My Royal Canin Rep's Response To Me...

[Yorkiemom1]

I will paste my reps response to my stern questioning and insistance on a follow-up regarding my concerns of changes made. She understands my concerns since I have used this food for soooo long.....I assured her that there are MANY people that are RC customers because of the nutritional, scientifically researched quality of the food that are concerned about these changes. I wanted you all to know she is working on a response for me from corporate headquarters.....as soon as I get anything from anyone about "what and why" changes were made, I will post it here. I will say this....when there was a recall of dog food back in ....?? the '80's?? '90"s ?? the first big recall that involved so many of the companies, RC had their first and ONLY recall, in the Rx lines, and I contacted them...I got nothing but "canned answers" and I went balistic....long story short, the then CEO of the company contacted me, we talked and he gave me his personal phone number, with instructions to call him directly if I had anymore concerns that I was not able to get addressed. Well, he is retired now.....we will see how fast I can get help with this issue. Meanwhile, below is what my rep has said....
"I am working on it right now. All I know so far is that the formula changed (very slightly) in February. 8 months ago. I wasn't even around then, so I'm waiting on info from corporate to explain any info I should relay. And I'm sure it's absolutely nothing to be concerned about. Royal Canin would never ever ever ever ever change a formulation of any product unless it is what is best for the dog. We don't spend any money, much less hundreds of millions like other companies, on advertising. We spend that money on very expensive scientific vetirinary experts to exhaustively research every single thing that composes the manufacturing of our food, to ensure we deliver a nutrient profile that best benefits every dog of any size breed or age. We are a nutrient-based company not an ingredient-based company. And it would be easy to follow marketing trends and eliminate ingredients from our foods to please the people that buy them who have bought into fad marketing, but we won't and we never will. We may lose a lot of customers because they have bought into hyped up marketing and want to focus on what the ingredient list says, but we will never compromise the nutritional profile of our food in any way because that is not in the best interest of the dog. Royal Canin is the world's most trusted expert in pet health nutrition, and we stand behind our products 100%.I will let you know as soon as I hear a precise explanation concerning what was reformulated and why, I am confident that whatever changed was for a very good reason and the food, regardless of what the ingredient list says, could only have been reformulated to make it better. I know that will not satisfy everybody, and people will still want to focus on the words that make up the ingredient list, but again we always put the dog first and every decision we make is based upon that guiding principle of our company. I will keep you posted!! "

[Yorkiemom1]

Well...............that was quick!!! Hot in from corporate headquarters......

"Judy, the reformulation was mostly just to relaunch a new name & bag design, and to streamline the US bags with all the other Royal Canin bags globally. We were the only country using the “number system”, like Yorkie 28. It was confusing to consumers who didn’t have any idea what that number meant, and we had to get special bags printed in the US. So, now it’s Yorkie Adult, Yorkie Puppy, etc. And the packaging is streamlined with Royal Canin all over the world.

It appears that people’s concern is that the quality of the food has changed or it isn’t still meeting the nutritional needs of the dog.

Absolutely NOTHING has changed about the nutritional profile of the food. It is exactly the same. And the quality is guaranteed to never, ever be sacrificed or lessened. Again, we are a nutrient-based company, not an ingredient-based company. We don’t find a formula that works for a breed, then never continue to research it to find a better way to deliver the nutrients the dog needs. Change should not only be expected, it should be demanded. If we discover a more digestible protein source, we will use it. Even if that means upsetting people who are hyperfocused on that ingredient list. When it comes to nutrients & the ingredients we choose to deliver those nutrients, we will never take a human’s needs into consideration for marketing purposes. There is no such thing as a filler in our food, every single molecule of our food serves a dedicated purpose. Dog first, always!
We don’t compromise quality to please humans.
Royal Canin is the reference in pet health nutrition. Nobody else out there can hold a flame to the FORTY YEARS of research & development in our food. Our Yorkie formula will deliver the same, exact results that is always had, regardless of the packaging of it.AND please tell anyone that has questions or concerns to call our Tech Services department. It is manned by veterinarians & vet techs whose only job is to have 1-on-1 conversations with consumers and breeders about our food, nutrition & anything else related to their pets. This is a GREAT service for folks with concerns who want to speak to somebody. These knowledgeable folks can be reached at (800) 592-6687!! "
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So, there it is! Corporate DID call me, and we discussed this.....I asked them to PLEASE send me an email that I could copy/paste to the forum. I understand this explanation will not satisfy everyone....there is a phone number listed here that you can call and talk and ask specific questions.... I will do as I said I would do....I will continue to use the food, and monitor my dogs conditioning....stamina, energy levels, attitudes, muscle tone, skin, coats, SMELL. poop, etc and any changes noted, I will contact these people and go from there!

