A recent article from Render Magazine (rendering industry publication) gives us some insights on what industry thinks about rendered pet food ingredients and perhaps some insight to the future plans of pet food industry groups.
The recent article titled “Rendered Products Remain Quality Feed Ingredients” published at RenderMagazine.com reports on the recent International Rendering Symposium. Greg Aldrich, pet food industry consultant (this article stated he is affiliated with Kansas State University), was quoted saying “Dogs and cats love rendered animal fats and proteins.” “Rendered protein meal represents a substantial portion of the high quality protein and fat in modern companion animal diets,” Aldrich said. “They are commonly included at five to 40 percent and can contribute in excess of 85 percent of the dietary protein and 30 percent of the dietary fat.”
The article continues: “National Renderers Association (NRA) President Tom Cook described the rendering industry as the essential gatekeeper for the health of people and the planet. In the United States and Canada, 250 facilities process 137 million pounds of raw material each day, enough to fill 10,000 Dallas Cowboy football stadiums annually. He broke down the amount of material from each animal not consumed for human food in the United States as 49 percent of the live weight of a cow, 44 percent of a hog, 37 percent of a chicken, and 36 percent of a turkey.”
Dr. Aldrich shared a clue of what should be in store for future AAFCO meetings: “As to the on-going battle of classifying some pet food ingredients as “by-products,” which, by definition, are secondary products produced in addition to the principal product, he noted that if the ingredient name cannot be changed, then the pet food industry will need to educate consumers that these ingredients are just fine to use in pet foods.”
“If the ingredient name cannot be changed…” – there is our clue. A hint from Dr. Aldrich that the pet food ingredient by-product might be up for a name change. Perhaps something that will further confuse (lie to) unknowing petsumers?
I’ve noticed recent industry reporting referring to by-products as “co-products”. No matter what the term is (by- or co-), the issue that is of most concern for pet food consumers is existing ingredient definitions, diseased tissues or tissue sourced from 4D animals (dead, diseased, dying and disabled) animals are lumped into the by-product category as well.
AAFCO has forever balked at defining human grade pet food ingredients; this attitude is antiquated thinking. Pet food consumers want and deserve to know the quality of the ingredients in their pet food/treat purchases. It is real simple…label pet food ingredients honestly. USDA inspected and approved meats and by-products or non-USDA inspected and approved. Then let the pet food consumer decide which they prefer for their pet.
Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,
Susan Thixton
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
What’s in Your Pet’s Food?
Is your dog or cat eating risk ingredients? Chinese imports? Petsumer Report tells the ‘rest of the story’ on over 2500 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. www.PetsumerReport.com
2013 List
Susan’s List of trusted pet foods. Click Here
Have you read Buyer Beware? Click Here
Cooking for pets made easy, Dinner PAWsible
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
Mary Anne Latham Kennard
May 1, 2013 at 4:59 pm
My question is, how do they know that dogs & cats “love rendered animal protein & fats”? Did they ask a group of dogs & cas their opinion? And, did they answer? I don’t think so. There’s the first lie right there.
Ellie
May 1, 2013 at 6:16 pm
I think it was the Hills information site I was reading that was trying to assure consumers that by products were actually very healthy things for animals to eat. I suppose that is part of their “education” of pet owners.
One pet owner I know is totally convinced by her pet food company and her vet that the commercial brand of food that she is feeding her pets is totally good and healthy feed. At one time she was concerned about corn being one of the main ingredients in her pet’s food but after doing her research she is satisfied with the ingredient list and avidly defends the company and ingredients.
I can only shake my head and be amazed at how easily consumers trust companies to grade their own report card. However, what can you say when vets support such things? Pointing out that a vet gets very little nutritional training during their education process and that their schools are largely subsidized by the pet food companies is met with suspicion. I suppose it is easier to decide to trust the product that costs less and is easier to obtain.
Tammy Baugh
May 3, 2013 at 11:43 pm
I almost didn’t read this. Since the very term By Product, knowing what that is is sooooo disgusting to me. Whenever I grocery shop I nearly heave in the meat department, still knowing I need to eat it. But I know what they did to it, how can I force myself too? Privately gagging to myself and out loud with actual tears in my eyes begging my husband not to make me pick out some meat for the week. This is an experience we live through each and every week. And it’s just what we have to eat. Now about the pets…Why is it we are only hearing about 4-D? When it is actually 5-D? Don’t you know not only dead, diseased,dyeing and disabled but also drugged animals and their parts? I am just wanting to know since it is my understanding that this is what the Ds actually stand for. And this is what By Product meats what all they can contain. Not nescessarily that they all do, but yet they may and still pass AVCO standards. Please forgive my spelling. I have to go to sleep.
Pingback: Pet Food Bi-Product Ingredients |
Peter
May 14, 2013 at 8:57 pm
Well, this is an art that pet food manufacturers have turned into a science. Look at the ingredients list of the food you bought: does it have “brewers rice”? This is just a made-up term, intended to make broken chips of rice (garbage, which cannot be used for any other purpose than be dumped into animal feed and pet food) sound appealing.
Renderers do indeed need to work tirelessly to combat the growing awareness of what they produce and how they make it. In Susan’s book, there is a section where an employee of a rendering plant describes the environment, conditions, and processes at the plant. It is at once horrifying, and then revolting. I cannot imagine anyone having read it, being willing afterwards, to feed food with rendered ingredients to their pets.
I think that use of the term “lie” is appropriate. Unfortunately, you’d be amazed at how many times we’ve asked people what food they use, and puzzle and scrunch their brows and can’t come up with what they buy and feed their pets. AAFCO and the pet food agribussinesses will be counting on duping them even further. But that won’t work for everyone.