Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyalCaninCA  Hi Nancy!
It was more with the Size Health Nutrition formulas we have where the confusion was coming from. Owners would visit a store and ask for the "28 formula", but it would refer to a few formulas rather than a single formula.
Specifically for the Yorkie formula (referencing the Canadian formula on the website, Yorkshire Terrier Adult / Breeds / Dog Diets / Pet Store Products / Home - RoyalCanin) it contains 26% min Crude Protein.
This might open a brief chat about what exactly the "crude" in crude protein means. Crude refers to the simple process that is used to estimate the protein level. It is a very old process. Essentially what happens is a sample is taken and burned in a special laboratory machine called a Protein Analyzer. The machine captures and measures the amount of Nitrogen released from the sample. Nitrogen is a component (protein) and that value is directly proportional to the level of protein in the sample.
The total amount of protein is good to know, but it doesn't provide you with information on the individual amino acid levels, the digestibility or the quality. RC actually does additional testing at our Americas Regional Lab (ARL) here is Guelph to obtain precise amino acid levels and well as simulate the digestibility. This provides us more information about the formula and how it will benefit the pet. If all you did was a crude protein analysis, I could theoretically test a formula that contained hair and a leather boot, and probably obtain the same crude protein level as a commercially available pet food. Why? because leather and hair contain protein. The protein is not available for digestion in the body in its current state, but the machine would still capture the nitrogen and provide a crude protein value.
Why did I want to explain what crude protein is? You might have noticed that the formula went from min 28% to min 26% protein. This is a guaranteed analysis value (a minimum). Another possible protein measurement would be to look at the typical analysis value (an average), which is more accurate than the guaranteed analysis from a protein level standpoint, but still doesn’t give any information about the quality, digestibility, or amino acid profile of the protein. Basically, the “28” was a number that created a lot of confusion, without providing useful information. The measured amount of protein in a formula is not as important as the amount of protein that is digested and used by the body. Each time RC updates a formula we make sure the palatability, digestibility and performance is equivalent or better than the current formula. In this instance, we were able to increase the digestible (usable) protein. Protein that is not used by the body is wasted in the stool, and can even cause stool issues such as flatulence and soft/smelly stool.
Hopefully this helps 
Ashley |
So the new YT forumula has 26 percent protein? Why the change from 28%? For years RC was saying Yorkies needed this higher percentage because of the hair.
Taken from an ad,
Quote:
|
Perhaps the most notable trait of the Yorkshire Terrier is the coat. The coat is unique in that it does not shed, but instead grows continuously, much like human hair. Another distinct feature is that there are no secondary hairs in the follicles, and thus Yorkies have no undercoat. The hair and skin can require up to 35% of the daily protein intake. To provide adequate nutrition for this constant hair growth, Yorkshire Terrier 28 provides high quality protein that is particularly high in sulfur-containing amino acids (which necessary for hair growth). . . Royal Canin Canine Health Nutrition Yorkshire Terrier 28 | Pet Care Article | petco.com |
So what’s changed, Is there some new research that shows they don’t need 28%? Or is it because when you use a lower quality protein you should actually reduce overall protein?
You say you made this move to by-products because you make a lot of pet food and there wasn’t enough chicken meal. I understand that your company, in April of this year, purchased Iams, Eubanka and NATURA, and I understand that you need a lot more chicken meal, but that’s no excuse for using chicken byproducts as the main protein. If chicken byproducts are so good, why didn’t you use them before? This excuse that by-products are more expensive than muscle meat is so misleading. Anything “boneless, is more expensive, but compare gizzards to boneless breast meat and you’ll find that breast meat is three times as expensive. Also, by- products aren’t regulated in that you HAVE to put gizzards in them, a company can just use whatever is left after the human market takes what it wants, and yes since there is a market for gizzards and hearts and livers, I doubt if the by-products contain much of that because they don’t have to. Since beaks, feet and intestines aren’t used by the human market this is more likely what by products contain, and while I realize all those things contain protein, it doesn’t mean they are quality protein like muscle meat. The only way the consumer knows if the “crude protein” that is posted on the bag is “usable” protein is to check the ingredient list and see what type of meat has been used. I guess we as consumer should switch to one of the companies that are using “LOW” cost but high quality muscle meat.
Also, now, the first ingredient is brewers rice, a by-product of rice with very little nutritional value. I understand that Mars makes Uncle Bens rice and has a lot of brewers rice left over, but to use it in a supposedly "premium" dog food?