.jpg)
All Pages
Pet Food Article Categories
Pet Food Calorie Mis-Information
- 1-10-2012
- Categorized in: Pet Food Ingredients, Pet Food Regulations
One of the biggest pitches of pet foods is the 100% Balanced Nutrition claim. You see that '100% Balanced Nutrition' claim everywhere, even veterinarians advise pet parents to make sure you are feeding one of the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) balanced pet foods. 'Your pet will suffer from health problems if you don't feed a balanced diet' is the typical advise. Well guess what? Those AAFCO balanced diets have calorie contents that run from well lower to well higher than what is needed for healthy pets. Pet health is at significant risk even with 100% Balanced Diets.
To a health conscious world, calorie counting is a must. For the pet health conscious, calorie counting is a world of misinformation, poor directions, and lack of regulatory oversight. The FDA and AAFCO have no current regulations that require pet foods to accurately report calorie information to pet parents. No calorie statement regulations and/or no enforcement of existing pet food label laws means pets are at risk.
In using standard food industry calorie measurements, I found pet foods with recommended feeding instructions providing pets from 30% less calories per day (required to maintain good health) to more than double the recommended calories per day. And again - this was taken directly from manufacturer recommendations; pet food advising pet owners to feed far less or far more to maintain a healthy pet. These discoveries weren't limited to grocery store type pet foods either. The drastic variations in calorie statements and recommended intake of calories were discovered in all types of pet foods from raw, canned, and kibble.
What's the risk to pets? From 'The Growing Problem of Obesity in Dogs and Cats' "The problems to which obese companion animals may be predisposed include orthopedic disease, diabetes mellitus, abnormalities in circulating lipid profiles, cardiorespiratory disease, urinary disorders, reproductive disorders, neoplasia (mammary tumors, transitional cell carcinoma), dermatological diseases, and anesthetic complications."
Besides the significant risk of pet obesity, another absurdity of pet food regulations is the calorie calculations used by AAFCO. The food industry's standard to measure calories is known as the Atwater system or Atwater formula. Simply put, the Atwater system allows anyone from a nutritionist to a consumer to calculate the amount of calories from food. The system is so easy to calculate calories, the Science Education Partnership University of California even provides a lesson plan for 4th Graders using the Atwater formula. The Atwater Formula is...
Each gram of protein produces 4 calories.
Each gram of carbohydrates produces 4 calories.
Each gram of fat produces 9 calories.
Although the Atwater system is standard in the food industry, pet food uses a slightly different Atwater formula which is defined by the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) as "Modified Atwater". The Modified Atwater is...
Each gram of protein produces 3.5 calories.
Each gram of carbohydrates produces 3.5 calories.
Each gram of fat produces 8.5 calories.
Remembering that pet obesity is at epidemic levels in the U.S., consider that the AAFCO Modified Atwater formula calculates calories lower than the food industry standard formula. Is a .5 difference in calorie calculations significant? With one pet food exampled below, we found only a 14 calorie difference between the standard calorie measurements and the AAFCO calorie measurements...per ounce. When you do the math, you realize how many ounces of pet food a 30 pound dog consumes each year. The 14 calorie difference turned into a 35,000 calorie difference between AAFCO's reporting method and standard calorie methods (over a year). The AAFCO method tells the pet parent the pet has consumed 35,000 less calories over a year. Again - AAFCO chooses to use a method that reports significantly less calories to pet owners. In the pet food calculations exampled below, the AAFCO method did not report an additional 98 calories a day. 100 additional calories per day can result in a weight gain of 15 pounds per year. No wonder pet obesity is epidemic.
Unfortunately, we pet parents cannot rely on pet food regulators to protect our furry families. Counting calories is yet another issue we must take control of for our pets. The following is teaching you how to calculate the calories your pet consumes each day. Yes, it's a little tedious. But I believe it to be significantly important for all of us to know how to do. Ok...get your math hats on and here we go...
The following pet foods were chosen at random and are used soley to teach pet parents how to accurately calculate calorie information.
First, the standard Atwater formula (not used by pet food)...
Purina ProPlan Natural Chicken & Brown Rice Formula Dry Dog Food
Daily Feeding Instructions from the Purina ProPlan website states a 30 pound dog should be fed approximately 1 3/4 (1.75) cups of dog food per day. The Guaranteed Analysis of this dog food states the food contains...
30% protein
17% fat
4% fiber
12% moisture
Ok, now we need carbohydrate information (to calculate the full amount of calories for this dog food). How do we determine the carbohydrates? From the Guaranteed Analysis stated on every pet food label and website, we are provided with percentages of protein, fat, moisture, and fiber in a pet food. With this particular pet food...100% minus 12% moisture equals 88%. Thus, for each ounce or pound of dog food, 88% of each ounce or pound is dry matter food. Next, we subtract other percentages we are provided with in the Guaranteed Analysis. 88% (dry matter of this dog food) minus 30% protein, minus 17% fat leaves us 41% dry matter. This remaining percentage is fiber, carbohydrates and various other (minimal weight) ingredients such as vitamins and minerals. So now we know that this pet food contains 30% protein, 17% fat and approximately 41% carbohydrates and fiber.
