This was a question sent to me by a reader. And my answer is…no and yes. Here’s why.
AAFCO – Association of American Feed Control Officials – is a non-government association made up of government employees (state and a few federal). The key words to recognize in order to understand what AAFCO is are ‘Feed Control Officials’. For the most part, AAFCO is comprised of state Feed Control Officials (State Department of Agriculture representatives) that work together to develop future laws governing the food animals consume (feed). The work of AAFCO includes guidance and cooperation with FDA as well.
AAFCO doesn’t ‘approve’ pet foods. Actually AAFCO itself doesn’t approve or reject or have any regulatory authority at all. The confusion as to why many pet food consumers think AAFCO certifies or approves pet foods comes from the statement found on many pet food labels: ‘XYZ Pet Food is formulated to meet the nutrition levels established by the AAFCO Food Nutritional Profiles’. In many states (but not all), in order for a pet food to be labeled as a ‘food’ it is required by law to meet the nutritional requirements established by AAFCO. It would be individual states – not AAFCO – that basically ‘approves’ a pet food (or approves it to be classified as a food instead of classified for supplemental feeding).
AAFCO’s ‘provides complete and balanced nutrition’ statement that appears on most pet food labels is perceived by many (and marketed by many) as the level of excellence – what all pet foods should be measured by. But, here are some problems with that…
1. The AAFCO system is feed, not food. In the Feed Control Official world, feed is what animals eat, food is what humans eat. Per FDA Compliance Policies and AAFCO established model bills, feed is allowed to contain euthanized animals or pesticide contaminated ingredients – food cannot. AAFCO has a separate division that is specific to pet food, but Feed Control Officials still consider pet food a feed. Most states (ok…all states) don’t take issue with a pet food (aka pet feed) containing protein sourced from euthanized animals or pesticide laden grains/vegetables. Even though the ‘stuff’ that pets consume is titled ‘pet food’ it is considered ‘pet feed’ and it is held to regulations of feed (not regulations of food).
2. The nutritional requirements established by AAFCO adopted by many states (but not all) were (again) based on feed quality of ingredients, not food quality of ingredients. And these nutritional requirements were established for highly processed foods like kibble. This can pose a problem for pet foods that are made from food quality ingredients and are lightly processed. It’s known as bioavailability – how well the body absorbs a nutrient. Mother Nature immediately understands what food is and utilizes the nutrition found in that food easily. To the contrary, Mother Nature might not easily utilize a synthetic supplement (man made instead of Mother Nature made) or a nutrient sourced from a decaying, euthanized animal protein. Mother Nature can readily absorb the nutrients from a lightly processed food, but she undoubtedly is challenged to utilize the nutrients in a highly processed food. But in pet food regulations, it is a one size fits all nutritional requirement. The AAFCO system does not acknowledge that a pet might utilize nutrition received from food better than it would from a feed or synthetic supplements.
Some pet foods that use whole food ingredients (not feed ingredients), recognize if they met the AAFCO one size fits all nutritional requirements, their food could actually be toxic to some pets (with some nutrients). These companies choose to forgo the ‘meets the AAFCO nutritional requirements for complete and balanced nutrition’ label claim. Does that make these foods inferior? Absolutely not. In many cases, the manufacturers of these human grade/whole ‘food’ pet foods provide superior nutrition. They are food – exactly what Mother Nature understands as the perfect method to provide the pet with required nutrition.
But does that mean all pet foods that do not meet the AAFCO nutritional requirement for complete and balanced nutrition are superior nutrition for our pets? No, it doesn’t. Because there are no regulations specific to food grade ingredients or whole food nutrition for cats and dogs – undoubtedly some of these pet foods could be lacking in some nutrients needed by our pets. The key for pet food consumers to know the difference is to talk with the manufacturer. If your pet’s food does not meet AAFCO nutrient profiles, ask the manufacturer why. In many cases, you’ll learn amazing things about the pet food – why the company chose not to follow the AAFCO path.
3. AAFCO’s established complete and balanced nutrition provided daily is not how Mother Nature intended. Animals (and humans) are designed to be ‘seasonal eaters’. The Cleveland Clinic defines seasonal eating as: “Eating foods when nature produces them is what people the world over have done naturally through most of history, before mega-supermarkets dotted the landscape and processed foods become ubiquitous. Seasonal eating is also a cornerstone of several ancient and holistic medical traditions, which view it as integral to good health and emotional balance.”
AAFCO’s established requirement that animal food should contain 100% of necessary nutrients the animal would need each day would be more suited for mass production of livestock animals (cattle, pigs, chickens) which have a short life span (from months to a few years). These 100% daily nutrient requirements were put in place decades ago because the livestock industry needed the animals to grow quickly and be healthy enough to be processed (slaughtered) as food. Today, there is no time to allow mass produced livestock the opportunity to eat seasonally. Pets (cats and dogs) are expected to live long lives, thus the need for daily balanced nutrition is not the same as it is for mass produced livestock. But…in the one size fits all world of AAFCO – the same nutritional requirements met daily in feed is also required of pet food.
