# Earthborn Holistic Grain-Free Kibble anyone?



## Donna5503 (Mar 13, 2009)

Hi....I'm switching from TOTW (because of Diamond recalls & uncertainty of product) to Earthborn .....what does everyone who knows this brand think? Thanks :wave:


----------



## momof3 (Nov 24, 2007)

Check out dogfood anayalsis or dog food advisor and see how it rates.


----------



## Donna5503 (Mar 13, 2009)

Hi...yes I did check it out & it rates 6 stars - I'm just curious to talk w/people who have fed this food before  Thanks!


----------



## begemot (Feb 1, 2011)

I actually just ordered this food (Earthborn Holistic Primitive Natural Grain Free Dry Dog Food) to try. It has good ingredients and a good protein percentage (38%) which is the true test of how many fillers it has. It's not as good as, say, Orijen, but it's still good. It's better than TOTW, which has 25% or 32% protein, which makes it rather mediocre.

I always wonder why TOTW gets recommended so much on dogforums. Yeah, it's better than Science Diet, but that's setting the bar pretty low. There are better foods out there than TOTW. I guess it's because of the price.

I can't give any feedback yet because it hasn't gotten here, but on petfooddirect it has 4.4 out of 5 stars from 5 customer reviews.

ETA: TOTW high prairie and wetlands formulas have 32% protein, which I think is decent but not great. TOTW pacific stream and sierra mountain formulas have 25% protein, which is unacceptably low and the result of too much potato filler.


----------



## Shell (Oct 19, 2009)

Donna5503 said:


> Hi...yes I did check it out & it rates 6 stars - I'm just curious to talk w/people who have fed this food before  Thanks!


I feed the Earthborn Primitive Natural and have for about 3 years now. Plus using it for a former foster dog for 5 months (who had a very sensitive stomach and did well on this). I think it is a very good food. Their other grain-free choices are aslo good, but not quite as high on the meat content. It is made in the US, the fish is ethoxyquin-free, and the protein content is good. For the money, it is very high quality, since a bag is about 60% of the price of Orijen (around here at least). It even smells fine, most like meat than "dog food"

Some other people I know have tried it and while their dogs had very nice coats, it was a little rich for their dog's stomachs. But both were pit bulls known to have sensitive stomaches so they still recommend it to others to at least try.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

begemot said:


> I actually just ordered this food (Earthborn Holistic Primitive Natural Grain Free Dry Dog Food) to try. It has good ingredients and a good protein percentage (38%) which is the true test of how many fillers it has. It's not as good as, say, Orijen, but it's still good. It's better than TOTW, which has 25% or 32% protein, which makes it rather mediocre.
> 
> I always wonder why TOTW gets recommended so much on dogforums. Yeah, it's better than Science Diet, but that's setting the bar pretty low. There are better foods out there than TOTW. I guess it's because of the price.
> 
> ...


I think you're kind of overstating the difference between these foods. TOTW is a low cost food that is very comparable to some other highly recommended foods in terms of ingredients, protein, fat and carb percentages. I agree that Earthborn is a little better, but that doesn't make TOTW bad. If you're going to call it mediocre you're going to have to call many other well-respected foods mediocre as well, including Wellness Core, Acana, Canidae, Fromm and Innova. There are very few foods that are better for the price and price is no minor consideration for many.

Btw, protein percentage does not actually determine how much meat is in a food. If it did, foods like Beneful Healthy Harvest that have hardly any meat at all in them would have 0% protein, when they really have protein in the 20s. That's because of plant based proteins, which many would consider fillers. It explains why a food like Wysong Epigen can have so much protein (68%!!) but still have all kinds of fillers in them. Wysong only has 11% carbohydrate, but that doesn't mean a significant portion of the food isn't plant material. It just means they isolated only the proteins from many of the plant components of the food in order to hide them.


----------



## Willowy (Dec 10, 2007)

kafkabeetle said:


> I agree that Earthborn is a little better, but that doesn't make TOTW bad. If you're going to call it mediocre you're going to have to call many other well-respected foods mediocre as well, including Wellness Core, Acana, Canidae, Fromm and Innova.


 I agree with this. . .I won't look them all up to nitpick at, but someone recently posted a link to Acana. $75 for a food with potato flakes (which weigh nearly nothing) as the SECOND ingredient?!?!? I was not impressed. I've been looking at ingredient lists trying to decide which food I'd go with if Diamond foods end up with availability/price problems in this area, and most of them look pretty mediocre.