Next, we will need to convert these percentages of one ounce of dog food into grams. One ounce equals 28.35 grams. We need to calculate grams because both the Atwater formula and AAFCO's modified Atwater formula are based on grams.
So one ounce of dog food is 28.35 grams. We know, thanks to the Guaranteed Analysis that 30% of an ounce of this dog food is protein. Our math to change 30% of one ounce of dog food into grams is...
.30 X 28.35 = 8.5. Each ounce of dog food contains 8.5 grams of protein.
Again, from the Guaranteed Analysis, 17% of an ounce of this dog food is fat. Our math to change 17% of one ounce of dog food into grams is...
.17 X 28.35 = 4.81. Each ounce of dog food contains 4.81 grams of fat.
And lastly carbohydrates (which includes fiber). From our calculations above, we determined this dog food is 41% carbohydrates. Our math to change 41% of one ounce of dog food into grams is...
.41 X 28.35 = 11.62. Each ounce of this dog food contains 11.62 grams of carbs.
Each ounce of this dog food contains...
8.5 grams of protein
4.81 grams of fat
11.62 grams of carbohydrates
Now we have all the information we need to calculate calories of this dog food.
The standard Atwater formula calculates calories at 4 calories per gram of protein, 9 calories per gram of fat, 4 calories per gram of carbohydrates.
4 calories per gram of protein. 4 X 8.5 (grams of protein per ounce) = 34 calories per ounce from protein.
9 calories per gram of fat. 9 X 4.81 (grams of fat per ounce) = 43.29 calories per ounce from fat.
4 calories per gram of carbs. 4 X 11.62 (grams of carbs per ounce) = 46.48 calories per ounce from carbs.
Our total for this dog food is 123.77 calories per ounce.
Now, we go back to the information provided by Purina ProPlan from their website. Purina ProPlan states there is 1889 calories per pound of dog food. One pound equals 16 ounces. So from our calculations, 123.77 calories (per ounce) X 16 (ounces in a pound) = 1980.32. Purina's calorie statement is very close to our calculations.
But what about feeding directions? The Purina ProPlan website suggests a pet parent feed 1 3/4 cups of dog food to a 30 pound dog. Because all kibble weighs differently (size of kibble, density), we need to know how many ounces of dog food (by weight) is in each cup. Purina shares that one standard measuring cup will contain approximately 112 grams of dog food. Our 1 3/4 cup daily recommended feeding for a 30 pound dog would weigh 196 grams. To change this back to ounces - our math is 196 (grams) divided by 28.35 (one ounce in grams) equals about 7 ounces. Whew! Now, back to our calorie calculations. Each ounce of dog food produces 123.77 calories. 7 (ounces) times 123.77 equals 866 calories per day for a 30 pound dog.
Is that too many calories? The National Research Council (NRC) nutritional guidelines are what AAFCO chooses to follow. NRC suggests a 30 pound inactive dog consume 674 calories per day. The difference between the recommended feeding amount of this dog food and NRC recommendations is 192 calories per day.
That's not too bad, is it? 192 additional calories for a 30 pound dog per day would be similar to a human consuming 1000 extra calories per day (everyday, month after month, year after year). By human standards, one can gain 15 pounds a year by consuming only an extra 100 calories per day (over a year). Imagine a pet food providing 192 additional calories per day would do to the waistline of a 30 pound dog.
Now let's look at a cat food using the standard Atwater formula...
Purina Natural Chicken & Brown Rice Formula Cat Food Dry
Purina recommends 2/3 cup dry food per day for a 10# cat
The Guaranteed Analysis states...
40% protein
16% fat
3% fiber
12% moisture
To calculate carbohydrate...100% - 12% moisture = 88% dry matter food, - 40% protein (= 48%), - 16% fat (= 32%), leaves 32% fiber, carbs, and misc.
Next we calculate grams of protein, fat, and carbs from each ounce of cat food...
40% protein - .40 X 28.35 grams = 11.34 grams of protein per ounce
16% fat - .16 X 28.35 grams = 4.536 grams of fat per ounce
32% carbs, fiber, misc - .32 X 28.35 grams = 9.072
Now we have the information needed to calculate calories using the standard Atwater formula...
Calories from protein 11.34 X 4 = 45.35 calories per ounce
Calories from fat 4.536 X 9 = 40.824 calories per ounce
Calories from carbs 9.072 X 4 = 36.288 calories per ounce
Total = 121 calories per ounce of this cat food.
1 cup weighs 124 grams or approximately 4.4 ounces of cat food.
2/3 cup serving size equals 2.8 ounces by weight of cat food.
2.8 ounces of cat food X 121 calories (per ounce) = 339 calories per serving.
NRC recommends 280 calories for an adult cat per day.
According to standard Atwater calculations, a ten pound cat would be consuming almost 60 extra calories per day following manufacturer directions for feeding. This is similar to a human consuming almost 900 extra calories per day; weight gain of 15 pounds a year occurs with just 100 extra calories a day over a year.
But these calculations are using standard Atwater formula, not the AAFCO modified formula. Here are the results using the AAFCO formula...
Same Dog Food as above...
