDBsR4Me (Jan 23, 2012)

I just picked up a bag of EVO Red Meat to try because they have small bites and my boy likes tiny kibble. 

I don't ever pay attention to the recommended feeding amounts on the bag because they are usually way off, and I feed my guy based on kcals/cup. 

So last night, for some reason, I just happened to look at their feeding guidelines and was surprised to see that they were actually pretty spot on. They recommend 3 7/8cups for a 120lb dog and I think it was 4 1/2cups for a 140lb dog. My guy is 132lbs and he's getting about 4cups. 

I just kinda shocked because most brands recommend 6-7 cups for a dog his size. 


Also didn't happen to look at their protein levels before I bought it...so that has me a little freaked out and wondering if I should switch back to Acana, which is kind of a shame because he really seems to like this food!


----------



## _unoriginal (Apr 8, 2012)

What's wrong with the protein levels?

I'm probably way off but I thought the problem with high protein kibbles is that they lack moisture. Moisture can easily be added back into a diet. I soak my kibble-fed dogs' meals in water before feeding it so I know they get a ton of that moisture back.


----------



## Caty M (Aug 13, 2010)

I wouldn't worry about protein levels too much, unless the food is just too rich for your boy. Raw is higher in protein (by dry weight) than EVO red meat.. what is it, 38% protein or so?


----------



## DDBsR4Me (Jan 23, 2012)

Daviking made the following post in a different thread -I think the one about Nature's Logic vs Orijen (hope its ok to post it here) - and it made me kind of worried. EVO Red Meat has 44% protein. 

I do already add water to his food, as that's the way he likes it. He is a 5yr old DDB, who isn't very active. 

Should I worry about the protein level?





DaViking said:


> I don't think it is possible to say which formula is best on paper, only real life testing will show which is the best one for a particular dog. They both certainly have a lot of great ingredients.
> However, both of them are really high (38%+) in protein, this is dry matter protein, not whole wet raw chicken. All this protein in the kibble comes with increased levels of nitrogen (protein waste), 16% of the protein as an average (could be higher, could be lower, it's one of the things that determines quality ingredients). This means that high levels of nitrogen is delivered to the kidneys every day. This is more taxing overall and the body will start a flushing process and dilute the urine to get rid of the increased amount of nitrogen. Secondly, excess protein creates heat and increases the body temperature, not sure if that is ideal as a constant state. So, what does these two points mean? More nitrogen to the kidneys and more heat from excess protein. No one have any good answers or studies on high (32+) protein level kibble formulas for dogs with moderate to normal activity levels yet so no one can with certainty say it's bad. But some facts are known, I mentioned two of them, another is usually higher ash levels. Most animal nutritionists have questions regarding these ultra high protein formulas, even the ones who work for the makers of these ultra high protein formulas. It's mostly an answer to serve the demand for "super premium" products. I have no doubt that both Orijen, Natures Logic and similar formulas can produce great results but the question is, is it more as a result of composition and ingredient selection and not necessarily ultra high levels of protein?


----------



## Caty M (Aug 13, 2010)

Oh, I think I was thinking of Orijen Regional Red, which is lower. I think all you can do is try it, it might work out great for him! I don't see what activity level has to do with what you are feeding- a human athlete and a human couch potato should be eating the same healthy foods, though of course the athlete will require more calories. If he gains weight, reduce his food.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

Make sure to compare apples to apples. In the end what matters is how much protein is fed to maintain nitrogen balance (nitrogen going to the kidneys) not the percentages per say. Raw chicken breast with skin contains about 65% water, the rest is proteins, fat, minerals and other. Fat is from 6 to 8 percent, other around 5%. 100g chicken breast with skin would give around 30g protein. Numbers vary a little depending on where you are looking (I have seen 23 to 31%) Now, obviously the *percentage* of protein fed in PMR style feeding would be much higher overall. That plus other factors you have with kibble not present in PMR feeding makes it difficult to compare. The closest you can get is to look at the grams of protein fed, say per day. That will of course vary depending on brand suggestions vs recommended amounts feeding PMR.

True, in terms of storing fat a calorie is a calorie regardless of where it comes from, the kcal per kg fed is what matters in the end. If high levels of protein is just piled on top of an already high kcal formula it is bad. Good if it is balanced out to traditional levels for normal active dogs.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

DDBsR4Me said:


> I just picked up a bag of EVO Red Meat to try because they have small bites and my boy likes tiny kibble.
> 
> I don't ever pay attention to the recommended feeding amounts on the bag because they are usually way off, and I feed my guy based on kcals/cup.
> 
> ...


He will get the same amount of calories with less food as he would with the other brands which are probably around 400kcal/cup vs Evo that are in the 500 to 550 range.


----------



## Caty M (Aug 13, 2010)

I know cooked proteins are different than raw, but if dogs don't need carbohydrates why is a typical kibble better than a high protein/fat one? There are many performance dogs that I know of that do well on a carb free diet.

Of course how your dog reacts to the food is of the most importance- even all of my dogs don't get a typical "PMR" diet- Tessie needs a lot of fat to maintain her coat/weight, so she gets extra fat or oil in her diet.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

Caty M said:


> I know cooked proteins are different than raw, but if dogs don't need carbohydrates why is a typical kibble better than a high protein/fat one? There are many performance dogs that I know of that do well on a carb free diet.
> 
> Of course how your dog reacts to the food is of the most importance- even all of my dogs don't get a typical "PMR" diet- Tessie needs a lot of fat to maintain her coat/weight, so she gets extra fat or oil in her diet.