----------



## begemot (Feb 1, 2011)

kafkabeetle said:


> I think you're kind of overstating the difference between these foods. TOTW is a low cost food that is very comparable to some other highly recommended foods in terms of ingredients, protein, fat and carb percentages. I agree that Earthborn is a little better, but that doesn't make TOTW bad. If you're going to call it mediocre you're going to have to call many other well-respected foods mediocre as well, including Wellness Core, Acana, Canidae, Fromm and Innova. There are very few foods that are better for the price and price is no minor consideration for many.
> 
> Btw, protein percentage does not actually determine how much meat is in a food. If it did, foods like Beneful Healthy Harvest that have hardly any meat at all in them would have 0% protein, when they really have protein in the 20s. That's because of plant based proteins, which many would consider fillers. It explains why a food like Wysong Epigen can have so much protein (68%!!) but still have all kinds of fillers in them. Wysong only has 11% carbohydrate, but that doesn't mean a significant portion of the food isn't plant material. It just means they isolated only the proteins from many of the plant components of the food in order to hide them.


I'm not saying that TOTW is bad, and I know that meat isn't the only protein source in dog food -- but meat has more protein by weight than vegetable sources. I also am not advocating looking solely at the protein percentage -- the ingredients also should be taken into account.

I'm saying that TOTW is a middle-of-the-road food. It's certainly better than the grocery store brands, but it's not as good as Innova EVO, Orijen, BB Wilderness, Go! NATURAL Grain Free Endurance, Nature's Variety Instinct, and some others. The two TOTW formulas that are 32% protein are better than the two that are 25% protein, which I think is too low. Acana is about on par with the two higher protein TOTW formulas, but it's ridiculously overpriced. I think it's supposed to be Orijen's lower quality sub-brand, but the company forgot to drop the price as well.

I think that when people recommend TOTW to new people on here, they should probably differentiate between the formulas, because they're not equal.


----------



## FuSchniken (May 5, 2011)

Feeding it to my pups as we speak. They enjoy it, though one of my pups has slightly soft stools. Minimum of poo, good coat, resealable bag, grain free, and they enjoy it. It has been added to my rotation of brands.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

begemot said:


> I think that when people recommend TOTW to new people on here, they should probably differentiate between the formulas, because they're not equal.


That's probably a fair criticism, though I don't have a problem with the lower protein formulas. For many they are a good alternative for dogs that need grain free but can't handle a food that's too rich. I would also still recommend some foods that I feel are even lower quality (like 4Health, Whole Earth Farms, Diamond Naturals, etc) because not everyone can afford to feed the best. It's worth letting people know that even if you can't afford Orijen you can give your dogs something that at least has a fair amount of meat in it, and few chemicals or dyes. I know if I had a dog much larger than Sydney I would not be able to afford to be even as picky as I am.

Oh, and here's a comparison of the foods you just mentioned as being better than TOTW. If we're talking only about the two higher protein formulas, I think I would beg to differ that they offer anything significantly different or better than TOTW (with the exclusion of EVO and Orijen which are both extremely expensive). And considering all of these foods are more expensive (some significantly more), I think you could understand why this food has become so popular.

Taste of the Wild (High Prairie and Wetlands) - 36% protein, 20% fat, 36% carbohydrate.
Blue Buffalo Wilderness - 38, 17, 38
Innova Prime Grain Free - 39, 18, 35
Go! Grain Free - 38, 18, 36
Nature's Variety Instinct - 39, 24, 29


----------



## Inga (Jun 16, 2007)

My dogs have been eating the Earthborne Holistics for awhile now. They like it and thus far are doing well on it. I have it in my rotation. At this point, I am not removing the Taste of the Wild from my rotation either. I am just keeping a close eye.


----------



## begemot (Feb 1, 2011)

kafkabeetle said:


> Oh, and here's a comparison of the foods you just mentioned as being better than TOTW. If we're talking only about the two higher protein formulas, I think I would beg to differ that they offer anything significantly different or better than TOTW (with the exclusion of EVO and Orijen which are both extremely expensive). And considering all of these foods are more expensive (some significantly more), I think you could understand why this food has become so popular.
> 
> Taste of the Wild (High Prairie and Wetlands) - 36% protein, 20% fat, 36% carbohydrate.
> Blue Buffalo Wilderness - 38, 17, 38
> ...


