Jane Brody on Dog Food

[Jan Carr]

For some 30 years, Jane Brody has written a column on personal health
for the NY Times. In my view she has always been one of the most
sensible and objective commentators on the scene.

Now she has turned her attention to dog (and cat) food, and I know
this is an issue of importance to this group. Personally, I have come
to believe that you save in vet bills what additional monies you
expend for quality dog food.

Here's a link to the article, which I have also printed below in case
you cannot access the link:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/01/health/01brod.html?src=me&ref=general

Personal Health
The Truth About Cat and Dog Food
By JANE E. BRODY
Published: May 31, 2010

A visit to a local supply store for pets has convinced me that many
people’s pets eat better than their two-legged companions, or their
companion’s children.

Whatever you think your pet needs (dog or cat, that is, I’m not
getting into nutrition for birds, rabbits, turtles and the many exotic
animals people keep as pets), there is a product ready to meet it:
vegetarian, organic, holistic, natural, raw, kosher, all-meat, gluten-
free, high-fiber, high-protein, grain-free, low-fat, “lite” and anti-
allergy. There are products for young and old pets and those with
sensitive skin, sensitive stomachs and sensitive skin and stomachs, as
well as foods enriched with supplements like antioxidants, omega-3
fatty acids, glucosamine and chondroitin, the value of which has yet
to be established for people, let alone pets.

Do the conscientious pet owners who buy these products really scour
the supermarket for the human equivalent of “Grain-Free Optimal
Holistic Nutrition for Dogs, Thoughtfully Chosen Whole Food Natural
Ingredients in Every Bite,” as proclaimed on the package of Earthborn
Primitive Natural dog food? Or baby food like Innova Puppy Food made
with turkey, duck, barley, brown rice, apple, tomato, carrot, potato,
egg, cottage cheese and alfalfa sprouts?

Parents know how to respond when a baby reacts badly to a newly
introduced food. But if a puppy eating Innova had a food sensitivity,
how could you tell which ingredient was responsible?

I’m not against feeding pets well. They are, after all, much-loved
members of the family, providing valuable emotional support. Although
both cats and dogs can be as mischievous as toddlers and as rebellious
as teenagers, they are always happy to see you and they never talk
back.

In fact, too often pets are overindulged, with too much food and too
many snacks in proportion to the exercise they get. Veterinary groups
have estimated that 20 to 60 percent of American dogs and cats are
overweight or obese and at risk of developing heart disease, high
blood pressure and Type 2 diabetes.

And I wonder whether people who invest in high-end pet foods are
getting their money’s worth. Are their pets really healthier and
happier? Do they live longer? And are these foods any better than the
generic versions sold in supermarkets and big-box stores?

Recognizing the high value most owners place on their companion
animals, and distressed by recent recalls of contaminated pet foods,
two scientists decided to examine the pet food industry and the
evidence for the value of its products and the claims made for them.
Marion Nestle, the Paulette Goddard professor of nutrition, food
studies and public health at New York University, and Malden C.
Nesheim, emeritus professor of nutrition at Cornell University, have
packaged their findings in “Feed Your Pet Right: The Authoritative
Guide to Feeding Your Dog and Cat,” published in May by Free Press.

In an interview, Dr. Nestle (pronounced NES-sel) said: “People are
willing to spend anything on their pets. The $18-billion-a-year pet
food industry is considered to be recession-proof. Although during
this economic downturn shelters have been overwhelmed with pets people
could not afford to keep, those who have kept their pets are not
stinting on what they spend to feed them.”

She noted, however, that the so-called premium pet foods cost three to
four times more than supermarket brands. Within the premium brands,
there is also a wide price range, yet when the ingredients lists are
compared, they are strikingly similar since all have to meet certain
nutritional standards. The first five ingredients of nearly every kind
of dog and cat food are generally the same, representing protein, fats
and carbohydrates, Dr. Nestle said, adding that “anything listed below
the salt would be present in only very small amounts.” She and Dr.
Nesheim compared 10 premium chicken dinners for dogs and found that
all contained basically the same ingredients: All start with chicken
or chicken broth, followed by grains and vegetables. The nonpremium
brands use more grains and poultry, meat and fish byproducts.

Most important, Drs. Nestle and Nesheim say, is to look for products
labeled “complete and balanced,” indicating that they meet the
nutritional requirements of cats and dogs listed by the Association of
American Feed Control Officials. This organization, in conjunction
with the Food and Drug Administration, state officials and the animal
feed industry, develops model regulations for pet foods, which are
voluntary unless encoded in state laws.

“All pet foods are made from the byproducts of human food production,”
Dr. Nestle explained. “No matter what the package says, your dog is
not getting whole chicken breasts, but what remains after the breasts
have been removed for human food.”

And, indeed, it is primarily human food companies — Nestlé, Purina,
Mars and Procter & Gamble — that make the pet foods sold throughout
the world. Of course, in much of the world, domestic dogs and cats
survive on table and street scraps, not commercially produced pet
foods. In seeking evidence for the added value to health and longevity
of commercial pet foods, the authors found almost none with any
validity.

No agency requires proof of pet food health claims, and no pet food
company is willing to invest in decades of research to determine
whether its products keep animals healthier and extend their lives,
the authors state. Pet food companies say they do research, but it is
rarely done in a scientific fashion, with comparable control and
experimental groups. There is, however, ample evidence that, despite
claims to the contrary, both dogs and cats “are perfectly able to
digest grains if they are cooked,” Dr. Nestle said.

None of this should imply that different pet food products make no
difference to individual animals. When my friends’ havanese began
licking its paws incessantly, the vet suggested they try a corn-free
pet food, which stopped the itching. However, they need not spend $31
for a 12.5-pound bag of premium food free of corn; Costco’s Kirkland
Super Premium Dog Food, also free of corn, costs about $15 for a 40-
pound bag.

Still, Dr. Nestle suggested, “if one or another brand seems to
completely change the way a dog behaves or cures an allergy, when you
find something that works for you, stay with it.”

While many pay good money for marketing gimmicks, Dr. Nestle also does
not object to people paying for attributes they value. If
characteristics like natural, organic, holistic, vegetarian or kosher
are important to pet owners, it may be worth it to them to pay top
dollar for pet foods that claim to provide the desired attribute, even
if there is no official or enforced definition of the claim.
Although some owners insist on cooking for their pets, the authors
said animals are more likely to get all the nutrients they need, and
in the right amounts, from a commercial product.

“Besides, the pet food industry serves an important ecological
function by using up food that would otherwise be thrown out,” Dr.
Nestle said. “If everyone cooked human food for the 472 million cats
and dogs in America, it would be like feeding an additional 42 million
people.”