Don't turn this into another carb vs no carb war, it's not about that. No one disputes the fact that dogs can thrive and live a great life without ever seeing a single carb  No one said "better" simply because no one on either side can justify that word here. But there are some undisputed facts, on both sides, where some are specific to kibble like ash levels, more fats to balance etc. By feeding a high to ultra high protein formula you are likely to send more nitrogen to the kidneys simply because the body in most cases don't need all these proteins to build and achieve nitrogen balance. Is it bad? Is flushing bad? No on knows. Some dogs seem to flush others seem unaffected but more and more reports of excessive urination is trickling in. There has been 1 study as far as I know. Kronfeld tested a 52/36 diet in racing sled dogs. He reported no ill effects in the racing dogs from this high protein and fat diet. Quote


> "Whether the improvements were associated with increased protein consumption or with conditioning the dogs to metabolize greater quantities of fat remains to be determined. It is clear that these dogs did acclimate to the high fat and protein diet without any apparent ill consequences."


So this kind'a support high protein diets but as I understand it the study was done on extreme performance dogs under very high stress levels. Other studies have shown that high stress performance dogs don't need more than 25% protein provided available energy is sufficient.

At the end of the day you have to go with what your gut tells you. Since I am in the camp with those who believe low to moderate carb levels is appropriate in dog food I don't see any need to go beyond what all science show is necessary in terms of proteins and fat balance. My advice to everyone is to find a formula ranging from 22 to 32'ish percent protein where as much as possible is animal sources and 10 to 35% carbs, grains or no grains.
Regardless if you (as in anyone) agree with me or not. A final advice to everyone who feed a high protein/fat (energy) diet. Be honest with your dogs activity level. I see so many owners who buy various expensive super premium formulas with tons of energy from premium ingredients because they like the premium ingredient side of things (nothing wrong with that). They feed it as it was 1990 again and Eukanuba was the best thing since sliced bread. Unless you signed up for Iditarod, feed less!


----------



## Caty M (Aug 13, 2010)

Oh no, I am not trying to turn it into a war, I am just honestly curious. Most of the groups I am in are raw groups and I see very little performance dogs who are kibble fed because of that 

I do not think grains are the devil at all, I do not see how they are any different than potatoes for dogs, though I prefer to recommend people stay away from corn, soy and wheat because of the whole GMO side of things. And agree 100% on the amount fed, a lot of people get loose stool on the high quality foods, and most because they do not reduce the amount fed. No different than raw.. start low and work your way up! :wink:


----------



## Caty M (Aug 13, 2010)

Um, that should be a lot of people's DOGS get loose stool, not people. I hope people aren't eating Orijen or EVO.


----------



## BearMurphy (Feb 29, 2012)

i agree that ultra high protein kibble should not be fed to an average dog. why tax their system more than needed to process food they can't fully utilize since they are not performance dogs? i prefer to keep it around 30% since that is closer to an actual piece of meat


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

BearMurphy said:


> i agree that ultra high protein kibble should not be fed to an average dog. why tax their system more than needed to process food they can't fully utilize since they are not performance dogs? i prefer to keep it around 30% since that is closer to an actual piece of meat


the meats that I've checked have been around 20%. Which is why I can't figure out why dog foods are so much higher. Maybe they don't absorb it all, or something.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> the meats that I've checked have been around 20%. Which is why I can't figure out why dog foods are so much higher. Maybe they don't absorb it all, or something.


You have it the wrong way around. The difference is because chicken meat for example contains approx. 65% moisture vs kibble who weighs in at 10% moisture. Following the same raw guide we used years ago (very close to PMR) I would feed around 60g of proteins per day to my 17lb JRT x. Feeding our current kibble will give him ~30g of proteins per day. That is in line with pretty much any study out there.


----------



## Sprocket (Oct 4, 2011)

Is it really called Evo Red Meat?

Why not a specific red meat/s?


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

So what do I have wrong?

chicken meat is about 18% protein wet weight.

Dry food says something like 30-35% protein dry weight.

If we figure in percent rather than in grams, I am not seeing the connection that they are the same thing in the end. Seems to me like 20% is 20% wet or dry.

Now, total grams I can see. It would be different in dry and wet. But not percentage-wise.

do dog food bags tell you how many grams of protein are in there?


----------



## Caty M (Aug 13, 2010)

Sprocket said:


> Is it really called Evo Red Meat?
> 
> Why not a specific red meat/s?


Because it contains beef and lamb. I guess they could have called it EVO Beef and lamb..


----------



## Caty M (Aug 13, 2010)

xellil said:


> So what do I have wrong?
> 
> chicken meat is about 18% protein wet weight.
> 
> ...


No, 20% is not 20% wet or dry.. because if you take raw meat's WET weight, it includes water which "dilutes" the food. Wet food is heavier.

If you dehydrate raw food so it is 0% moisture, BY WEIGHT, it is 65% protein. A chicken inclusive of water might be 20% protein. The only difference is the water content. Water inclusive = lower protein, because you are also including the weight of the moisture.

Now, the actual GRAMS or amount of protein would be the same wet or dry, but the percentage of those as a whole would be lower if wet.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

thanks Caty!


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> So what do I have wrong?
> 
> chicken meat is about 18% protein wet weight.
> 
> ...


You said "Which is why I can't figure out why dog foods are so much higher. Maybe they don't absorb it all, or something." You indicate kibble needs higher amounts of protein because not all of it is "absorbed" Which is wrong and why you have it the wrong way around for any practical purpose. On any recommended kibble amount per day the dog will get fed much less protein than compared to any raw regime I am aware of. You, me and dogs don't consume percentages do we? We consume weight units of something, grams of proteins in this case. Percentages lies as long as moisture is not removed from the equation.



xellil said:


> Dry food says something like 30-35% protein dry weight.


No. It would be "as fed" which is not dry weight or dry matter.



xellil said:


> do dog food bags tell you how many grams of protein are in there?


26% of 127g =


----------