Those are all totally different numbers than I have seen (also Innova Prime is different than EVO).

Here's what I have, which is the basis of my opinion:

Taste of the Wild, high prairie: *32*% protein, 18% fat
vs.
BB Wilderness: *42*% protein, 16% fat
Innova EVO: *42*% protein, 22% fat
Go! NATURAL grain free endurance: *42*% protein, 20% fat
Nature's Variety Instinct: *42*% protein, 22% fat


----------



## begemot (Feb 1, 2011)

kafkabeetle said:


> I would also still recommend some foods that I feel are even lower quality (like 4Health, Whole Earth Farms, Diamond Naturals, etc) because not everyone can afford to feed the best. It's worth letting people know that even if you can't afford Orijen you can give your dogs something that at least has a fair amount of meat in it, and few chemicals or dyes. I know if I had a dog much larger than Sydney I would not be able to afford to be even as picky as I am.


To be honest, I have a lot of expenses right now, and good food for my five pets plus the ferals I take care of is a big stretch. I justify it in part because I think it will ultimately be cheaper because their health will be (and has been) better than if they were eating a poor diet.

Maybe it's good to give people all the information, so they can decide what they can afford. A lot of grocery brands are much more expensive than what you've listed, so people are often probably used to spending more. Better food also means feeding less. I think, if I were new to this whole subject, I would want to know that there's a difference between Diamond Naturals and EVO. Dog food is a spectrum, and out of all the foods that are decent, there are better and worse choices. Which is another reason to note the differences among TOTW formulas, when recommending it.

Also, I don't totally understand what people mean when they say certain foods are "too rich" -- maybe I've been lucky with my dogs, but we're not talking about a diet of pâté and caviar here. Do people mean specific ingredients, eg chicken fat, that their dogs can't tolerate?

(ETA: I don't mean to imply that anyone who isn't feeding the top of the line foods is a bad owner -- everyone has to make these choices for themselves.)


----------



## Jacksons Mom (Mar 12, 2010)

I'd feed Royal Canin before I'd touch ANYTHING by Diamond (including TOTW).

Simply looking at protein percentages and numbers is NOT a way to judge food. Two foods could have 26% protein and 15% fat but yet be manufactured at completely different facilities, have totally different ingredients, etc. I think foods like Orijen are TOO much of a "good thing" if you will for a lot of pet dogs and there is no need to over-complicate things with a gazillion different meats in one formula and a ton of veggies and fruits. However I love Champion, and my dog has done the BEST out of any foods on Acana for sure.

For a dog who does horrendous on Orijen but does outstanding on, say, Royal Canin... then THAT food is superior for THAT dog.

I'd feed Fromm or Canine Caviar over a lot of these so called "6 star" foods. And I'm becoming more and more aware that these ratings sites are taken like it's the Bible or something, LOL. "Oh I can't feed this food because it's only 3 star!" but the site is written by a human dentist, and places no thought as to who is manufacturing the food, how many FDA warnings they've had, how many recalls, etc, etc. He only looks at high protein and a bunch of different meats listed which may NOT be ideal for ALL dogs.

I do agree that placing TOTW in the same category as Champion Foods is kind of a joke. But hey, if the dog does better on TOTW than Acana, so be it.

As for Earthborn - I actually just bought a bag of it the other day for my dads dogs to share, and Jackson has been eating it when he's over there and is doing fine - no loose stools problems or gas or anything. Only thing to look out for, as I've recently found out, is the ash content is pretty high in quite a few of their formulas ... just something to look out for as apparently it does take a toll on kidneys after a while (NOT the high protein -- but the ash). It's the only thing turning me off from feeding the food more permanently. Otherwise I thought I had hit jackpot, as he LOVED the buffalo-based formula (Great Plains Feast, I think). But it's something to think about, as I am recently learning about ash content in kibbles. But still may consider it, at least for a while. I had a 1lb sample bag of Great Plains that he loved.


----------



## kafkabeetle (Dec 4, 2009)

begemot said:


> *Maybe it's good to give people all the information, so they can decide what they can afford.* A lot of grocery brands are much more expensive than what you've listed, so people are often probably used to spending more. Better food also means feeding less. I think, if I were new to this whole subject, I would want to know that there's a difference between Diamond Naturals and EVO. Dog food is a spectrum, and out of all the foods that are decent, there are better and worse choices. Which is another reason to note the differences among TOTW formulas, when recommending it.


...??

