Hello, I´m from Portugal and in Jully I´m going to have my baby lab, so i´m already thinking about everithing for my baby so, i qant to know your opinion about this dog food, Carnilove, the ingredients are: And please sorry for my bad english and thanks for the future opinions, i want the beste for my dog. Carnilove puppy large breed salmon meal (25%), turkey meal (20%), yellow peas (18%), chicken fat (preserved with tocopherols, 9%), sal – mon deboned (6%), chicken protein hydrolyzed (5%), tapioca starch (5%), apples (3%), chicken liver (3%), salmon oil (2%), carrots (1%), flaxseed (1%), chickpeas (1%), hydrolyzed crustacean shells (a source of glucosamine, 0,031%), cartilage extract (a source of chondroitin, 0,019%), brewer´s yeast (a source of mannan-oligosaccharides, 0,018%), chicory root (a source of fructo-oligosaccharides, 0,012%), yucca schidigera (0,011%), algae (0,01%), psyllium (0,01%), thyme (0,01%), rosemary (0,01%), oregano (0,01%), cranberries (0,0008%), blueberries (0,0008%), raspberries (0,0008%). Carnilove adult large breed salmon meal (25%), turkey meal (20%), yellow peas (20%), chicken fat (preserved with tapioca starch, 10%), duck meal (5%), salmon deboned (5%), chicken liver (3%), tapioca (3%), apples (3%), salmon oil (2%), carrots (1%), flaxseed (1%), chickpeas (1%), hydrolyzed crustacean shells (a source of glucosamine, 0,05%), cartilage extract (a source of chondroitin, 0,03%), brewer´s yeast (a source of mannan-oligosaccharides, 0,015%), chicory root (a source of fructo-oligosaccharides, 0,01%), yucca schidigera (0,01%), algae (0,01%), psyllium (0,01%), thyme (0,01%), rosemary (0,01%), oregano (0,01%), cranberries (0,0008%), blueberries (0,0008%), rasp – berries (0,0008%).
best is to give your pup the food which he/she started at the breeder. Wait till you know what it is getting and how it is doing on this food. It is not wise to change its food so soon!
Hi @sabri.1996, I don't think that that Carnilove dog food looks good - for one, it has "meal" which is to be avoided at all costs ("salmonmeal (25%), turkey meal (20%)",) You can check the quality of dog food based on its ingredients here : http://get.dogsnaturallymagazine.co...7f951e537ebee3c4d756e7bf7acec0a976f5153e9d0b2 I changed my labs' dog food two / three weeks after getting him from the breeder. So, first I bought a 3kg bag of the same dog food the breeder was giving him and then transitioned slowly to the new food. It took me one week to do the transition in itself (so 2/3 weeks of his old food first and then one week to actually do the change) - first started out with 75% of the old food and 25% of the new one for a couple of days, then 50% of each, then 25% of the old and 75% of the new one. In Portugal, I personally have narrowed down my dog food choices to Happy One Mediterraneum ( http://www.mediterraneum.pt ); Naturea ( http://natureapetfoods.com ); Alpha Spirit ( m.facebook.com/alphaspiritportugal/?locale2=pt_PT ). And don't forget to choose the one for puppies. PS. I too am in Portugal.
Is Carnilove not a good food to have?? I bought some while I was at Crufts and my dog absolutely loved it. I have to say aswell, I have never seen her fur so glossy as while she was on it.
Why do you say that? "Meal" is the same product as the meat, just dried in order to make it more usable. The protein content of a food containing meal can be far higher than one containing meat, with far fewer storage problems. As long as the initial meat is a good quality, then there is no reason that the meal is "bad". Generic "meals" are as bad as generic "meats", but named animal meals shouldn't be assumed to be bad. https://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/choosing-dog-food/about-meat-meal/
Hi snowbunny, You can look up both meal and meat on the dog food analyzer I posted previously.. (Nothwithstanding that, my personal opinion is that meats and meals are probably a mash of byproducts, I absolutely avoid them).
The definition of meal is exactly the same definition as the meat from which it is derived from, it is just rendered to improve its shelf life and protein-to-weight ratio (as you'll see on the PDF you link to, they add the water weight under the whole meats as a reason that whole meat is "questionable"). Also, as the PDF states, generic meats and meals can be made up of any animal, including (in the USA at least), euthanised animals, road kill etc, and are definitely to be avoided, but named ones such as salmon meal and turkey meal, not at all. As it states, you need to trust the manufacturer, but that is true of any food. Low quality salmon will be low quality salmon whether or not it is rendered into meal. You can't tell from the label, you have to investigate the manufacturer if you want to go that far. Nowhere in that PDF you linked to does it say that meals from named meats are to be avoided.
