Hi Nancy!
See the answers to your questions below:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy1999  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? |
The minimum protein of the new YT formula is 26%. The recommended protein level for adult maintenance is a typical analysis of 18% (as per AAFCO). You’re absolutely right about the Yorkie hair. Did you know for the average dog about 30% of the daily protein intake goes to producing hair and skin cells? In a Yorkie, with hair that grows continuously, it’s super important to provide enough protein to maintain their luxurious coats, as well as the right amino acids, and other skin and coat supporting nutrients. The protein in the Yorkie formula provides highly digestible protein in an amount that has been researched to show that it meets their specific needs. A higher quality and digestibility of protein means that less protein is required to meet their needs. If the protein was lower in quality, we would actually need to increase the amount of protein to maintain the digested and utilized protein amounts. In addition, sulfur amino acids like cysteine and methionine provide the precursors for making keratin. Tyrosine and phenylalanine provide the precursors for pigments to make sure they maintain their rich coat colors. The skin barrier complex helps to make their delicate skin stronger.
From my last post remember that crude protein does not provide you information regarding the amino acid profile, the digestibility or the quality of the protein. Therefore the crude protein level on the package of Yorkie changed, but the actual nutrition and benefits provided to the pet remained the same. Ingredients are the vehicles to bring nutrients into the body. RC’s focus is the nutrient profile that is being provided to the pets we feed. Here is another analogy
Think about watering plants using a watering can. The watering can is the vehicle for the water. If one day you used a different watering can, but the water it supplied to the plants was the same, is the change significant?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy1999 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, |
Royal Canin did not purchase any other pet food companies. Royal Canin is part of the MARS Petcare family, which simply means that we all live under the same parent umbrella. When MARS acquires other pet food companies, it does not change the way that Royal Canin does business, nor does it impact our quality control measures or our ingredient selection.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nancy1999 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. |
By-products that you mentioned above, such as feet, are actually highly consumed in other populations, notably the Asian population. The North American population tends to consider muscle meat (such as the breasts, thighs etc.) to be the most desirable part of the chicken. But in other countries around the world, what we might consider un-desirable in NA is deemed as a delicacy and highly nutritious for them. One of our veterinarians here is originally from a little island near France where insects are considered a delicacy. He can’t believe that we don’t widely consume them here because they are packed full of protein and beneficial nutrients.
Ingredient names themselves are very misleading, no matter what ingredient you are talking about. This is the problem with trying to read pet food labels. The name of an ingredient tells you nothing about the quality, digestibility, or the nutrition the ingredient provides. Remember that meat is not the only source of protein. Any vegetarians or vegans out there can attest to that. Grains, vegetables , dairy etc. are all great sources of protein as well. The important things to consider are the amino acids that protein provides, how digestible it is and the quality. I know I repeat those often, but I think it is so commonly overlooked for determining how beneficial a protein source is for the dog.
Thanks for the questions!
Ashley