Quote:
Originally Posted by Britster  The only thing I don't like/confuses me about AAFCO is that even the worst of the worst foods are AAFCO approved, so to me, it doesn't really mean much.... IAMS, Pedigree, etc, all that junk. So being 'AAFCO' approved doesn't mean anything to me. I feel like AAFCO makes the very LEAST standards that should be in dog food. I don't think being stamped 'AAFCO' approved makes a good worthy of feeding. |
I totally agree. Even following a diet that has been evaluated using a spreadsheet and compared to the AAFCO and/or NRC standards does not ensure the diet will be nutritionally complete. Just as with our own diets what’s considered "balanced", "good" is always changing. The nutrtional levels established by AAFCO are based on older guidelines published by the NRC in 1985,
AND AS OF YET, have not been updated following the release of newer NRC standards in 2006.
A good example of how these standards can change is the discovery in 1987 that cats were dying of heart failure due to a lack of adequate taurine in cat food. Previously, the NRC did not recognize taurine as an essential nutrient for cats, and no one knew how much cats required. Now, newer research shows that taurine may also be conditionally essential in the dog’s diet, though there are as yet no standards requiring it. Ongoing research reveals more all the time, but this is an endless task.