[Britster]

I'm impressed with their prompt replies and am happy their answers satisfied you. They personally don't impress me too much. I get what they're saying. They're more focused on the nutrient profile etc and I too agree that paying attention to a company, where the food is manufactured and nutrient analysis' are MORE important but that doesn't mean ingredients are of ZERO importance either. You could mix together boots/shoes and add some vitamins and make an "appropriate nutrient profile".

I respect RC and what they have done for animal nutrition. But in the end, I still believe them to just be another food company, trying to cut back on costs, and not making it very easy to find this new information. Sorry, but as a consumer, I want/need to know when an ingredient list changes and don't really like how they're just brushing it off like "oh it's the same formula". But... it's not, technically.

Anyway, I hope it all works well for you. The ingredient change personally 100% writes them off my list of potential foods to feed and I probably won't recommend them anymore.

Then again, I'm back to feeding Acana which did change their ingredients (but I was well aware, I got multiple emails, all the stores said "NEW formula", etc) and I wasn't impressed with the addition more peas and lentils, but it's still better than the RC changes imo. I decided to begin feeding the new formulas and to my surprise, they work just as well for Jackson, so RC likely will be the same for you.

I just... I know ingredients aren't everything but I still couldn't convince myself to feed a food with two rice ingredients as the #1 and #2 ingredients, chicken by product for your protein (not even a 'chicken meal' or 'chicken' anywhere in there) and corn gluten meal AND corn. All in the top 10 ingredients. Unless it was literally all my dog could eat.

[Yorkiemom1]

Like I told the man, "talk is cheap....I want evidenced based results....". So, I personally will continue to use it until I see that my dogs are obviously not getting what they need to keep them in top shape. If I could feed them hay, fortified with vitamins and minerals, as long as their skin, hair, teeth, bones, vim and vigor and overall health remained in tip top shape, and they LOVED it, had no gastric issues with bloating, gas, vomiting, soft poop, growling upset tummies, etc, that would be just fine with me. It has worked for me and mine for many, many years...when they break it and it no longer works for me and mine, then I will change. I see no reason to do otherwise!

[Lilah Charm]

Wow, well I am actually very impressed with their prompt customer service and thought it was a well written thought out response. I do watch trends eb and flow in the pet market being they buyer for that department- potatoes were a god send, the grain free binder a kibble needed- then they were a lesser choice, a high glycemic failure- no sweet potatoes! No, legumes to be the binder! That's too many legumes! Heck, we sell vegetarian dog food at my store, poor friggin dogs. So yes, people sure jump the trends. Also I did notice that some rc breed food didn't have a similar ingredient profile at all to the yorkie formula and I thought- well, that's funny- I suppose my teeny sensitive lap dog may have been bred over time to do well with corn as opposed to that other breed over there. I will keep my ears out and I will purchase rc 28 tommorow but all I can say is that it brings me great joy to see my little girls ears perk up when she hears her rc yt kibble hit the bowl and her tiny little legs in over to excitedly munch down her meal. I'm not ready to give that up after all of the natural, grain free, raw this n that, dehydrated, pea kibble she has tried and rejected. So I suppose we will just see how it goes.

[MarkFromSea]

Thanks for looking into that Yorkiemom.

[Yorkiemom1]

Not a problem! I have been with these people tooooooo many years to just drop them like a hot rock, so I was equally concerned about what I was reading on here. I needed answers, and they took the time in a very timely manner, to answer all my questions....they also encouraged me to share that number for anyone to call if they wanted to talk with the people a RC. I am not an idiot tho, and did not expect them to say ,"well, you caught us, we screwed up and have made changes to increase our profit margins, etc...." ......so I did tell them I would continue to use it until/if I see any deterioration in their health/physical appearance/energy levels, etc.....if THAT happens, then I will need to address that.

[107barney]

I'm impressed with the company and the food. When I used it for my dogs they shined beautifully, had bright eyes and no issues with their stools or body scores. These days, I'm back to exclusively home cooking for them which I like the best. But I still would not hesitate to feed RC over almost every single other brand on the market if I wanted to feed dog food.

[Verbena]

I am glad you got your answers. . .

