I was hoping to get some opinions(good, bad, neutral) on the inclusion of named animal plasma in dog and cat food. From the reading I’ve been doing, it seems to be a controversial ingredient but I’m not sure I understand why. Someone I trust said she spoke to a manufacturer of this ingredient and now she will not feed it to her pets but she was unable to say why. Anyone have any ideas why this would be?
All ingredients that don’t sound like they were pulled off a human grocery shopping list seem to be “controversial” to some people. Personally, I think it has much to do with deliberate misinformation, hype, and frankly, immaturity on the behalf of some of those doing the controversy spreading – i.e., the “ewwww gross” mentality that tends to crop up when someone either doesn’t or doesn’t want to understand what that ingredient actually consists of, and why it has been included in the feed.
Plasma is nothing more than the part of blood which contains the fat – in dog food it usually has a pork origin. If you fed your dog an undercooked or raw steak, they would be eating animal plasma that has not been separated from the red blood cells. It’s used for flavoring, but flavoring a feed does not equate it with junk. It is also not a “filler” – most ingredients labeled as such usually aren’t, in reality – and may not be a nutritional powerhouse, but does contain some in the form of extra fats, which are a necessary nutrient.
Whether or not you want to feed it is a personal choice. In my own opinion, I see nothing wrong with it, though.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.