Each ounce of this dog food contains...
8.5 grams of protein
4.81 grams of fat
11.62 grams of carbohydrates
Next we calculate grams of protein, fat, and carbs from each ounce of cat food...
40% protein - .40 X 28.35 grams = 11.34 grams of protein per ounce
16% fat - .16 X 28.35 grams = 4.536 grams of fat per ounce
32% carbs, fiber, misc - .32 X 28.35 grams = 9.072
Using AAFCO's Modified Atwater formula...
11.34 X 3.5 (calories per gram) = 39.69 calories per ounce from protein
4.5 X 8.5 (calories per gram) = 38.25 calories per ounce from fat
9.07 X 3.5 (calories per gram) = 31.7 calories per ounce from carbs
Total - 110 calories per ounce
Daily recommended feeding for a 30 pound dog is 7 ounces. 7 X 110 = 770 calories per day. NRC recommends 674. That's an extra 96 calories per day. But - we need to realize how much the AAFCO Modified Atwater changes the calorie content for our pets.
Standard Atwater Formula this dog food contained 124 calories per ounce.
AAFCO Modified Atwater Formula this dog food contained 110 calories per ounce.
A difference of 14 calories per ounce doesn't sound like much until you do further math. For a 30 pound dog - the difference of calorie reporting for just one day of food between these two formulas is 98 calories (standard Atwater formula measures 98 more calories per day). The difference between standard calorie measurements and AAFCO calorie measurements for a 30 pound dog over a year would be 35,770 calories. The AAFCO measurement of calories reports 35,770 less calories per year than the standard calorie content formula!
Here is one more...
Now, we look at a raw pet food...
Nature's Variety Instinct Raw Frozen Diet
The Nature's Variety website states this pet food contains "Calories 65 per ounce".
The Guaranteed Analysis...
Protein 13%
Fat 6%
Fiber 2%
Moisture 68%
(Carbs, Fiber, Misc 100 - 68 = 32 - 13 = 19 - 6 = 13 13% Carbs, Fiber, Misc)
13% Protein - 13% of 1 ounce (.13 X 28.35) = 3.68 grams protein per ounce.
6% Fat - 6% of 1 ounce (.06 X 28.35) = 1.7 grams fat per ounce.
13% - 13% of 1 ounce (.13 X 28.35) = 3.68 grams carbs per ounce.
Now we can calculate calories using the standard Atwater formula...
3.68 X 4 (calories protein) = 14.72 calories per ounce from protein
1.7 X 9 = 15.30 calories per ounce from fat
3.68 X 4 (calories carbs) = 14.72
Total 44.74 calories per ounce of dog food. The Nature's Variety website states each ounce provides 65 calories per ounce.
Ok, now we'll use the AAFCO Modified Atwater formula...
The Guaranteed Analysis...
Protein 13%
Fat 6%
Fiber 2%
Moisture 68%
(Carbs, Fiber, Misc 100 - 68 = 32 - 13 = 19 - 6 = 13 13% Carbs, Fiber, Misc)
13% Protein - 13% of 1 ounce (.13 X 28.35) = 3.68 grams protein per ounce.
6% Fat - 6% of 1 ounce (.06 X 28.35) = 1.7 grams fat per ounce.
13% - 13% of 1 ounce (.13 X 28.35) = 3.68 grams carbs per ounce.
Calories using Modified Atwater...
Protein 3.68 X 3.5 (calories per gram) = 12.88 calories per ounce from protein.
Fat 1.7 X 8.5 (calories per gram) = 14.45 calories per ounce from fat.
Carbs 3.68 X 3.5 (calories per gram) = 12.88 calories per ounce from carbs.
Total - 40 calories per ounce. Again, Nature's Variety states each ounce of this raw dog food contains 65 calories.
Nature's Variety recommends 7.7 oz dog food for a 30 pound dog with normal activity. Using the AAFCO Modified Atwater calorie calculations...7.7 oz X 40 calories per ounce = 280 calories. The NRC recommends 674 calories/day for a 30 pound dog. This dog food, if fed as directed, would provide less than half of the daily needed calories for a 30 pound dog.
Without going into all the math calculations again (hopefully you understand how to calulate calories now), the Nature's Variety Instinct Raw Chicken Formula for cats as well states each ounce provides 65 calories. Using AAFCO's Modified Atwater formula, the calorie content shows 40 calories per ounce. Recommended feeding for a 10 pound cat is 3.5 ounces; 3.5 ounces X 40 calories per ounce is 140 calories per day. NRC recommends a cat consume 280 calories per day.
How crazy is this? We've calculated calories from just four pet foods and we see variations of...
40 to 124 calories for one ounce of dog food;
40 to 121 calories for one ounce of cat food.
Serving recommendations from...
For a 30 pound dog 280 calories to 866 calories per day;
For a 10 pound cat 140 calories to 339 calories per day.
Imagine how crazy this could become with thousands of different pet foods?
Please Note: The above calcutions did not exclude an estimate of vitamin/mineral content of the pet foods (vitamins/minerals would not produce any calories). This was excluded to not confuse the teaching of using this method any further. When you calculate calorie content of pet foods, you might consider subtracting an an additional 5% (.05) from the carbohydrate percentage.