[Nancy1999]

Judy, you can tell by the ingredient list the product has changed, just look at the first three ingredients. For him to say that they are nutritionally equivalent, is vastly misleading. Lets face it, all dog foods are "nutritionally equivalent" the government demands them to be, they have to have a certain amount of xy and z, but that doesn't mean that they are all the same quality.

Old Ingredients

Chicken Meal, Brewers Rice, Brown Rice, Chicken Fat, Chicken, Corn Gluten Meal, Dried Egg Powder, Barley, Natural Chicken Flavor, Cellulose, Dried Beet Pulp (sugar removed), Anchovy Oil, Dried Brewers Yeast, Potassium Chloride, Soya Oil, Fructo-oligosaccharides, Salmon Meal, Calcium Carbonate, Sodium Tripolyphosphate, Choline Chloride, Dried Brewers Yeast Extract (source of Mannan-oligosaccharides), Taurine, Vitamins [DL-Alpha Tocopherol (source of Vitamin E), Inositol, Niacin Supplement, L-Ascorbyl-2-Polyphosphate (source of Vitamin C), D-Calcium Pantothenate, Biotin, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride (Vitamin B6), Riboflavin Supplement (Vitamin B2), Thiamine Mononitrate (Vitamin B1), Vitamin A Acetate, Folic Acid, Vitamin B12 Supplement, Vitamin D3 Supplement], Magnesium Oxide, Borage Oil, Trace Minerals [Zinc Proteinate, Zinc Oxide, Ferrous Sulfate, Manganese Proteinate, Copper Proteinate, Copper Sulfate, Manganous Oxide, Sodium Selenite, Calcium Iodate], Glucosamine Hydrochloride, L-Carnitine, DL-Methionine, Marigold Extract (Calendula officinalis L.), Tea (Green Tea Extract), Chondroitin Sulfate, preserved with Natural Tocopherols (source of Vitamin E), Citric Acid and Rosemary Extract.


New ingredients:

Brewers rice, brown rice, chicken by-product meal, chicken fat, wheat gluten, corn gluten meal, corn, natural flavors, powdered cellulose, dried plain beet pulp, fish oil, grain distillers dried yeast, vegetable oil, potassium chloride, calcium carbonate, sodium silico aluminate, fructooligosaccharides, sodium tripolyphosphate, salt, taurine, hydrolyzed yeast, vitamins [DL-alpha tocopherol acetate (source of vitamin E), inositol, niacin supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (source of vitamin C), D-calcium pantothenate, biotin, pyridoxine hydrochloride (vitamin B6), riboflavin supplement, thiamine mononitrate (vitamin B1), vitamin A acetate, folic acid, vitamin B12 supplement, vitamin D3 supplement], DL-methionine, choline chloride, magnesium oxide, L-lysine, glucosamine hydrochloride, marigold extract (Tagetes erecta L.), trace minerals [zinc proteinate, zinc oxide, ferrous sulfate, manganese proteinate, manganous oxide, copper sulfate, calcium iodate, sodium selenite, copper proteinate], tea, L-carnitine, chondroitin sulfate, rosemary extract, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid

Do you see how chicken meal, use to be the first ingredient? The US requires that the ingredient that weighs the most is the first listed. In the new product chicken meal the third on the list and even more importantly, instead of using "chicken meal" they are using "chicken meal by-products". Chicken meal products is not the same quality as chicken meal, you can read about this in other places then just those sites that hate dog food. It varies greatly from batch to batch because they can use many things in it beside the actual muscle meat, it's a lesser quality protein than muscle meat and it is harder on the kidneys to process.

It sounds like he thinks the only thing that changed was the number system, "We were the only country using the “number system”, like Yorkie 28. It was confusing to consumers who didn’t have any idea what that number meant." Twenty-eight use to refer to the amount of protein, and on the side of the bag, it would also say 28% crude protein, while now it contains 26% protein, so that is a nutritional difference. Not a huge difference, but a definite difference, and because the protein is less quality, yes, that is a big difference. Honestly, I want to believe the company, but I can't blindly trust, when I do know that they aren't telling the truth. Two products can be nutritionally equivalent, have the same amount of vitamins minerals, protein fats, and carbohydrates, but be vastly different health wise.

The thing about nutrition, is animals do adapt to poor diets rather well, if they are not getting enough of a vitamin or mineral, their bodies learn to use it more carefully. I do not think the changes RC made will be something that you can easily see in a few years. I'm more concerned about long term problems of kidney's because they are using a poorer quality of protein. If this were a food people could pick up at the grocery store, and had the price to match, I wouldn't think it was so horrible, (although, I wouldn't choose it), but the price is still one of the highest out there, but their ingredients have gone down hill.