So, back to the question sent to me by a consumer – Should my pet’s food be AAFCO approved? Yes and No.
In that the AAFCO established nutrient requirements only fit one segment of pet food (feed grade ingredients, mostly high processed) – yes, meeting the complete and balanced claim with pet foods made with feed grade ingredients and pet food that are highly processed is probably better than nothing.
But due to the concerns explained in this article, no – I do not believe a pet’s food is required to meet the complete and balanced nutritional requirements established by AAFCO. What I believe (personal opinion) is the most important thing to consider when feeding our pets is that they be fed food (USDA inspected and approved for human consumption) – not feed (can be rejected for use in human food, euthanized animals, chemical and pesticide laden).
I believe AAFCO’s complete and balanced can be a benefit or it can be a curse. There is no simple answer.
One last thought…if the AAFCO complete and balanced claim was really the level of excellence it is proclaimed to be, then why is obesity in pets epidemic? Why do 50% of all dogs die of cancer? Why do so many pets have skin issues or kidney disease or an array of other common diseases?
Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,
Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food
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
2014 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
Josh
July 8, 2014 at 3:46 pm
This is a great article! You explain it in a very clear manner that I think most people will understand (those who may not do this kind of research on a regular basis). You boiled it down to the most important points and I feel if I recommend it to people to read, most will actually finish it and walk away with some valuable knowledge. Once again, great article!
JOSH-
Fearless K9
Debbie Daniel
July 8, 2014 at 3:50 pm
Well said and so glad you put this out. I have never been a fan of any of those companies. AAFCO, FDA, USDA…etc etc. Even human foods arent regulated. Us humans are dying of cancer every day. we have to be vigilante and find a way around all the garbage in foods. fast foods,..a big no no. A Raw diet from pasture/grass fed animals is the best…that means humans and pets. We need to rid the FDA of everyone in it and start new with good people that CARE and CAN do there jobs. Apparently this country stopped caring a number of years ago. It saddens me and makes me furious too.
elizabeth
July 8, 2014 at 5:59 pm
Well, Susan, as you know, I’ve been venturing into the realm of homemade dog food (I don’t have confidence enough to do catfood yet), and it’s been hit and miss, but granted he’s a picky dog. But, I think, too, it was a shock to his system to be eating real, natural food. To transition him, and as this article addresses, my concern about being brainwashed that his diet’s nutritionally incomplete (vitamins, other nutrients), I have been alternating his old food with my home cooking. So far, I feel better about it, and I am getting better. I find the cost is no different, and can be cheaper than processed food as I get better at making batches and freezing for later use. I am requesting taurine as my Christmas present, and a food processor, so I can spend Sundays making everybody’s food for the following week, and breaking free from AAFCO and the 4 Ds and other disgusting things in commercial pet food.
Angela Himmeroder
July 8, 2014 at 6:20 pm
I don’t really care about the American
AAFCO regulating our food in Canada, I think each country should monitor and regulate their own pet foods. With ingredients sourced from the country where the food is made
TNReedy
July 8, 2014 at 7:44 pm
In the context of an imperfect world in which most people live, what one buys as feed or food is largely defined by what one can afford. Understandably, this means some pet owners and caretakers will buy their pet ‘food’ at their local grocery store/s and discount/mail order stores, some will buy at farm-and-home stores, some at pet stores (Petco, Petsmart, etc), some at specialty pet ‘food’ stores; while some forsake all commercially prepared products for human-grade food lovingly prepared at home. Most of the time, the thing that defines which choice is made concerning what ones family and animals eat is simple economics–the family budget. The economic axiom that I follow and suggest to others is to buy the best grade, quality ingredients that one can afford while respectfully remembering that everyone in the family, human and non-human, may not (can not, should not) eat the same food. As with most things, the one-size-fits-all concept rarely if ever works. Bon Appétit
Karla
July 8, 2014 at 9:46 pm
Superb article, Susan. We pet owners are incredibly grateful that you are providing such excellent information. If only our government agencies could do half as good a job as you do at educating consumers!
Jolie Cosette
July 9, 2014 at 3:13 am
I finally decided to go primarily raw after seeing months of a Persian (doll face, not extreme) breeder’s YouTube videos. Ten years of healthy, active, mischievous, intelligent cats meant more to me than six months of AAFCO trials.
KJ Long
July 9, 2014 at 12:26 pm
Thank you for preparing these articles for us. I like to think humans are slowly evolving to consider pets and their diets are as important as ourselves but one thing not approached is chemicals in water sources. In the Atlanta area water that sits in a pets bowl more than a day leaves a reddish chemical residue. Shouldn’t we check this out too? Can simple sink or pitcher water purifyers take these chemicals out? And homemade diets used to be the answer but now it is revealed rice is high in lead so what grain carb do we use now that is safe? Used to be rice and chicken or rice and beef – and meats need to be chem. free too! Used to be dogs lived longer and with less cancers – how can we solve all this?