How can pet foods be allowed to state calorie content high or low? Why can't State Department of Agriculture (AAFCO members are State Dept of Agriculture employees) do quick calorie calculations on pet foods - and those that are under or over be pulled from store shelves? Why isn't someone doing something about this? Why...because AAFCO has NO minimum or maximum calorie requirements for pet foods.
Of course, an educated pet parent would have to wonder if calorie misinformation is intentional. Pet food manufacturers are well aware many petsumers calculate cost per serving. Is low end pet food feeding instructions meant to appear the pet food is less expensive? We will never know. But what we do know is that pet food regulations don't protect pets and are not designed to provide accurate information to discerning pet parents. But...now we all know how to calculate calories per ounce and serving for ourselves.
I don't like that so many pets are overweight or obese. But what I really don't like is that the pet owner gets the sole blame. How can a pet owner be blamed for an overweight pet when some pet foods - even 'light' pet foods - contain far more calories than is recommended by the NRC? How can a pet owner be blamed for an overweight pet when they are following the manufacturer feeding directions? How can a pet owner be blamed for an overweight pet when the pet food regulatory agency intentionally reports calories lower than what is considered standard in the food industry?
One more thing...Another significant issue to pet obesity is exampled below...
Nutro Max Adult Chicken, Rice & Lamb Dinner Canned Dog Food
Nutro reports that the 5.5 ounce can of this dog food contains 183 calories.
Using the standard Atwater formula, calculations showed 187 calories for the 5.5 oz can.
Using AAFCO's Atwater formula, calculations showed 170 calories for the 5.5oz can.
Nutro was fairly accurate in reporting calorie information. However...
Feeding instructions for this dog food states "feed adult dogs 1 - 2 1/4 cans daily per 10 lbs. of dog weight." For a 30 pound dog, feeding instructions from Nutro are to feed between 3 - 6 3/4 cans per day. The pet owner is instructed to feed between 3 cans and almost 7 cans a day?
Using standard Atwater Calculations these feeding instructions vary calorie intake between 561 to 1262 calories per day.
Using AAFCO's Modified Atwater calculations these feeding instructions vary calorie intake between 511 to 1150 calories per day.
NRC recommends 674 calories per day. These feeding instructions vary from 150 calories less per day to 550 calories more per day than AAFCO accepted feeding recommendations. I completely understand that each pet is different, however the huge variation in many feeding instructions makes it hard for me to believe pets are that different!
I have to say it one more time...How can pet parents prevent obesity if accurate calorie information and solid feeding guidelines are not provided?
Next week I'll be attending the AAFCO meeting. I'll be asking about this issue, but I'm expecting nothing more than the typical run-around. By the way, incoming AAFCO President Robert Waltz has never agreed to an interview. I've been told that FDA's Dan McChessney isn't attending (I had to contact his boss for this information - he never bothered to respond to my multiple emails), and no one will tell me names of anyone from the FDA that is attending.
Please, do your own pet food calculations. If you find a pet food is significantly higher (or lower) than NRC recommendations, please report this to your State Department of Agriculture. Share with them how this wide variety of calorie information makes you feel as a petsumer. Ask them to do something about it!
Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,
Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author, Buyer Beware
Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
TruthaboutPetFood.com
PetsumerReport.com
What's in Your Pet's Food?
Is your dog or cat eati
ng risk ingredients? Chinese imports? Petsumer Report tells the 'rest of the story' on over 2500 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. www.PetsumerReport.com
The List
The List of pet foods that Susan wouldn't hesitate to feed to her own pets!
Have you read Buyer Beware?
Cooking for pets made easy, Dinner PAWsible.
Are you subscribed to Truth About Pet Food Newsletter? Click Here to subscribe.
Follow Truth about Pet Food on Twitter.
Become a Fan of Truth, Vindication, Dinner PAWsible, Buyer Beware on Facebook.
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
Email to Friend
Fill in the form below to send this article to a friend:
Scientists don't even know what a 100% balanced diet is for humans. If they did - we wouldn't need any more research.
If a company has developed THE 100% balanced diet - why do all these companies constantly bring new versions on the market?
I can only assume, THE 100% diet from yesterday WASN'T 100% balanced after all. Why then would or should I believe today's newest 100% invention is truly 100?????
They can say 100% balanced because it has the minimum amount of vitamins and minerals needed to maintain a healthy pet. Although some foods contain the maximum allowed vitamins and minerals which can cause problems later down the road for the animal as some vitamins and minerals need to be strictly regulated. Minimum amounts of vitamins and minerals in pet foods can also cause problems for pets.
Just like humans pets are not all the same. This makes it impossible for the pet food companies to create a food that is perfect for each and every dog.
Just amazing. Thank you for bringing this to our attention! I never would have realized how far off this information would be....
it isn't the no. of calories or % of anything that is the key issue. it is what is the source of the protein, carb, and fats..just like in human food and labeling on vit/min products. many ingredients are not bio-available..not in a form that the bodys molecular structure can digest or assimilate.