Nowhere in the pdf does it say that meals from named meats are to be avoided, true, though you do have the colour key at the begininning, in which those ingredients named in red are dangerous ingredients, those in yellow are questionable and the blue are healthy. All those (including meals from named meats, such as turkey or salmon meal, etc) are presented in yellow, hence questionable, the meat is presented in red, hence a dangerous ingredient. Of course, it would be wonderful if all dog foods had only blue ingredients, I am not aware of any that does, but I am happy to settle with the dog food analyzer in which : A - No yellow or red ingredients B - Less than 0-5 yellow ingredients C 5-10 yellow or 0-3 red ingredients D more than 10 yellow or more than 3 - 5 red F more than 5 red or more than 10 yellows Still, personally I prefer a yellow ingredient such as sweet potato ot brown rice to a "meat" or a "meal", because I know exactly what a sweet potato is as well as the brown rice, etc, whilst I havent the faintest idea what is in the "meat" "meal", it could be anything come to think of it (roadkill, pts animals..yes). The first time I came across the doubts on meats and meals was by watching PetFoo(le)d and then looking it up a bit, i.e. and Dr. Karen Becker (and the 2007 kibble recalls...) and articles such as this one of hers : https://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2017/05/19/high-meat-pet-food.aspx , Truths About Excess Meat Content in Pet Food Which has also brought me to a point that I find myself comparing extruded foods to cold pressed. Hence me having mentionned in my first post Alpha Spirit, though I prefer small regional manufacturers who use natural fresh produce in their kibble (the case of Happy One Mediterraneum is close to this ideal of mine) Alpha Spirit is cold pressed kibble, which I think comes across as healthier. And you are right, there has to be trust in the manufacturer, above all (one of the reasons that I have settled for the Happy One Mediterraneum vs. Alpha Spirit event though the letter is cold pressed is to me a matter of trust, trust in regional produce).
As are beef, bison, chicken, duck, lamb, liver, rabbit, salmon and turkey. Are you really saying that these shouldn't be fed? NO! Not if it is a named meat. Beef meal, salmon meal, turkey meal, chicken meal. None of these contain anything except what would be in the same listing as "beef, salmon, turkey, chicken". They are the exact same thing, except the meal is rendered. No extra ingredients, no extra off-cuts or nasty bits. Exactly the same. I think you're getting confused with "meals from named meats" and "meat meal", which, I agree, I would absolutely avoid. As an aside, I've searched and can't find any reference to euthanised animals, road kill etc being used anywhere outside of the USA. Their rules are rather different to European ones. The article you link to by Dr Becker doesn't say anything about named meat meals except that dry foods have lower nutritional value than fresh food. Well, duh. I don't think anyone would ever argue against that - a food that has a shelf life as long as most of these kibbles do just can't be as nutritionally sound as fresh food. Of course processing food will destroy some of the amino acids and vitamins, as will oxidisation. But that's just as true of dry foods that have "chicken" on the list as those that have "chicken meal". Again, there is a big difference between "meat meal" and "chicken meal", "turkey meal", "salmon meal", "beef meal" etc. I commend you for looking for the absolute best food you can for your dog, I really do. I think it's brilliant. I'm not trying to be argumentative for argument's sake. I just think that saying people should avoid all meals is wrong and nowhere in the links you have presented does it say that. If you are choosing to feed your dog kibble (something I'm moving farther and farther away from myself), then choosing the best quality food you can afford is great. I don't think that demonising a food like the one the OP mentioned for having named protein meal ingredients is valid. If that protein source is of high quality (which is up to the consumer to research) then I wouldn't be concerned about whether it was presented in meal form or not.
I feed kibble, the so called organic kind, with natural ingredients that are apt for human consumption. I am trying to steer away from too commercially driven manufacturers (i.e. those with greater focus/investment on marketing vs. the quality ingredients they could invest in rather in their product). And yes I am starting to look into barf I did not demonize any kibble, and would not do that at all. I gave my opinion on meal and meat (and my opinion on this is vs. natural fresh organic ingredients which I ultimately prefer, having had a lab that died of stomach torsion at a still young age (7 yrs) and till this day not being quite sure if I couldn't have done better or at least something different to avoid that, food or health-wise).
Sorry, forgot to say, I am aware there are the differences you mention in the US vs European kibble and dog food manufacturing, which could lead me or us to think I/we should steer away from those made in the US, but that could be seen as demonizing US manufacturers do you agree (?). @snowbunny, they are all just opinions, and kindly should all be seen and discussed as such, hopefully something useful is intended.
