# protein level for puppies



## Bones333 (Sep 30, 2009)

I was wondering if 34% protein was too high for a 7 month old boxer mix puppy who weighs about 43-45lbs. I would like to switch him from Blue Buffalo puppy to the new grain free Wilderness formula. I think he may be having a bit of an issue with grains.


----------



## iim7v7im7 (Feb 1, 2010)

No, it is not too high. Just remember to switch over slowly over 7-10 days.

e.g. 3 days 75% old/25% new, 3 days 50% old/50% new, 3 days 25% old/75% new


----------



## Jordan S (Nov 21, 2009)

No it isn't. People have gotten the protein thing confused. The problem with some high protein foods is the CALCIUM. When you raise the meat content is hard not to raise calcium. So just get a high protein food tailored towards pups. Like Orijen puppy. 
If the Wilderness has less than 1.5% calcium then i'd say you could go for that too though.

And like they said before, switch gradually.


----------



## Labsnothers (Oct 10, 2009)

Unlike calcium, puppies can burn excess protein for energy or excrete it. 

Large breed puppies are better off on a less rich ALS food. It is no one nutrient, just the whole balance. Even the large breed puppy chows are formulated for faster growth than is good for large and giant breeds. 

At least it is usually easy to keep Boxers lean. Lab puppies usually will eat more than is good for them and look for more. See http://www.longliveyourdog.com/twoplus/RateYourDog.aspx


----------



## GreatDaneMom (Sep 21, 2007)

ok wait...no... theres some wrong info here.
if you are worried about the rate of growth in a puppy your factors ARE protein, calcium, phosphorus, and calories!

Jordan S- many puppy formulas actually INCREASE the speed of growth, not slow it down as they should. 

iim7- actually, yes. it is a bit high. protein levels for pups should be kept lower. 27% is really the max you should go. 

im not just spitting out crud. ive researched very much into puppy growth and development and the effects food has on it. after almost losing my dane to HOD, i became obsessed with it and wanted to prevent from ever having to deal with that again. i have also helped many other people who had dogs with HOD get through it.


----------



## Bones333 (Sep 30, 2009)

I have been doing some further foods research and pricing today since my original post. I may go with the TOTW grain free instead. It has less protein and costs quite a bit less. Not that cost is a big issue, but I would rather play it safe with the protein level for now, the cost is just a bonus. The only thing is, I cannot find out what the calcium level or phosphorus level is for the TOTW. If these are things I should be concerned about, it would be nice to have that information.


----------



## iim7v7im7 (Feb 1, 2010)

Hi,

I am familiar with the calcium and phosphorus studies conducted with Great Dane pups showing 3.3% calcium having adverse effects on growth in large breeds. I am also familiar with high calorie diets and putting too much weight on a young pup impacting growth and skeletal development (also with Danes).

The papers that I have read cite _caloric intake_ and NOT _protein content _as being the causitive factor. In _Nutritional Influences on Hip Dysplasia, Herman A.W. Hazewinkel, DVM, PhD, DECVS, DECVCN, Dept. Clinical Sciences of Companion Animals, Utrecht University, The Netherlands_, 17 Great Dane pups, 7 wk of age, were divided into three groups. During 18 weeks each group received dry food containing 32%, 23% or 15% protein (on dry matter basis).

No differences were found among the three groups for the height at the shoulder. Significant differences were found between the 32% and 15% groups for body weight and plasma albumin and among all three groups for plasma urea. The study concluded that the differences in protein intake did NOT affect the occurrence of disturbed skeletal development in young Great Danes, and that an etiologic role for dietary protein in the development of osteochondrosis in dogs is unlikely.

Managing caloric intake is easy and manageable. Which article siting 27% protein are you referring to, I'd like to read it? 

Thanks,

Bob




GreatDaneMom said:


> ok wait...no... theres some wrong info here.
> if you are worried about the rate of growth in a puppy your factors ARE protein, calcium, phosphorus, and calories!
> 
> Jordan S- many puppy formulas actually INCREASE the speed of growth, not slow it down as they should.
> ...


----------



## GreatDaneMom (Sep 21, 2007)

17 dogs is not near enough of a group to make any kind of study out of.....

by the way may i point out that as the protein increases typically so does the fat content- which means calories also rise!!! so in turn, YES protein content DOES need to be watched

and its funny THAT is the study you chose to display as your "papers" you read, because if you google the subject, thats the second link that comes up....


