 |
||||
Good Doggy Diets Scrimp on pet food? Vets divided 
A big box of store-brand corn flakes goes into the shopping cart instead of Kellogg’s. Mouthwash with a plainer label than Listerine’s gets tossed in, too. Many shoppers are out of work or fear they will be soon, so they’re cutting their grocery bills however they can. Private label and store brands of mouthwash and grocery staples contain the same ingredients, and many consumers make the switch to these less costly products with confidence. But in the pet food aisle, they pause. Is it all right to buy the 20-pound bag of low-cost dog or cat chow with a name they’ve never heard of? Or is the food nutritionally bankrupt? The biggest risk, probably, is that the animal won’t like it and will refuse to eat it, in which case you’ve wasted money anyway, says veterinary nutritionist Robert Backus, an assistant professor of the College of Veterinary Medicine at the University of Missouri, Columbia. “Lots of research has been done on what dogs and cats require nutritionally,” he says. Dog and cat food formulas can “come together in a lot of ways to meet these requirements,” he adds. The type and quality of ingredients largely account for price differences. The protein source in a premium brand might be chicken or beef, while a bargain brand uses soy or corn gluten meal to meet a pet’s protein requirements. Plant-based proteins can be less digestible, Backus says, but nutritionally they’re not inferior. Veterinarian Dan Benefiel, Stonebridge Animal Hospital, Naperville, Ill., takes a different stance, saying unwholesome foods take up much of the pet food aisle. It’s not even safe to assume that brand-name foods satisfy an animal’s basic nutritional requirements, he says. In fact, one of the more popular brands is no better for dogs than junk food is for humans because it’s filled with so much fat and fiber. Bargain-brand pet foods most likely are insufficient, Benefiel insists, although there may be some exceptions. Pet food labels list ingredients by proportion in descending order. The first or second ingredient ought to be a protein source. However, “The best thing to look for on a label is whether the food has been fed to dogs or cats,” Backus says. Yep, there are brands on the market that haven’t even been taste-tested or evaluated for nutrient absorption in animals. Somewhere on the label should be a statement that the recipe underwent feeding tests based on procedures approved by the Association of American Feed Control Officials, Backus says. Another reason foods vary in price is that marketers of brand-name products pass along the cost of packaging and advertising on to pet owners. Consumers also pay for research that has nothing to do with nutrition or taste. Sophisticated technology is used to make canned dog food, for example, resemble savory bits of beef instead of mush. Of course, the dog wolfs it down without pausing to appreciate the chow’s uncanny resemblance to people food. “The shape, texture and color appeal more to humans,” Backus says. “From a nutritional standpoint, this technology doesn’t add anything.” Ultimately, consumers decide what to feed Fido or Fluffy, often based on what they can afford. Benefiel says he sees the fewest health problems in pets that are consistently fed top-shelf brands. Backus says value seekers need not feel guilty: “As a nutritionist, I don’t think the lower-priced brands are nutritionally unsound.” |
||||
|
||||
