[losul]

Basically I think if they are putting an AAFCO label of nutritional completeness on their foods, i doubt they should be doing so. On the other hand, for me, AAFCO guidelines hold much less relevance for well rounded quality whole, foods, and really become much more relevant the more heavily processed foods. kibbles, etc. I don’t like to many excessive and uneccessary added vitamins/minerals to raw diet.

I’ve not seen guaranteed analysis of their products. The analysis they show is a bit confusing, especially the way they have broken certain items down.

I think I can assume that fat means total fat, carbs mean total carbs, it wasn’t at first plain to me from their analysis. But the total calories still don’t quite reconcile?

Going by what i can here’s the best I come up with on the puppy blend. I hope this comes out looking like a spreadsheet, never has for me before on the review side anyway 🙁

Analysis % %Dry Matter Approximate % calories from?:
——————————————————————————————————-protein 14.02 46.6
fat 7.58 25.2 about 51% ?
carbs 6.57 21.8
water 69.92
ash/other 1.91 6.3
——————————————————————————————————-
100 99.9

Going by those figures, the fat doesn’t look out of line, particularly since the product has added coconut oil and salmon oil, already. I might give consideration feeding the puppy blend (to my adult) on a supplemental basis. I’d be interested in how the veggies, particulary the kale, are processed to make more digestible., and if the mung and adzuki beans are cooked in addition to, or simply just sprouted.

Edit: yeah it didn’t come out looking like a spreadsheet, at all. I’ll have to try doing something about that later.

• This reply was modified 11 years, 2 months ago by losul.