@CMartin, I completely agree with your sentiments and am always striving to provide the very best nutrition for my dogs. I probably even now haven't got it quite right... I even bought an independently written book to get a better insight, a good one written by Linda Case, called "Dog Food Logic". It helped my understanding enormously. I really dislike the huge marketing machines behind even small manufacturers, their messages very one-sided and at times darn misleading! There were some studies I also read, must dig out their references later. I have to say it is a minefield, the pet food industry is HUGE, it seems everyone and their brother is jumping on this lucrative bandwagon. It does mean that there is conflicting information out there. I read this article re: chicken vs chicken meal, and thought it was interesting. I must admit though, I very rarely feed any type of commercial poultry to my dogs, but this is for personal reasons. Saying that I found the process interesting, and as I do feed some kibble, the "how" it's all put together quite enlightening. https://blueseal.com/tech-talks/chicken-and-chicken-meal-what-are-the-differences/
Nope, sorry It's saying that you need to be aware of what might be in your dog food and, like you, I would choose to avoid anything that could contain euthanised animals etc. Which would mean, for consumers in the US, avoiding "meat meal", "animal byproducts" and all that jazz. I would avoid those same ingredients in Europe not because I believe them to contain the same nasties, but because I don't believe them to be quality ingredients. Avoiding US manufacturers doesn't make sense if you're buying in Europe, because the laws don't apply where the manufacturer is based, but where the food is sold. So unless you're in the business of importing food from the other side of the pond, you need to be aware of the requirements on your own side. I'm definitely not demonising US manufacturers - other than those who use road kill and euthanised dogs in their foods, and they deserve it Which is exactly what we're doing - discussing your opinion. But when you state categorically that salmon meal and turkey meal "should be avoided at all costs" without any evidence to support that, then of course someone is going to come along and hold it up for scrutiny. It may be "just an opinion" but simply by opining on a public forum, you have to be prepared for someone to say "Hang on, what? Why?". I still don't have an answer to that "why?".
Without looking at any sources, my memory from researching is that a named source of meal e.g., salmon meal, turkey meal has removed the water content from the meat therefore resulting in higher protein. The food I feed (Canadian manufacturer) has a combination of named meal and meat. I chose our food specifically for the meal contents for higher protein, these are the first ingredients: Chicken meal, turkey meal, salmon meal, de-boned chicken, de-boned turkey, de-boned trout, potatoes, etc
Sorry everyone, hadnt replied yet as short for time this afternoon. The difference would be @Beanwood (thanks for the interesting article), @snowbunny and @QuinnM15, that I don't see "meat" as the same as stating "turkey" "chicken" "duck" etc..I think the word "meat" holds something other or beyond the 100% pure animal cut, and hence it showing as red (dangerous) in the food analyzer I posted. The same applies in my view to "meal", it's not clear to me that it would mean simply the "turkey" "chicken" or whatever animal cut minus the moisture or water (and hence that's why it is shown as yellow and questionable in the dog food analyzer). Interesting is that, as far as I am aware, in for example at least the Portuguese language you dont have the term "meal" in kibble ingredients lists..maybe it just got lost in the translation or unimportant or being precious to most.
It is not "just" an opinion, it is based on what I believe and have read and processed based on those readings, and am fine discussing with others and sharing opinions. As such, to share opinions on a public forum there is no need for underlining, capital letters, and the works.
And another interesting piece on meals, meats and rendering. https://m.petmd.com/dog/nutrition/evr_pet_food_for_your_pets_sake
Well, you're right - "meat" is different to a named source - that's what I've been saying I think this is just a simple misunderstanding and we're essentially singing from the same hymn sheet. Basically, as I've already said, "meat" can be pretty much anything, including undesirable things. Animal byproducts and, as discussed, in the United States, this can include euthanised pets, zoo animals, road kill and pretty much anything that once was an animal. But that is why we should avoid foods that state "meat" or "animal <whatever>" as an ingredient, because we can't know what it is. As opposed to "chicken", which we DO know is "the clean combination of flesh and skin with or without accompanying bone, derived from the parts or whole carcasses of poultry or a combination thereof, exclusive of feathers, heads, feet and entrails". https://www.aafco.org/consumers/what-is-in-pet-food And this is where the simple misunderstanding is. Because, chicken meal is "the dry rendered product from a combination of clean flesh and skin with or without accompanying bone, derived from the parts or whole carcasses of poultry or a combination thereof, exclusive of feathers, heads, feet and entrails". That is, exactly the same as the chicken above. Just dry rendered. It does not contain anything else at all. Just chicken. I know you don't appreciate my stylistic emphasis, but it's there simply for clarity, so I'm going to use it again. I'm going to underline the similarity between "chicken" and "chicken meal": Chicken: "the clean combination of flesh and skin with or without accompanying bone, derived from the parts or whole carcasses of poultry or a combination thereof, exclusive of feathers, heads, feet and entrails" Chicken meal: "the dry rendered product from a combination of clean flesh and skin with or without accompanying bone, derived from the parts or whole carcasses of poultry or a combination thereof, exclusive of feathers, heads, feet and entrails" So you can see, by definition, the meal is exactly the same as the chicken, just dry rendered. This is what I'm arguing, that your opinion is based on a simple misunderstanding about what meal is. It is no more and no less the original product, simply rendered and dried. "Meat" = bad. "Animal" = bad. "Meat meal" = bad. These are things we all agree on. Just re-read all the articles you have posted and keep referring to, none of which disagree with what I'm saying. If you can understand that the meal of a named protein doesn't have anything else added, then it'll all slot into place and we can move on into our happy place. With or without stylistic emphasis.