----------



## upendi'smommy (Nov 12, 2008)

Bones333 said:


> I have been doing some further foods research and pricing today since my original post. I may go with the TOTW grain free instead. It has less protein and costs quite a bit less. Not that cost is a big issue, but I would rather play it safe with the protein level for now, the cost is just a bonus. The only thing is, I cannot find out what the calcium level or phosphorus level is for the TOTW. If these are things I should be concerned about, it would be nice to have that information.


For TOTW High Prairie I believe the calcium level is 2.1% MAX, which is high for puppies. We're currently feeding Wellness until I feel Mina is completely done growing before we switch to TOTW as I've had great results with it in the past.


----------



## tonisaysss (Jan 18, 2010)

i would genuinely avoid grain free foods up until a year old or more. as stated, they normally have higher calcium/phosphorous levels that will result in the early onset of joint/bone/hip problems.

like greatdanemom has said, an all life stages food would be your best bet until he's old enough to go grain free.


----------



## sagira (Nov 5, 2009)

tonisaysss said:


> i would genuinely avoid grain free foods up until a year old or more. as stated, they normally have higher calcium/phosphorous levels that will result in the early onset of joint/bone/hip problems.
> 
> like greatdanemom has said, an all life stages food would be your best bet until he's old enough to go grain free.


I agree. Wellness has all life stages that are good protein, calcium and phosphorus levels. For my breed, the Llewellin Setter, I've been told to stick to 26% protein or less, and fat 14-16%. I'm keeping the calcium levels at or below 1.5% and phosphorus around 0.9%.


----------



## iim7v7im7 (Feb 1, 2010)

Miss,

You are mistaken about me. 

I happen to work in Pharmaceutical R&D and have work access to veterinary literature databases (my company is also among the largest animal health companies so they provide access to those data bases, while I work in the area of Human health). This is where and how I researched. The fact that google will provide you an abstract is not surprising. Google Scholar and PubMed are actually good sources to identify papers but you usually will need to pay to get the actual paper.

Yes, I agree that 17 dogs is an extremely small study (to be clear that means n=17 dogs per arm and not a total of seventeen)to base an absolute conclusion on, but this was the best controlled study that I could find that compared levels of protein 1x, 1.5x and 2x. Dr. Hazewinkel's clinical studies (he also studied calcium/phosphorus) are among the most cited studies with Great Danes as the animal model. Animal studies are typically small and not always statistically powered like late stage human studies (too expensive). What is also unclear is how the magnitude of effect tracks across breeds. Great Danes are chosen in growth studies as "worst case" candidates. 

As I said in my earlier posting, caloric intake does drive growth rates whether you have a 25% protein or 40% protein. You need to understand your dog's age, metabolic requirements and the kcal/kg and cup of the kibble and manage intake responsibly. This is an entirely different matter than protein content. 

I repeat, what studies are you referring to that cite 27% protein and are the basis of your concerns? 





GreatDaneMom said:


> 17 dogs is not near enough of a group to make any kind of study out of.....
> 
> by the way may i point out that as the protein increases typically so does the fat content- which means calories also rise!!! so in turn, YES protein content DOES need to be watched
> 
> and its funny THAT is the study you chose to display as your "papers" you read, because if you google the subject, thats the second link that comes up....


----------



## Bones333 (Sep 30, 2009)

I am not too worried about Boone packing on the pounds. As you can see from the photo below, he is pretty long and lean. I would say eating is not his top priority. He is more into long walks and playtime, or just checking out what is going on in the neighborhood.


----------



## croll326 (Jul 25, 2009)

Dogs excrete protein? How can I tell if my pup is doing that? He is not on Instinct Duck & Turkey.


----------



## Labsnothers (Oct 10, 2009)

I really don't how you would tell that, I guess run a stool sample through a chromatagraph or something. Chances are, whatever you are feeding has all the amino acids your dog needs and more available. The body deals with what is can't use one way or another.


----------



## Purley (Sep 7, 2009)

When my granddaughter and I took their dog to our vet's and told him that Cooper had diarrhea all the time, he told us to switch from the Orijen puppy food. I am pretty sure he said that it was the high protein content that was causing the diarrhea. Ok he HAD Parvo, but this was when he was well again.