I disagree Arlene. Regardless if the fat is sourced from the best options, too much fat results in high calories. Too many calories result in fat pets. I do agree that USDA approved sources of protein and fat and food sources of vitamins and minerals are significantly better for a pet. But calories still matter.
I am currently in vet tech school and according to my animal nutrition teacher, the reason there is so much variation in pet food calories and how much to feed is because of the different vitamin and mineral mixtures. If you feed under the amount listed for your dog or cat then they are not getting the proper vitamin or minerals. If my dogs were to eat what their food said they should eat they would be extremely overweight. They only eat maybe half of what the bag says.
Unfortunately AAFCO does not regulate pet food or pet food labels the way it should. According to several of the vets that are teachers in my vet tech school say they often see issues later in life caused by either a defiency or an overabundance of vitamins and minerals in the pet's system.
A good way to calculate the number of calories necessary for a dog is:
The equation to figure out how many calories a dog needs is
(dog's weight in kg(divide lbs by 2.2)x30)+70
After you figure that out you multiply the answer by an activity factor.
These are:
1-1.25 for inactive dogs
1.45 for active dogs
2-3 for endurance dogs
This does help if you know the actual number of calories in the food. This equation does equal the number of calories I feed my dogs though and they are all perfect weight.
Fat is the main energy source in dogs and cats. However fat also makes the food very calorically dense. While the sources of the protein, fat, and carbs are very important(as seen by the amount of recalls in pet foods) fat provides a significant amount of calories. Also the protein percentage is important because too much protein causes a significant strain on the kidneys(they process protein) which can cause many renal issues later in life.
One of the main problems with pet food labeling is the listing of the Guaranteed Analysis. This is merely a list of minimum and maximum allowed nutrients. If the minimum amount of fat listed is 5%, it can be much higher than that, possible 10% or double the amount on the label. Pet food companies should only list the As Fed Values. This is the only way to determine the percentage of nutrients.
Obesity, at least in cats, relies not just on the calories but on the ingredients from which those calories are derived. For instance, calories from carbohydrates will put more weight on a cat than calories from fat. Cats receive just about all of their energy requirements from protein and fat. By decreasing calories from carbs and increasing calories from fats, typically most cats will eat less since their nutritional requirements are being met by the protein and fats instead of the useless carbs.
My two cents worth as far as improving pet food labeling: (however there are many more!)
· Requiring pet food labels to include carbohydrate content.
· Requiring pet food labels to list nutritional information on dry matter basis.
· Requiring pet food labels to only list As Fed Values.
· Allowing ingredient grading such as USDA inspected and organic.
· Inclusion on label of additives that are put in prior to manufacturing facility.
· Change protocols for foods to be accepted as “complete and balanced”.
· Requiring source of ingredients to be listed on company’s website.
· Standardize trace heavy metal levels allowable in pet food.
Susan, would you do a mini post on your Google+ page with a link to it for folks to "hang out" with you while you're at the AAFCO?
Just thinking it would be nice for people who have never been to Google+ or even know what the heck it is.
Wish I was going with you...sniff.
I wish you were going too!
Fascinating article AND follow-up comments. I learned a bunch here today!
Thanks Christina for the reminder of activity factor, an important missing factor from labels. From the pet food websites I've seen, that's why I like Nature's Variety's feeding guide, http://www.naturesvariety.com/feedguide because it calculates the activity level of animal.
I recalculated my current dog canned food Instinct Lamb for 10 pound dog and found that the website recommendation equals the 1.25 factor for inactive dog. So it still might be a tad on the high side for some inactive dogs who only need a factor of 1.0.
Over the last 5 years, I've run into several quandaries related to calories in pet food. Some of which are still not solved. So glad that susan is drawing attention to this area.
In 2007 I did little searching into calories for different meats and found lot of discrepancies in research. For instance:
According to U S D A circular # 549 http://www.ardengrabbit.com/facts.html
Rabbit has 795 calories per pound. = 50 kcalories per oz
Well, this conflicts with the USDA nutrient database (edible portion, raw meat only; depending on cut), which gives:
http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/
rabbit, domesticated, composite of cuts, raw 39 kcal/oz
So I was wondering, for Nature's Variety Instinct, since their frozen rabbit is 95% meat, how the kcal can be as high as 65kcal--can there be another 26kcal in the remaining 5% ingredients? I never got clear answer from NV. I still don't know if it's my confusion or math ineptitude or something else.
Hi Kendra
I don't think the problem is ineptitude -- certainly not your's. I think you're asking precisely the right questions. As for the calorie content of rabbit, I would place less credibiltiy in the continuing validity of USDA Circ 549 (which was published in 1940), and more in the most recently reviewed publications from the USDA food & nutrition database, which gets reviewed frequently. Remember that the USDA numbers aren't absolute, because every meat source varies some.
But your questions to NV are right on the money. As a chef that has had to learn the very convoluted world of AAFCO and pet food labeling & nutrition, I think we should all be asking how a manufacturer can claim that a product that's largely water (65-69% or more) could possibly have 65 calories in the 9 grams or so that remain after you remove the water (which has no calories.)