That's what I personally try to do, and it's the only reason I even responded to this thread. This dialogue has probably helped someone, whether they agree with either of us or not. I also think every thread I've ever seen about affordable food has included all of that information about not needing to feed as much "better" food as crappy foods etc etc. I really don't think anyone gets mislead here. A lot of ideas on nutrition are tossed around every single day. If people want "all the information" it is absolutely available here, so I find that comment kind of strange. Like people are being purposefully misled. It is important for EVERY owner to take in all the information they can in order to make their own decision on what matters to THEM.



begemot said:


> To be honest, I have a lot of expenses right now, and good food for my five pets plus the ferals I take care of is a big stretch. I justify it in part because I think it will ultimately be cheaper because their health will be (and has been) better than if they were eating a poor diet.


And it's all well and good to say you make dog top quality food a priority in your life but the fact is that you don't know anyone else's income or expenses and it's not up to you to decide whether or not someone else has their priorities straight. If someone didn't care about feeding something good they would opt for some generic food...I mean something like TOTW certainly isn't cheap, it's just cheap_er_ than some other foods. Idk, I'm finding the assumptions in this thread kind of irritating, so I probably won't be back.

And Jackson's Mom, I wasn't trying to imply that the ONLY thing that matters is the protein/fat/carb percentages. But to me it is a very important consideration among things like the quality of ingredients and lack of harmful chemicals and dyes. I think it's very easy to misrepresent the quality of a given food if you ignore the percentages entirely. Personally, I would (and do) absolutely feed TOTW over something like Royal Canin. Different strokes, I guess.



Jacksons Mom said:


> I'd feed Fromm or Canine Caviar over a lot of these so called "6 star" foods. And I'm becoming more and more aware that these ratings sites are taken like it's the Bible or something, LOL. "Oh I can't feed this food because it's only 3 star!" but the site is written by a human dentist, and places no thought as to who is manufacturing the food, how many FDA warnings they've had, how many recalls, etc, etc. He only looks at high protein and a bunch of different meats listed which may NOT be ideal for ALL dogs.


Oh, and DFA is just a database, so I don't see how the creator's qualifications really matter. To me it's just a good way to quickly compare foods where all of the factual information is in one place. If someone is treating it like a bible they aren't using it as it was intended to be used and that is their issue, not a flaw inherent in the site itself.


----------



## begemot (Feb 1, 2011)

kafkabeetle said:


> ...??
> 
> That's what I personally try to do, and it's the only reason I even responded to this thread. This dialogue has probably helped someone, whether they agree with either of us or not. I also think every thread I've ever seen about affordable food has included all of that information about not needing to feed as much "better" food as crappy foods etc etc. I really don't think anyone gets mislead here. A lot of ideas on nutrition are tossed around every single day. If people want "all the information" it is absolutely available here, so I find that comment kind of strange. Like people are being purposefully misled. It is important for EVERY owner to take in all the information they can in order to make their own decision on what matters to THEM.


I'm sorry for the confusion, I wasn't directing that comment ("maybe it's good to give people all the information, so they can decide what they can afford") at you, as if to imply that you are NOT giving people all the information, or implying that people are purposefully being misled. I was just saying that was my general take-away. 

I'm still kind of scratching my head over the different numbers. I may have to do some fact checking. I hope my information isn't wrong.



> And it's all well and good to say you make dog top quality food a priority in your life but the fact is that you don't know anyone else's income or expenses and it's not up to you to decide whether or not someone else has their priorities straight. If someone didn't care about feeding something good they would opt for some generic food...I mean something like TOTW certainly isn't cheap, it's just cheap_er_ than some other foods. Idk, I'm finding the assumptions in this thread kind of irritating, so I probably won't be back.


I'm also sorry for the misunderstanding here. I absolutely do not think that everyone must do as I do, or else they don't have their priorities straight. As I said in the ETA, everyone has to make these choices for themselves, according to what they think is best for their pet and their finances. No one should be shamed because of the food they get. When I talked about my own choices, I wasn't trying to say they were better, I was just explaining my thought process. I'm sorry if I offended.


----------



## InkedMarie (Mar 11, 2009)

I'll be adding Earthborn to my rotation for Ginger, maybe Boone too. I used to recommend TOTW to people who have itchy, ear infection prone or dogs with suspected food allergies and /or sensitivities and don't have alot of money for food. No more, it'll be Earthborn. For myself, I like a food with alot of meat for my dogs.


----------

