A number of years ago I wrote an article in the Club newsletter comparing different types of food - two complete foods and a complementary food (i.e. meat and mixer) and at that time I wrote the following (with some minor amendments):-

"On comparing the analysis of these three there is very little to choose between the three different foods as they are all allegedly balanced diets containing approximately the correct percentages of essential nutrients.

The most obvious difference of course is that of the meat/mixer, which is perhaps, less convenient to the owner than the complete foods which are straight from the packet to the feeding bowl, no opening of tins or mixing of other ingredients in the correct proportions.

In comparing these three foods it is more a matter of pointing out the drawbacks to each and the dangers inherent in each to an owner who knows no better than to take at face value listed analyses which at best are an approximation and at worst totally misleading.

None of the foods distinguish between wet weight and dry weight, dry weight being a much truer estimation of content. The complementary food being the one with the highest water content in the meat part is the most misleading in listing its analysis, for example it has an actual stated analysis of 9.00% protein and a moisture content of 80% which when converted to dry weight gives an actual protein content of 45% [100% - 80% = 20%: 9.0/20 x 100 = 45%] with all other ingredients being similarly adjusted to obtain the true value. The dry foods are also guilty of this but to a much lesser degree. It does not stop here however, as a mere list of contents and percentages really means nothing of value to an unknowing owner. Probably the constituent of the food which most people look at is the protein level - this is the one which most people will tell us is too high or two low. None of the foods distinguish between the differing types of protein. Protein derived from animal and from vegetable sources is completely different. Animal source protein being the most beneficial to the dog and the most easily assimilated.

Looking at the purpose of eating, the dog takes food in for energy; for growth, repair and reproduction; and substances for regulation and utilisation of the aforementioned. None of the foods distinguish between the gross energy, digestible energy and metabolisable energy content of the food the latter of these three being the only true measure of the energy which the dog is able to utilise.

Analysis aside there is also the question of how much the dog should be given. Figures quoted for one of the complete foods and for the meat and mixer are very approximate and tend to err on the excessive side. The unknowing owner who is liable to take these figures as gospel is in great danger of overfeeding their dog.

The other complete food being more concentrated does not require to be fed in such quantities as the other two but when placed in a bowl does not look very much and again the unknowing owner is just liable to add a bit more and again overfeed. Another danger from feeding complete food is that fresh water must always be available to prevent dehydration but with the tinned meat the danger is not so great. From reading the foregoing I may have given the impression that I did not like any of these foodstuffs. Quite the contrary, if handled properly each of them is well worth feeding to the dog but the companies concerned could do more to educate their prospective customers."

The foregoing is as applicable now as it was then, however, a problem which I did not mention at that time, mainly because I thought no-one could possibly be so foolish, was that of mixing a complete food with the complementary food (i.e. meat), a practice which I now find is very common place - even among Weimaraner owners. Recently I have been consulted by a number of clients who were doing exactly this or alternatively were feeding a diet consisting almost totally of tinned meat with little or no mixer added.

The result of this feeding regime is that the dog is being fed an excessive amount of protein which the dog’s metabolism has only two ways to deal with - it either stores the excess as fat or it burns it off in increased activity and becomes hyperactive, or perhaps a combination of both. This of course is not the only problem as excesses of other elements of the food can cause serious health problems, viz excess vitamin D can cause skeletal abnormalities and premature cessation of bone growth; excessive intake of Calcium may cause Magnesium and Zinc deficiency; Magnesium deficiency causes nervous system disorders and irritability; Zinc deficiency affects protein synthesis which can result in small immature puppies, poor coat, uterine inertia/abortion; excess Phosphorus leads to reduced calcium absorption - need I go on? - The list is endless and becomes a vicious circle!

Pet food manufacturers have spent thousands of pounds on research and are still doing so to get the food you give the dog properly balanced with all the nutrients vitamins and essential minerals - so why do some people insist on mucking it up by adding different things (and I include mineral supplements). It is true not all dogs like the same food but there is a big enough variety of them on the market that you should be able to find one your dog will eat, enjoy and be healthy on - after all is this not the main aim, to have a happy, healthy dog?

Andy Kousourou