An ounce of product equals roughly 28.35 grams, and 19 or so grams of that is calorie-free, so there's about 9 grams left to supply 65 calories? There's no way this is possible unless the product contains MUCH more fat (almost 70% fat!) than the label suggests.
Either there's a lot more fat, the calorie report is wrong, the moisture content is wrong, or the portion size is wrong. Or, it's a combination of all of these.
But, your intuitive math is right.
Arlene Ferguson is correct; the source of the calories is of primary importance, not the calories themselves.
All animal-based protein calories are used either for body building or for energy; *none* are stored.
Cats requires ~ 25% fat in their diet for basic functions.... so you really have to go wayyyyy overboard on fat to give them more than they need.
Calories from carbs (those carbs that actually get processed) are converted directly into body fat.
It's carb calories that are making today's commercially-fed cats obese!
You will very likely never see an obese properly raw-fed cat, because cats use calories from animal-based foods very efficiently. In fact, you can switch a cat from a low-calorie diet to a high-calorie diet and have the cat LOSE weight IF the new diet's calories come primarily from animal-based protein!
Ergo - it's the source of the calories that matter, since that's what will determine whether those calories are used, or stored as fat.
- - - - -
Not precisely about calories, but important enough to elaborate upon: carbs that aren't simply passed through to the litter box are converted into fat, not energy - even when there is not enough animal protein in the diet to provide for the cat's basic metabolic needs.
From the well-renowned endocrinologist, Dr. Peterson's latest article (Can Increasing the Amount of Fat or Carbohydrate in a Cat's Diet Compensate for Low Protein Intake?): "Because these feline hepatic enzyme systems are constantly active, a fixed amount of dietary (or muscle) protein will always be catabolized for energy no matter how much energy in the form of carbohydrate or fat the cat ingests."
In other words, every single cat that isn't receiving adequate amounts of animal protein in its diet is sabotaging its own muscles for the protein it needs just to power its body for another day.
Food for thought, eh?
Best regards.
Tracy (aka Auntie Crazy)
Calories are calories, if they're metabolizable, they're fair game for energy use or storage -- but following specific metabolic pathways and rules. That being said, both the canine and the feline bodies follow well-defined procedures for metabolism of proteins, fats and carbohydrates. Add to this the idea that the canine and the feline may (depending on the individual's current energy demands) prioritize energy metabolism from each macronutrient source differently.
So, while there's not a direct pathway in canines or felines for proteins to be stored as fats (as there is for carbohydrates and fats converted to carbohydrates), proteins DO get converted in a process known as gluconeogenesis (new glucose creation). This is a good thing, because the brain uses only glucose for energy, so a canine or feline (or human) that is incapable of converting proteins to glucose would have a very short life, indeed.
So, theoretically, even if you fed only high-quality proteins from meats to your dog or cat, the process of gluconeogenesis could -- theoretically -- produce glucose which, if not fully utilized for immediate energy requirements, be metabolized by insulin into stored fat.
Other indirect pathways to fat storage also apply when proteins are ingested with carbohydrates & fats. If the animal's metabolic prioritization utilizes the proteins, then consumed carbohydrates and fats are left unused, and may ultimately be converted to fats at a higher rate than they would have been in the absence of the protein.
These indirect pathways and macronutrient prioritization can have consequences for fat storage that aren't often intuitive.
Oh, and Cats should never have carbohydrates. They're obligate carnivores, so we find it better to stick to proteins & fats from meats, fish & fowl.
Thx for posting your comment. To me, this is an extremely confusing subject! Could you translate your scientific explanation into a practical example? Regarding pet dog (under 20lbs) average activity, lite walks, usual naps? Let's say 1/2 cup of quality dry kibble maintains the dog's average weight. What are you saying happens if (for example) you feed twice as much? That the protein part gets converted into sugar = energy? But that because sugar = energy can't be stored, that the extra calories will probably convert into fat, where it can be stored? I know this seems "duh" like obvious - as in overfeeding means obesity. But I'm just trying to understand the scientific explanation of why akk this happens. Thx again for taking the time to share!!!
Hi
I know. This subject is really rather complex, and as such, it's so easy for bits and pieces of information to be taken out of context to mean this or that, and so often it winds up making the subject even more confusing.
We can't all be endocrinologists and biochemists, but we can learn some basic things that will help us sort the truth from the agendas out there. So, I hope this will be one of the helpful posts.
Let's disregard for a moment the idea of protein, fat, or carbohydrate "quality." These terms stand for real ideas and some concerns, but they're less important to a basic understanding of how your dog or cat uses food from each of the macronutrient classes of protein, fat, and carbohydrates. So, for now, we'll leave it alone and assume we're talking about feeding whole, unprocessed foods from all three macronutrient classes: protein, fat & carbohydrate.
When our dogs eat, we want most of the food they consume to be converted into useful energy for their bodies to use to move, grow and develop. So, in the following paragraphs, "fuel" means food that our dogs can convert to some form of a sugar, sugar relative, or fatty acid, which -- in a very oversimplified way -- is what virtually every organ or muscle of the body uses for fuel (in various forms like glucose, glycogen, glycols, etc.) These fuels are converted into Adenosine Triphosphate (ATP) by processes that are a bit more complex than appropriate for this post.