[thelittleyorkie]

Is merricks or wellness good

[Yorkiemom1]

I am in daily communication with RC.....I will copy/paste another email I received today from them.....they attached an article about ingredient lists....I am not able to "copy/paste" that article into this post.....I know there are people that will never be assured about RC and the quality of the food.....for those of us that have fed it for many many years, with excellent results, and want to continue until there is actual evidence in our pets that it is no longer the quality we have grown to expect and appreciate, even DEMAND from them, I am comforted by the article that clearly explanes how that listing of ingredients works by weight. That article was not part of RC and any of their marketing practice, so that makes me comfortable and less suspicious. Like I said, I am not printing this here in order to change minds or convert people that are devoted to their own brand of food....I am only trying to show people that are feeding RC and trust the company and their impeccable quality control measures, why they should not think the RC brand has deteriorated to a "feed store junk dog food". If you are feeding RC and you are confused or upset about changes in the order of ingredient listing on the bag, I am just re-printing what they (RC) are sending me in a sincere effort to calm my concerns and I want to share that with whoever is interested.
From RC to me:...
"You are not alone in your “meat should be the first ingredient” concerns. On paper, it seems like it would obviously be the best thing for a mostly carnivorous animal. But ingredient lists are deceptive…and far more complicated than just words on a bag. You have to forget the idea that the ingredients that are listed first are actually indicative of what the food contains most of. It isn’t that simple. I spent weeks at Royal Canin’s nutrition academy, learning about these things from some of the foremost experts. And it is still confusing! Any food that markets itself as “real chicken is the first ingredient” is fooling consumers . All ingredients are listed in order of their pre-cooked weights. Read that sentence over and over again. Pre-cooked weights. It is not indicative in any way of how nutritious the food is. Chicken is 80% water, 20% meat, before cooking. That weighs a lot. So it’s easy to get that as a first ingredient. If ingredient lists were made after cooking….chicken would be moved way down on that list, and not be offering much nutrition. Chicken meal is dehydrated chicken that has been finely ground into a powdery substance. Good source of protein, but it doesn’t weigh much at all when compared to whole rice. And chicken byproduct meal is a fabulously nutritious ingredient aside from a scary-sounding name…livers, hearts, organs, etc. with the water removed. By-product meals are meat concentrates and contain nearly 300% more protein than fresh chicken. Again, doesn’t weigh much, but is probably the best source of protein, amino acids, and nutrients that a dog needs to survive.

The most important tidbit of information I can share with you is to dig deeper into what can affect the ranking of ingredients. Read this article below, and share it on your YorkieTalk blog if you like it. It explains things far better than I think I could…and it isn’t affiliated with Royal Canin in any way…so it isn’t a biased towards any agenda we are trying to push."

I will continue to try to get that article to reprint here....

[Yorkiemom1]

Here is the article they sent me....RC has nothing to do with this article....it just explanes ingredients and how/why they are listed like they are.....

"Ingredient splitting might be one of the pet food industry’s most controversial practices.

Dog food companies deny any intentional wrongdoing. They claim they’re only reporting a product’s contents — and simply following government guidelines.

Yet others cry foul. They insist ingredient splitting is nothing less than a deliberate attempt to mislead consumers — a common trick used by less ethical dog food companies to make an ingredients list look more attractive to buyers than it really is.

So, who’s telling the truth?

What Is Ingredient Splitting?

Ingredient splitting is the deceptive practice of subdividing a more abundant — yet inferior quality — ingredient into smaller portions.

This dubious tactic can be used to artificially raise a meat item to a higher position on an ingredients list — and lower an inferior one.

How Does It Work?

Say you have a dog food in which corn is the dominant ingredient. Since corn is less nutritious to a dog than meat, it’s considered a lower quality item.

Remember, pet food manufacturers are required to arrange each item on every ingredients list in order of its precooking weight.

Now, take a look at the “Before Splitting” side of the table below.



Notice how corn, with its 30% pre-cooking weight, gets a first place position. Second-ranked rice makes up the next 20%, thus leaving chicken meal (a quality item) to occupy the list’s #3 spot.

Of course, dog food companies want their products to “look” like they’re meat-based. So, they’re well aware an ingredients list like this isn’t likely to impress a label-reading shopper.

Turning Straw Into Gold

Now, what would happen to that same list if you divide a few of the more abundant ingredients into smaller portions?

