Pet
Nutrition
by Geoge Burns BA
Managing Director Land of Holistic Pets Ltd (UK)
Vice President - Burns Pet Health Inc (USA)
Pet Nutrition
Some 40 years ago our family pet dog was fed on the leftovers from
the kitchen table and scraps from the butchers which included tripe
and sheep heads, we also used the unsold wholemeal bread from the local
bakers, garden vegetables that my family used to grow and the odd piece
of fish, we even fed rabbits and hares when she was lucky enough to
catch them. I remember once going to the vet but it was because the
local GP could not extract the fishing hook from the dog's ear - the
fear of being bitten I think more than anything else.
Society has changed dramatically from those days. Supermarkets now
dominate the food supply chain and food processing is more the norm
than natural foods. Parallels remain strong in term of human food consumption
and that of our pets. We are both eating more processed foods, driven,
I believe by the convenience factor. A major divergence between our
eating habits and that of our pets emerged in the mid 1970's. Around
this time puppy foods came onto the market, followed a few years later
by senior foods for older dogs. Scientific research was credited with
this major advancement in terms of feeding pets and sales of life stage
foods is now estimated to be worth £100m in the UK this year.
In the early 1990's the raw food diet emerged primarily as a result
of the increasing awareness of pet health problems and degenerative
diseases. Responsibility for the health issues were laid at the door
of commercially prepared pet foods and in some cases the manufacturers
were accused of deliberately causing health problems for commercial
gain.
Living and working both in the United Kingdom and United States I feel
very privileged to have met and spoken with advocates of varied approaches
to nutrition and pet health. As a consequence I have heard many contradictory
views on how our pets should be fed.
I have always believed that education, my own included, is something
that evolves on a daily basis and any comments should be looked upon
as contributing to the debate for the benefit of our pets.
Given the historical perspective of pet nutrition there are a few issues
that should be considered with an open mind. Attending many dog shows
I am often asked about puppy foods and senior food. Never in my wildest
dreams can I imagine a mother pushing her shopping trolley through the
aisles of a supermarket looking for a lower protein food for her 8 year
old son who is on the big side. Similarly, saying to her friend, that
the child's grandmother switched to a lower protein food 4 weeks ago
and is doing much better.
It has been well documented that higher levels of protein and fat are
required for growth of young animals - and that less is needed for older
animals. People seem surprised when I ask them, "What level of
protein do you feed your children?" We normally don't worry about
special or unique diets for our children, beyond infancy, yet the attention
that this subject is given with regard to young pets strains belief.
Concerning special foods for older pets, again, we ask whether you
buy "older people foods". Of course not. At this writing my
mother (Mrs. Burns) is in her 92nd year. She does her own shopping.
She doesn't look for food for older people; she eats the same diet she
has done most of her life, only she eats less. Old age is normal, and
eating less in old age is normal. What is not normal are the many degenerative
diseases which seem to accompany old age in our animals and fellow human
beings.
I recall being at a seminar at Tuffs University in Boston USA where
a new senior food was being introduced. The addition of certain nutraceuticals
was cited as the major benefit compared to another adult maintenance
food. The other adult food happened to be an own brand. "Surely
the inclusion of these nutraceuticals in the adult maintenance diet
would have negated the need for the senior diet" someone in front
of me asked - He got a blank response. This experience should not be
generalized but raises questions about the scientific research always
quoted to validate products in the market place.
Senior diets appear to have resulted from such an approach, the protein,
fat and nutrient levels were cut to match a more sedentary lifestyle.
Large breed puppy foods were introduced to offset the perceived and
real problems of feeding more nutrient dense foods or 'traditional'
puppy foods. Pups are fed more food per body weight than adult dogs,
and so tend to take in more protein. Add to that the effect of "high-protein"
diets for puppies and we see a potential for skeletal problems. High
protein intake could force growth of the muscle beyond the capabilities
of the skeletal system, putting strain on the joints. We suspect a correlation
between the advent of high-protein foods for growth and the rise in
problems like hip dysplasia. In fact a German vet and scientific journalist
have suggested that canine hip dysplasia arises not from heritable causes
but from problems associated with diet. (1)
The raw diet emerged with a vengeance promoted in the main by the experiences
of an Australian vet. The philosophy that underpinned his approach appears
flawed. So earlier in the year I spoke at length with Katie Merwick,
author, behaviorist and recipient of the American Red Cross "2000,
Hero of the Year" award. Katie has devoted more than 23 years of
her life to animal welfare, training and rehabilitation for both domestic
and wildlife. Katie has taken in many wolves from the wild all of which
were malnourished.
She argues that the rosy picture painted of wild dogs and wolves by
the proponents of the raw diet does not match reality. That said, I
have spoken with a great many people whose pets have done wonderfully
well on the raw diet.
Confusion reigns in the pet owning public naturally anxious to do what
is best for their pets. The above points illustrate in many ways how
the confusion has arisen and what to believe. My own approach is simple
in terms of pet nutrition - Do No Harm!
Three major factors pertain to the health of pets in terms on nutrition.
Too much food, unhealthy or non-optimal ingredients and harmful formulations
can make the difference between health , vitality and attending the
vet on a regular basis.
Too much food may seem obvious but when I suggest this to owners they
often refer to the weight of their dog and suggest that it is not overweight
and they are right. On the other hand being the correct weight does
not mean that their dogs are eating the correct combination of ingredients.
A dog can be the correct weight but may be diabetic from too much sugar
intake over time. Unhealthy or non-optimal ingredients falls in to this
category. Sugars are derived from many food sources and have many different
names. Harmful formulations and additives are the primary cause for
concern. The Animal Protection Institute in the USA have identified
over 8000 additives covered by formal legislation which may be added
to pet food and considered safe. Chemical colouring's, preservatives
and flavours are the most obvious culprits.
In the United States the American Animal Feed Control Organization
(AFFCO) have very strict rules regarding pet food labeling and enforce
then them with full time officers in every state. They insist on differentiation
of ingredients like poultry by-products and poultry meat meal, corn
glutten meal from whole corn etc.
The worth of such an approach is only of value if the individual pet
owners take the time to research and learn the differences in terms
of digestibility and nutritional value. So far I have been impressed
by the US pet owners in the United States as a whole, who have used
this approach and continued to educate themselves in terms of nutrition
which benefits the well being of their pets.
So what is a good diet? The ingredients should be of high quality,
easily digested and without added chemicals and above all - Do No Harm!
(1) Marc Torel and Klaus Dieter Kammer - Tierarzliche Umschau ( German
Veterinary Review 1996)