Gitta
July 10, 2014 at 10:54 am
There is another issue with feed designed for livestock: carefully selected ingredients for maximum weight gain in the shortest amount of time with the least amount of money spent. Because these ingredients are so cheap, they have found their way into pet food and into human food on a very, very large scale and all financed by tax payer funded subsidies. Now we seem perplexed that not only livestock gets fat and get fat quickly but that pets and humans do so as well. But now we are told we are just lazy gluttons eating too much and moving too little.
I haven’t found anything that talks about “essential carbohydrates” in the canine diet. Yet, we stuff them to the gills with mostly cheap carbs which just convert to sugar.
All AAFCO approved.
A bit dated, but still very good
http://www.direct-ms.org/pdf/EvolutionPaleolithic/Cereal%20Sword.pdf
Many humans have proven that one can survive even longer than 6 months on a purely junk food/fast food diet. If one stops this experiment just in time before measurable health problems surface it too can be labelled a complete and balanced nutrition for all life stages. Just a matter of timing.
Peter
July 11, 2014 at 7:51 am
Well, despite the impact that carbohydrate-loaded foods hold on pet health, The Official Publication of the AAFCO specifically discourages the use of the word “carbohydrate” anywhere on a pet food label. Perhaps that is recognition of the importance of starches in modern, profit-driven manufacturing? From AAFCO manual, (2003, p.178): “Carbohydrate guarantees are no longer considered as necessary or meaningful for purchaser information, therefore, their use is discouraged.” And go check your shelves: very, very few manufacturers list calorie counts on the cans/packaging.
Jolie Cosette
July 11, 2014 at 10:44 am
“Carbohydrate guarantees are no longer considered as necessary or meaningful for purchaser information, therefore, their use is discouraged.”
Unbelievable. It’s generally recognized that carbohydrates should comprise no more than 10% of a cat’s diet. Obligate carnivore means exactly that; cats’ digestive systems have not evolved to adequately process carbohydrates.
I switched primarily to raw when I couldn’t get answers from pet food manufacturers–premium, “indie” companies–about the carb load of their foods and the dry matter analyses. I’d add up the guaranteed analysis numbers on the back of cans–rarely did those numbers reach 100%. I’d subtract the moisture, do some calculations, and realize that a “quality” food had 20% or more carbs. From that, I’d figure out the calories.
If a manufacturer doesn’t list the calorie count on the cans or a website, or doesn’t respond to my request for information, I won’t use that food. I don’t want to play a guessing game with my cats’ nutrition.
Thanks for bringing this AAFCO “suggestion” to our attention, Peter.
Pingback: Food for Thought...An Interesting Article
Mike L
July 10, 2014 at 9:17 pm
@ Angela Himmeroder
You said:
“I don’t really care about the American
AAFCO regulating our food in Canada, I think each country should monitor and regulate their own pet foods.”
Canada has no governmental agency regulating pet food/feed made here in Canada. Nada, zilch, devoid of guidance of any sort, period. Our government, in it’s wisdom, has chosen to allow the Canadian pet food/feed manufacturers to monitor themselves. You might want to consider caring about the American AAFCO because most, if not all, Canadian pet food/feed manufacturers happily boast on their packages that they meet the AFFCO’s guidelines.
So what that means is that Canadian pet food/feed manufacturers ARE using the same guidelines as set forth by our friends south of the border.
Mike L
Gresham
August 8, 2014 at 2:50 pm
@ least one Canadian agency has a person(people?) sitting on numerous AAFCO committees. Judy Thompson at the Animal Feed Division of CDIF (Canadian Food Inspection Agency) is one I know is from CDIF. Aaron Price, Terrence Field, Jennifer Kromos and Anna Lamberti all sit on AAFCO committees and are Canadians, although I do not recall which Canadian agency they are with.
pa pooch
July 11, 2014 at 1:21 pm
AAFCO does not recognize Omega fatty acids as essential, as foods that add or include ingredients that contain them, are listed on the Guaranteed Analysis with an Asterisk stating
“Not recognized as an essential nutrient by the AAFCO Dog Food Nutrient Profiles.”
It is alarming, when they are a necessary nutrient for dogs, because they cannot produce it by themselves but AAFCO doesn’t see it as essential.
John Rowe
May 11, 2016 at 4:13 pm
Read the AAFCO manual before believing anything you read . After writing two Animal Nutrition books based on common sense and 50 years of raising and training labs and English Setters I challenge anyone to find credibility with an organization who approves the use of proven carcegenic food preservatives(euthoxquin and Bha/Bht) plus by-products with little or no nutritional value. You will find questionable. at best, the AAFCO protocols for the testing of pet food.