He switched dog foods and the dog has been fine since. However, because my son works shifts and the Medi-Cal food only comes from the vets, its hard for him to get there when the office is open. When I suggested switching to a food from the pet store down the road that is open seven days a week and evenings - he said he wanted to keep on the Medi-Cal because the other food caused diarrhea. I said there are loads of other foods that don't have high protein. 

But maybe I misheard the vet and it wasn't the protein giving the dog diarrhea.

Was I wrong - does a high protein food cause diarrhea in some dogs??


----------



## HersheyPup (May 22, 2008)

One of my dogs, my German Shepherd, can't handle any kibble that has higher than 27% protein. She gets diarrhea and shows obvious discomfort. However, she can eat raw meat and bones without any problems. Something about the richness of the high protein kibble doesn't agree with her. I can mix a little high protein kibble with a lower protein kibble and she will be fine, but on it's own it upsets her system.


----------



## tonisaysss (Jan 18, 2010)

Purley said:


> Was I wrong - does a high protein food cause diarrhea in some dogs??


ABSOLUTELY.

my pup could NOT handle blue buffalo whatsoever (like 29% protein) and i know many have had the same problem. i have her on innova adult food now (she's 6 months) because it contains low calcium compared to puppy food. puppy food is very very rich!


----------



## iim7v7im7 (Feb 1, 2010)

As long as folks are contributing their own anectdotal experiences, I will add mine. My 11 week old Australian Shepherd puppy is doing fine on _Orijen Puppy_, which is >40% protein and >20% fat. His breeder did have him on _Fromm Gold Adult_ which is >24% protein and >16% fat (she believed the puppy formula was too high in protein at 27%). We have transitioned him over 9 days by blending the two. He did have loose stool at first, but that was due to _coccidosis _which has been treated. His bowel movements are firm and normal. He is doing well on this food (so far).


----------



## Purley (Sep 7, 2009)

Seems there is no answer. Some say too much protein gives them diarrhea; some say its calcium. 

Of course you hate to buy a bag of dog food and it doesn't agree with the dog -- too expensive.


----------



## tonisaysss (Jan 18, 2010)

orijen puppy food contains around 1.8% calcium (aim for 1.2% to 1.5% at max) which is high for a large breed dog. high calcium/phosphorous also leads to crystals in the urine and UTIs.

i wouldn't say calcium causes diarrhea. the issue with calcium is that is accelerates growth rates which leads to the early onset of joint/hip/bone problems. greatdanemom knows very much about this subject having been through it; i would discuss it with her.

some puppies can handle excess protein (28%+) but i do not have a need to give it to me dogs. my puppy did not do well with such a rich food so i do not intend on trying it again. *everything *in moderation is my motto. i avoid anything over 25% protein for my dog because she is still growing and larger.


----------



## iim7v7im7 (Feb 1, 2010)

The most cited study _(Hazewinkel et al.)_ in young Great Danes demonstrated that levels of 3.3% caused excess absorption and retention. The control group were fed 1.1% levels of calcium. Why is 1.5% (which is <1/2x the levels fed by Hazewinkel's dogs)a maximum? It seems quite close to the control group's levels. _Orijen Puppy _has ~1/2 the calcium concentration (1.8%) that was shown to elicit an effect. Additionally, Great Danes represent a worse case and it is unclear how these results tranpose to smaller breeds.

What data supports this? I am curious as to your souce. I'd like to read more.

Thanks


----------



## Bones333 (Sep 30, 2009)

Where can I find out the calcium levels for the TOTW foods? I think I am going to go with the Pacific Stream, as it has 25% protein as opposed to 32% in the other two formulas. I would like to know what the calcium level is. I don't see it on the bag or on their website.


----------



## tonisaysss (Jan 18, 2010)

Bones333 said:


> Where can I find out the calcium levels for the TOTW foods? I think I am going to go with the Pacific Stream, as it has 25% protein as opposed to 32% in the other two formulas. I would like to know what the calcium level is. I don't see it on the bag or on their website.


taste of the wild: calcium 2.1 ph 1.4
pacific stream: calcium 1.9 ph 1.1
wetlands: calcium 2.1 ph 1.4 

imo, pacific stream is still too high. as suggested before, an ALS food would be ideal for a LBD. grain-free is NOT the way to go with a growing pup. UTIs are a big problem w/ grain free in pups as well.