Please look at the right side of the table labeled “After Splitting”.

Now, instead of using 30% corn, a pet food designer could simply split corn into corn meal and corn flour — at just 15% each.

And replace the original rice with other rice ingredients.

That would move the corn and rice components further down the list. And so, even though the amount of chicken meal remains unchanged, it’s now magically the first-ranked ingredient.

Don’t Overvalue
the First Ingredient

If you’ve ever been told to only look for dog foods where meat is the first ingredient, please remember the deceptive power of ingredient splitting.

Being able to divide a dominant ingredient into smaller portions permits any pet food company to trick you into believing there’s more meat in a product than there actually is.
So, the next time you see a meat item as the first ingredient on the list — don’t be too impressed.
Or you could become the next victim of the pet food industry’s ability to re-order its ingredients list to suit its marketing strategy."

Here is the article....you can read it on not....at least you will know how and why ingredients labels are devised like they are!

[Lilah Charm]

Another issue with ingredient labeling and meat quantities can be water weight. People shy away from the word chicken meal for example but that is actually more likely an accurate representation of meat quantity vs when it just says chicken but is counting all the water weight. However I do note that in regard to the article concept of ingredient splitting that there are two rice items and two corn items on royal canin adults ingredients list. Perhaps they have such different values that that is why they are listed as such but it might be something to address in response to their recommended article. I am still impressed with their fast customer service, their quality control leading to only a single recall in their many years of business and their well thought out responses- more than anything, the joy of my little girl looking forward to her meals. That said, I ordered those four bags of rc 28 only to have my company send me the change over food. I was dissapointed because that is not what I ordered but decided to give it a go anyway. Lilah, threw every last bit of it up. Three times. As a disclaimer here lilah did recently have en elevated liver enzyme on a blood panel so this could be an issue related to that but she is not a chronic or even semi occasional vomiter and has had no other symptoms so I really do feel that the food disagreed with her. I was so excited to find a long trusted, well known, yorkie specific food that my dog would actually eat and it is a shame that for us it comes at a time when there is a shifting of comfort and a step away from solid long term evidenced health. I hope it does turn out well for those who have had long term success feeding rc- like you yorkiemom - as for miss Lilah, I don't think it will be in her long term benefit - since we is a grown gal- to stay on the puppy version (and appetite stimulation canned puppy) and that is what she likes and takes well so I suppose we have yet to find a stable kibble choice for our needs.

[MarkFromSea]

Originally Posted by Lilah Charm

Another issue with ingredient labeling and meat quantities can be water weight. People shy away from the word chicken meal for example but that is actually more likely an accurate representation of meat quantity vs when it just says chicken but is counting all the water weight. However I do note that in regard to the article concept of ingredient splitting that there are two rice items and two corn items on royal canin adults ingredients list. Perhaps they have such different values that that is why they are listed as such but it might be something to address in response to their recommended article. I am still impressed with their fast customer service, their quality control leading to only a single recall in their many years of business and their well thought out responses- more than anything, the joy of my little girl looking forward to her meals. That said, I ordered those four bags of rc 28 only to have my company send me the change over food. I was dissapointed because that is not what I ordered but decided to give it a go anyway. Lilah, threw every last bit of it up. Three times. As a disclaimer here lilah did recently have en elevated liver enzyme on a blood panel so this could be an issue related to that but she is not a chronic or even semi occasional vomiter and has had no other symptoms so I really do feel that the food disagreed with her. I was so excited to find a long trusted, well known, yorkie specific food that my dog would actually eat and it is a shame that for us it comes at a time when there is a shifting of comfort and a step away from solid long term evidenced health. I hope it does turn out well for those who have had long term success feeding rc- like you yorkiemom - as for miss Lilah, I don't think it will be in her long term benefit - since we is a grown gal- to stay on the puppy version (and appetite stimulation canned puppy) and that is what she likes and takes well so I suppose we have yet to find a stable kibble choice for our needs.

That is concerning!

One, they didn't send what you ordered, the 28. I hope you were able to return it. I'd be pissed! I'd force the issue through my credit card company if they did not comply fully! They did not send what you ordered, period!

Two, she threw it up, you won't be able to use what they sent you unless somehow she grows accustomed to it. Personally, I just wouldn't do it. Get a full refund or resort to your credit card company to force the issue. I strongly dislike unacceptable business practices. You were deceived by the retailer.

Gucci is doing well with his new food, it's for a senior though and sounds like it wouldn't apply to your pup.