In nutrition, the idea of energy "balance" means that the fuel from consumed foods is just enough to match the energy required by muscles, organs, (and the brain which uses up to 20% of energy) -- no more, no less. When the fuel from consumed food matches the needed fuel for the body, weight is generally maintained (even if the animal is overweight or underweight.)
But, when the fuel from food exceeds energy requirements, some of the fuel gets converted to fat. This process keeps food fuel that's perfectly useful from going to waste -- a big advantage in the animal kingdom.
Proteins are converted (digested) in various ways but the general name for all of it is "proteolysis," which breaks proteins, over various stages, into amino acids. Some of these amino acids (namely alanine, glutamine, glycine, serine, and threonine) are used by the liver (and some tissues) to produce glucose in the process called gluconeogenesis. This glucose is used to fuel the muscles, organs and brain. But, this process is generally slow to provide the final fuels than other macronutrient sources. So, a protein-only diet would provide energy for jumping and sprinting only after a long enough wait to allow proteins to be converted to amino acids, and for the liver (and some other tissues) to make sugars (glucose) from the amino acids.
Carbohydrates, to oversimplify, are complex sugars already. So, they're quickly and easily converted to final fuels (simple sugars) after a few digestive steps.
Fats are converted to energy very efficiently by canines. Simplistically, fats are converted into glycerols and fatty acids. The glycerols become glucose and the fatty acid becomes a ketone, which is either used for energy or excreted. Fat is an excellent long-term energy source, and gets converted so efficiently that it's a preferred food for sled dogs and other endurance (working dogs.)
So, you can see that all of the macronutrient classes ultimately convert to a fatty acid or sugar-related fuel that either must be used for energy, excreted or stored as fat.
So, when you double the portion of food that your dog eats, the potential for your dog to accumulate fat increases when the amount of calories your dog eats exceeds his or her energy requirements.
Some people report that they don't see a weight increase when they increase their dog's portions. More often, they just don't see a visible change in their dog's body. And, this is entirely possible if the dog's energy demands exceed the fed portion. When the body's energy demands exceed food fuel intake, the body actually converts organs & muscle to energy. Changes in the body composition in these cases may be difficult to see. On the other hand, if your dogs food consumption creates fuel that exceeds energy demands for a prolonged period of time (days or weeks), you're likely to see new body fat soon.
Depending on the mix of protein, fat and carbohydrate in the diet, various outcomes can be expected because, as I mentioned before, if proteins are present in sufficient amounts, their use for fuel may keep carbohydrates from being burned as fuel, making those carbohydrates more destined to become fat.
If your dog's meals are mostly protein, the dog probably won't have an optimum diet for endurance exercise but will be quite capable of using protein for energy. If your dog eats a lot of carbohydrates & fats, she may not get the right mix of amino acids to help her build new muscle, organ, and other cells, and since carbohydrates do seem to increase inflammation, you want to provide them in the right proportion to other foods to take advantage of the antioxidant, cancer-protective, and other nutritive properties of polyphenols & other phytonutrients (plant based nutrition) that can't be derived from meat protein. Balance is the answer to providing the best nutrition.
The good news is: the dog's body knows what to do. Provide a good mix of nutrition from various whole, unprocessed food sources, and your dog will get the best of all worlds.
"Depending on the mix of protein, fat and carbohydrate in the diet, various outcomes can be expected because, as I mentioned before, if proteins are present in sufficient amounts, their use for fuel may keep carbohydrates from being burned as fuel, making those carbohydrates more destined to become fat."
Your information may be spot on correct in reference to dogs (it looks like you sell dog food for a living), but it is not so with cats. Regardless of any balance between protein, fat and carbs, protein is used as fuel, and carbs are processed into fat.
Not sure why you took a swipe at endocrinologists, but Dr. Peterson's information is spelled out in clear, easy to understand language and illustrations. Why not go take a look at it? Can Increasing the Amount of Fat or Carbohydrate in a Cat's Diet Compensate for Low Protein Intake?
We do at least agree that the source of calories is of primary importance, since it determines their final disposition (precisely in cats, apparently less so in dogs). We also agree that cats do not require carbs and should not be fed them.
Wishing you and your pets well.
Hi Tracy
I LOVE your passion ! Thank you so much for bringing to my attention the ways that this subject are misunderstood. I intended absolutely no swipe at endocrinologists (or biochemists!) And, I think Mark's blog, and this article, as always, are great. Beside being a good refresher on metabolism, it's a very accessible overview of the inability of the feline to regulate hepatic enzymes responsible for protein metabolism and gluconeogenesis from protein sources, and why carbohydrates and fats can't be used to substitute for proteins because they simply can't provide complete amino acids that cats derive from protein.
Clearly we need more people like you seeking to disseminate the actual truth about things, not agendas from some that may have ulterior motivations. So, to that end, I hope that you'll be so kind to read through the rest of this LONG post.
First, I want to be clear that I mean this response with great respect for your passion and your help to others, and by no means as any challenge. I believe that another read of Mark's article will bring you to the same points I make here, that Mark really isn't saying what I think you're saying he does: that any carbohydrate a cat eats is destined to be fat. If that's not what you're saying then I apologize for misinterpreting your comments.