----------



## iim7v7im7 (Feb 1, 2010)

UTIs are typically caused by poor hygiene or lengthened residence time between urinations allowing a bacterial flora to muliply. How does this relate at all to protein content in food?

I am confused by this. Can you explain?



tonisaysss said:


> grain-free is NOT the way to go with a growing pup. UTIs are a big problem w/ grain free in pups as well.


----------



## GreatDaneMom (Sep 21, 2007)

Studies done by Hazewinkel et al, Goedegbuure et al and Goodman et al have concluded that the minimum safe level of calcium is 0.8%. Their studies all used very high levels of calcium (3.3% and 2.7% as high levels) known to encourage an increased incidence of disease. These high levels were also above the maximum standards of AAFCO (American Association of Feed Control Officials). There was a large gap in the levels of calcium in their test diets (up to 2.5 %). It was also concluded by the presenters in the symposium that no safe maximum level was established for large and giant breed puppies. It is obvious that further studies are needed in order to establish the maximum safe level.


----------



## Bones333 (Sep 30, 2009)

Forgive my ignorance, but I am not sure what to conclude from the above. Also, is there a big difference in risk between 1.5% calcium and 1.9%?


----------



## iim7v7im7 (Feb 1, 2010)

Hi,

Thanks for following up on the calcium levels. I also have this study at work. What I took away from the study conclusions and how it applied was as follows:

(1) No safe maximum level was established due to the size of the study, just that levels at ~3% had adverse effects on Great Danes and presumably other Large and Giant breed dogs. If you look at the data in the study, it is not refective of a sharp dose response.

(2) AAFCO recommendation of 1.0-2.5% is generally acceptable but I agree that with a giant breed staying towards the lower end is advisable.

(3) How control of calcium levels apply to smaller breed dogs like the original poster's Boxer (50-70 lb.) or my Australian Shepherd (50-65 lb.) have also not been established.

(4) AAFCO labeling requirements allow + 0.5% for calcium when expressed as a minimum. Most dog foods do not present min and max. Most state min and some present a max or with no qualifier at all. For example Canidae ALS lists min. 1.2%, so there can be as much as 1.7% in that kibble. So while this looks lower there is no assurance that it is.

(5) _Orijen Puppy_ lists a min. of 1.6% and a max 1.8%, a specification tighter than AAFCO requirements so I tend to trust it (Wellness does this as well). Additionally, if you read their ingredient list the chicken, salmon, turkey, walleye are all deboned to control calcium levels because the chicken, turkey, herring and salmon meals will all have ground bone content providing calcium. So the company is aware and has taken active measures to control levels. I know of no other kibble that does this.

So I have concluded for non-large/giant breed puppies (like the poster's puupy or my own) a 1.6-1.8% level of calcium is likely a safe level. 



GreatDaneMom said:


> Studies done by Hazewinkel et al, Goedegbuure et al and Goodman et al have concluded that the minimum safe level of calcium is 0.8%. Their studies all used very high levels of calcium (3.3% and 2.7% as high levels) known to encourage an increased incidence of disease. These high levels were also above the maximum standards of AAFCO (American Association of Feed Control Officials). There was a large gap in the levels of calcium in their test diets (up to 2.5 %). It was also concluded by the presenters in the symposium that no safe maximum level was established for large and giant breed puppies. It is obvious that further studies are needed in order to establish the maximum safe level.


----------



## Bones333 (Sep 30, 2009)

Thanks so much for this information. That was very informative and helpful. It can get quite overwhelming trying to sort through all this stuff. I really want to do right by Boone. Our previous dogs (two mini dachshunds) were fed Eukanuba because I didn't know that much about food differences and I feel they had some health problems that may have been helped had I known better.


----------



## sagira (Nov 5, 2009)

iim7v7im7 said:


> Hi,
> 
> Thanks for following up on the calcium levels. I also have this study at work. What I took away from the study conclusions and how it applied was as follows:
> 
> ...


I think I feel smarter just reading that post. Thank you very much. Very relevant to me.


----------

