Since our dog was showing signs of allergies or something else causing her to scratch a lot more than normal, I was curious about the possible benefits of  lamb.   The ingredients of a premium dry dog food said All Natural Lamb with Rice.  But the ingredients said “lamb meal,” so I looked a little further into what “lamb” or “lamb meal”  means.

There are several definitions of lamb which designate an animal and also the meat of the animal (unlike mutton or pork which designates only meat).  Many statements define what the age of a lamb is before it becomes a sheep or hogget.   Different countries outside the US, such as New Zealand, Britain and Australia, have their own definitions of lamb. Here are a few definitions of lamb and hogget:

Miriam Webster Dictionary:
Lamb: a young sheep: especially; one that is less than one year old or without permanent teeth.

The Farlex Dictionary:
Lamb: a young sheep, especially one that is not yet weaned.

Wikipedia
Lamb, hogget, and mutton are the meat of domestic sheep. The meat of an animal in its first year is lamb; that of an older sheep is hogget and later mutton.

WordNet
Hogget: a sheep up to the age of one year; one yet to be sheared

Other definitions include:

• Lamb — a young sheep that is less than one year old
• Baby lamb — a milk-fed lamb between six and eight weeks old
• Spring lamb — a milk-fed lamb, usually three to five months old, born in late winter or early spring and sold usually before July 1
• Yearling lamb — a young sheep between 12 and 24 months old.

There is a dramatic difference in the price of lamb meat (around $8.00 per pound) compared to mutton ($3.00 per pound).   Do dog food manufacturers who advertise lamb as an ingredient really have lamb?

Dog food companies generally don’t have FDA inspectors watching their manufacturing processes.  Since there is no way to distinguish between lamb and mutton ingredients in the dog food after it is processed and packaged, why would the manufacturer use high priced lamb meat instead of lower cost mutton?  My cynical side says they probably use mutton more than lamb.

So what’s the story on lamb meal?  The AAFCO (Association of American Feed Control Officials) definition is:

Lamb Meal - the rendered product from lamb tissues, exclusive of blood, hair, hoof, horn, hide trimmings, manure, stomach and rumen contents except in such amounts as may occur unavoidably in good processing practices.

Rendering means to melt down or extract by melting to convert into industrial fats and oils or fertilizer.  For a complete definition see the USDA Animal Product Manual.

This is not food for human consumption.  You can get sick to your stomach on this topic just Google Images “meat rendering plant” or see “What’s Really in Your Pet’s Food??” on Youtube.  I may never buy kibble again after seeing this.

I suppose there could actually be some real lamb meet in lamb meal, but how can you trust the dog food manufacturer and their advertising claim.  Do they really use the sumptuous sounding ingredients “All Natural Lamb and Rice?”  Maybe it would be more accurate to read “All Natural Mutton Meal and Rice.”   In any case,  if I want to find out if lamb will help our dog Molly,  I’ll probably end up buying real lamb for $8.00 a pound, or try to find some lower cost mutton.

Cod liver oil contains two of the best omega-3 fatty acids; EAP and DHA which are very important for development of the brain and nervous system.

Rickets is an adolescent condition, in humans and dogs, caused by serious vitamin D deficiency. This deficiency in vitamin D results in weak, soft bones, along with slowed growth and skeletal development.  In adults, vitamin D deficiency is manifest in osteomalacia, characterized by bone demineralization due to deficiency or impaired metabolism of vitamin D.

Mrs. May Mellanby and her husband, Dr. E. Mellanby authored over 400 studies in the 1920’s on controlling rickets by diet.  In her initial studies Mrs. Mellanby used dogs as the source of data.

In her research into rickets in dogs, Mrs. Mellanby discovered the mineral-blocking effect of phytic acid in grains and legumes. Dr. Mellanby demonstrated that diets containing high levels of cereals and lacking vitamin D, are the most effective producers of rickets.  Mrs. Mellanby believed that as cereals increase in the diet, vitamin D must also be increased to offset their anticalcifying effects.   She went on to prove that no matter how much cereal is fed, if vitamin D is adequate, bone and tooth formation is normal.

The minimum AAFCO recommendations for vitamin D in dog food are 500 IU / Kilogram (227 IU / lb or 14.2 IU / oz).  This means one egg has almost double the minimum daily vitamin D recommendations.  The maximum AAFCO recommendations are 5,000 IU of vitamin D per day.   Many veterinarians claim that AAFCO nutritional recommendations are too low.  I have seen a lot of older dogs with bone related problems like hip dysplasia and arthritis.   Could these degenerative diseases be related to low calcium metabolism and vitamin D deficiency?  Are the high cereal content kibbles of today a contributor?   Ask your veterinarian or canine nutritionist their opinion.

Sources of vitamin D

Cod liver oil 2,700 IU per ounce

Shiitake mushrooms 249 IU per four dried mushrooms

Orange juice (fortified) 125 IU per ounce; soy and rice milk are often fortified

Fresh herring 461 IU per ounce; pickled herring has 578 IU per serving.

Salmon 177 IU per ounce; mackerel, sardines, and shrimp are also good.

Eggs 26 IU per egg; almost all of the vitamin D is in the yolk.

Milk (fortified) 12.5 IU per ounce; cheese and yogurt are less likely to be fortified.

Tofu 40 IU per ounce; not all varieties are fortified, so read labels.

Yeast and other fungi (like ergot)

Cod liver oil is available from many pharmaceutical outlets.  The natural form of vitamin D found in marine oils is D₃ or cholecalciferol.  The vitamin D derived from plants is D₂ or ergocalciferol, sometimes considered an inferior form of vitamin D since an additional step is required to synthesize this form into the body.