Since 1977 researchers (Rogers, and others, see below) have studied the ways that carbohydrate ingestion by cats interacts with protein digestion, in some cases interfering with it. Now, this doesn't mean that the cat's baseline protein need or capacity for assimilation is changed, it means that the cat's ability to use the *consumed* protein is affected. For an excellent overview you may want to see Ellen Kienzle's 1994 article in the Journal of Nutrition
"Effect of Carbohydrates on Digestion in the Cat."
Mark's article points out that cats, as obligate carnivores (he even compares them to owls and rainbow trout), have evolved with very little ability to regulate how much protein their livers metabolize daily. So, whether a cat eats a high protein diet, a low protein diet, or is starved, the level of protein-metabolizing enzymes present in the liver really doesn't change much. (Actually, one does: tyrosine transaminase.) These findings are from a 1977 study by Rogers, Morris & Freedland, which Mark cites in his article.
But, this physiological reality doesn't quite reach the point of making it true that any carbohydrate consumed by a feline is destined to be fat. In fact, much of the same reality that I spoke about in a previous post about dogs is really also true for cats. That being that when proteins, carbohydrates and fats are consumed together, each has an influence on how others are used.
Cats, though, -- at individually and temporally varying levels -- have baseline hepatic enzyme levels that metabolize a quantity of protein (either consumed or corporeal) into amino acids and carbohydrate sugar through gluconeogenesis.
But, let's say that a cat eats a meal of tuna and drinks a saucer of milk. (I know, milk! But, for the sake of illustration let's dismiss any lactose intolerance). With sufficient lactase present, the lactose (sugar) in the milk is quickly used by the cat, so it will be available for fuel quickly because it's a sugar. Now, this won't change how the casein protein or the fish protein is metabolized into amino acids and glucose (by gluconeogenesis), but it very well may change the way the resulting glucose from that gluconeogenesis is disposed, either as fuel or conversion by insulin to fat. So, while the actual protein metabolism doesn't change, the disposition of resulting glucose may change based on the animal's energy balance. In other words, the cat's ultimate use of fuel from protein is different in the presence of lactose than it would be in its absence.
Also, one of the implications of this reality is that, for instance, if a specific cat's metabolic optimum rate (for growth, let's say) should exceed the fixed amount that the specific cat's liver can metabolize, growth or energy from protein could be limited by that specific cat's inability to metabolize more protein -- even if it is present in the diet. Personally, I think this would be the case infrequently, but possibilities like this may help us understand and account for why the modern cat seems to have adapted to use starches and simple sugars --
carbohydrates -- for energy, and to tolerate them well for short periods of time. Conversely, if not enough protein is present in the diet, the poor cat's corporeal protein (from muscle & organ) will be consumed. Cats -- perhaps even moreso than dogs -- have no biological need for carbohydrates, but this doesn't mean that they cannot utilize them.
But, over time, and especially in the absence of sufficient proteins, carbohydrates -- even starches and simple sugars -- are really bad news for cats. This is once true because needed protein (to meet that cat's baseline protein metabolism due to hepatic enzyme activity) will come from corporeal sources and twice true because, as Mark points out in his article, cats (and dogs) aren't really capable of synthesizing a full complement of amino acids necessary to build protein from fats or carbohydrates alone. And that's why you just can't replace protein with fats or carbs for cats. The cat's body will always try to use a fixed amount of protein, and it can't make a suitable subsitute from fats or carbs.
Thanks for hearing me out.
I can't speak to large working dogs should be fed. But the people I know owning mid-sized (under 20lbs) pet dogs with a casually active lifestyle (playing in yard, lite walks, chasing birds, etc.) never feed what the package or can would suggest! If they did, they would have hugely over-weight loafy dogs! I have faithfully measured every meal for my 14lb (12 yr) minature poodle and his weight hasn't varied but by a pound or two in all those years. His treats consist of "extra" kibble hand-outs (same food) and because he's a food-hound he thinks this is a perfect reward. My younger poodle (same size, 2 lbs less) just has a higher metabolism. He gets the same measurement of food, but is much leaner. He actually "naps" about the same amount of time as the older dog. He does have a more extended play period twice a day. But their Vet says both are weight normal. My point?? I'm convinced the manufacturers recommend "over-feeding" so consumers will buy more product. Feeding 1 whole can of wet food a day (for example) would actually make my dogs very sick with runny stools. I can add a couple table spoons to dry kibble occasionally. But otherwise it's too rich or just not wholesome enogh. My friend feeds a totally raw diet and allows her dog to eat as much as she wishes. Lots of times she doesn't finish her dish. She's a minature Poodle who is also in perfect weight. She's spayed, has a moderate lifestyle, etc. I don't think the manufacturers or AAFCO understand "beans" about this calorie calculation business. Frankly I found this article to be the most confusing one I've ever read on this site. And I have found that the higher the quality food, actually the less quantity is required to maintain the dog at the same weight. The higher quality (more expensive) food seems to be nutritionally more dense. Very interesting.
Just a heads up that they passed a mandatory calorie statement requirement last AAFCO meeting.