For some additional reading, here are some great articles on cod liver oil and cod liver oil manufacturing.

Since we were feeding Cinder Premium dry dog food and he never had any other illnesses (unless fleas can be dubbed an illness), it was alarming to find out he had cancer.  Maybe the cancer was genetic with the breed of dog but I believe it is more likely that the chemical laden dog food was the source of cancer. I felt I had been deceived by slick dog food advertising and misleading or false information about the ingredients of the product.  It was then I resolved to learn more about canine nutrition and how to reduce the risk of getting cancer, for our new puppy Molly. Shortly thereafter, HomeDogFood was born.

Our targeted readership is dog parents who are less than trusting of dog food manufacturing conglomerates and who are looking for alternative, higher confidence feeding solutions for their dog.  Our mission is to make feeding home dog food as easy and convenient as possible, provide veterinarian based knowledge of canine nutritional requirements, tasty food profiles and simple recipes using high quality, low cost ingredients.

When I started to do a little dog food research, it was not surprising to light upon the fact that virtually all dry dog foods that are packed in a bag and shipped by truck to the distribution channels, have additives to retain flavor, preserve color and prevent spoilage.  And with this thought, my professional risk management training kicked in!

Shelf life is a primary driving factor for dog food manufacturers when formulating their product. To reduce risk, they want to make sure it will appear fresh and fit for an extended time, even up to 6 months. If the product spoils or looses flavor before it gets to the consumer or before the dog has an opportunity to eat the food, the manufacturer could loose a lot of money.  Food spoilage or customer rejected product is a high risk factor for any food manufacturer.

Rejected Food Products

If we break down this risk factor and look at a rejected product event, here is what we might find.  Typically, in the dog food distribution channels, after a product has shipped from the factory and the store or the end customer finds unacceptable or spoiled product , the store notifies the dog food distributor of returning (rejected) dog food.  The store gives the distributor specific UPC codes from the product to be returned and the store is credited for that product.  The distributor picks up the rejected product from the store and returns it to the manufacturer.

When dog food is returned, the manufacturer not only looses sales revenue from the product already sold and being returned, but he may also have to “eat” direct costs associated with all the unacceptable dog food made in a given lot.  This includes; the cost of all product that hasn’t been sold yet and may be anywhere in the distribution channels; shipping costs associated with the spoiled product, not only to return the product but also costs already incurred to initially ship the product to the field; indirect administrative costs to deal with the problem internally, as well as working with all the distributors to identify and resolve any issues they might have with the defective product.

If the word of bad dog food gets out, we quickly loose confidence in the brand, the brand takes a hit and sales take a nose dive. Bad food is a very high risk and potentially a huge cost for dog food manufacturers.  A public recall of a well known dog food brand can cost a large company millions of dollars and of course, devalue the brand, the company stock and stockholders equity.  For a small company, a recall may cause financial ruin.

So isn’t it likely that dry dog food manufacturers, as a result of risk management decisions or profit motives, use preservatives in their formula that may be dangerous for dogs, to ensure the product will have a sufficiently long shelf life?

If we look at the potential cost to a food manufacturer, for rejected product, it may easily be orders of magnitude higher than the potential cost associated with the alternative, making sure the dog food has a long shelf life. One possible scenario, when a company chooses the long shelf life option might be, an affront on the brand from a few customers, for using potentially harmful substances in the dog food.  If a small percentage of customers forsake the brand for such a reason, the cost to the company, including lost sales could be relatively low.

One example of a potentially harmful ingredient that is used as a preservative, is commonly found in dog food and in human food, is BHA or BHT, classified as antioxidants.  Although controversial, whether or not these additives are safe, an article by Kate Murphy in Business Week, May,1996 states: “Repeated studies have shown that BHA and BHT increase the risk of cancer as well as accumulate in body tissue, cause liver enlargement, and retard the rate of DNA synthesis and thus, cell development.”

Tipping the Scale with Harmful Ingredients

Besides reading labels and avoiding potentially harmful additives, what other ways can we gain confidence that our dog food doesn’t tip the scale on harmful ingredients used to extend shelf life? How about AAFCO (American Association of Feed Control Officials) or the USDA, are they a factor in controlling preservative concentrations in dog food?

The site Dog Food Scoop, has some telling statements about regulations for dog food manufacturers:

1. AAFCO (American Association of Feed Control Officials) is not a government agency and they have no regulatory authority to enforce their standards.  Compliance by the dog food manufacturer is completely voluntary.   Actually, AAFCO regulations prohibit any reference to quality or grade of ingredients on the pet food label and further, they do not analyze the source nor safety of the ingredients listed on dog food labels.
2. The FDA – CVM (Center for Veterinary Medicine) is a branch of the Federal Government who regulates dog food ingredients and requires that they be truthfully labeled.   The CVM or FDA does not regularly test to make sure the dog food is safe and healthy.
3. The USDA (United States Department of Agriculture) is involved with regulations concerning pet food labeling and identification and the approval of pet food ingredients.
4. The PFI (Pet Food Institute) represent pet food manufacturers and play a major role in setting AAFCO’s standards.

The USDA, FDA and CVM conduct investigations of widespread deaths in animals, especially as related to imported food ingredients.

So what level of trust should we give the pet food industry regulatory agencies in being able to ensure the food we buy for our dog is not harmful?

Can we trust the dog food manufacturers to be totally truthful about what goes into the dog food in terms of ingredients, preservatives and labeling and do they really care if some dog’s life may be shortened by 5 or more years?  What do you think?  Please give us your thoughts.