Gun Dog Forum

Since this was mentioned in a previous thread and confusion seemed to abound, I'll do an example of how to calculate the % of calories from fat, protein, and carbs for straight kibble and then for one with additions.

For this example, I'm going to be using Orijen Puppy because we can easily verify the work because they print the % of calories information as well.

To do the math, we need 3 things:

1) The guaranteed analysis which is the % of components of the total weight. All we need is 2 of the 3 which is good because they almost always only give Protein and Fat.

2) The weight of serving size. Preferably, in grams.

3) Total calories in a serving size.

So back to the Orijen Puppy example:

1) 38% protein and 20% fat

2) 120 grams/cup

3) 490 kcals

Solving for calories from fat per serving

(120g × .2) × 9 cal/g = 216 calories

Solving for % of calories from fat per serving

(216 cal/490 cal)×100= 44%

Solving for calories from protein per serving

(120g × .38) x 4 cal/g = 182 calories

Solving for % of calories from protein

(182 cal / 490 cal)×100 = 37%

Solving for % of calories from carbs

100% - 44% from fat - 37% from protein = 19% from carbs.

We take a quick look at the Orijen website and, for their 38/20 puppy food, they give 44% fat 37% protein and 19% carbs.

Now the above is fine and dandy but what if we want to supplement our kibble with some coconut oil and a some raw sardines?

A 1 tablespoon serving of coconut oil is 117 calories with 13g fat, 0g protein, and 0g carbs.

A 1 ounce serving of raw sardines is 46 calories with 2.5g fat, 5.6g protein, and 0g carbs.

So let's make our new serving a cup of the above kibble, 1 T coconut oil, and 4 ounces of sardines.

Our new total calories is 490 calories + 117 calories + (46 calories/serving x 4 servings)= 791 calories

Solving for fat

Sardines ---》2.5g fat/serving x 9 calories/g = 23 fat calories/serving × 4 servings = 92 fat calories

Coconut oil ---》 13g × 9 = 117 fat calories

Kibible (from above) = 216 fat calories

(92+117+216) = 425 fat calories

(425/791)×100= 54% of total calories from fat

Solving for protein

Sardines ---》 5.6g protein/ serving × 4 calories/g = 23 protein calories/serving × 4 servings = 92 protein calories

Coconut oil --》0g protein ---》 0 protein calories

Kibble (from above) ---》 182 protein calories

182 protein calories + 92 protein calories = 274 protein calories

(274 protein calories/791 total calories)×100= 35% of total calories from protein

Solving for carbs

100% - 54% fat calories - 35% protein calories = 11% carb calories

So a serving of 1 cup Orijen Puppy kibble with 1T coconut oil and 4 ounces of raw sardines is 54% fat calories, 35% protein calories, and 11% carb calories.

Personally, I like using smaller serving sizes like a quarter cup of kibble for my calculations so the total calories for kibble and additives is lower and I have finer control of my dogs total calorie intake (ie. I might only need 3/4 cup kibble, 3/4 T coconut oil, and 3oz of raw sardine per meal) especially when using calorie dense kibbles like Dr Tim's momentum (588cal/cup 127g/c 49% f cal, 30% p cal, 21% c cal), Inukshuk 32/32 (640cal/cup 142g/c 64% f cal, 28% p cal, 8%c cal ), Red Paw 38k (4605 kcal/kg 49%p kcal 33%f kal 18%c kcal).

Ps. Purina Pro Plan Performance is 475 calories per 112g/cup with a guaranteed analysis of 30% protein and 20% fat so 42% of calories from fat, 28% calories from protein, and 30% of calories from carbs.

Smart.

Bill

Let me ask what difference does it make since the only true test is the condition of your dog?

Since my son was already studying for a math test on unit conversions rates that he's taking tomorrow, this was a great real world problem Senior Al Pastor

For grins we did Diamond High Energy.

24.96% calories from protein.
46.79% calories from fat
28.25% calories from carbohydrates

You'd think this information ought to be required to be printed on the bag. Thanks for the method!

Bill

ezzy333 wrote:Let me ask what difference does it make since the only true test is the condition of your dog?

First, I'm not sure what is so controversial about my post. I merely explained the process to determine the caloric distribution of food.

Even if all someone did was tinker with their dog's food and monitor the condition of their dog, why would you be opposed to them knowing having more information about their food so they can duplicate it using other sources?

However, I prefer not to make decisions that are insulated from scientific study or methods, and i don't like duplication of effort. When there is mounds of research and scientific study that indicate performance injury nearly disappears when diets exceed 30% of calories from protein, maybe people should have the tools to check.

Finally, how do measure condition of your dogs? Are you using a control group and a test group? Are blood sampling? Taking biopsies? Running tests like determining VO2Max? Are you merely relying on eyeballing and anecdotal evidence?

AlPastor wrote:

ezzy333 wrote:Let me ask what difference does it make since the only true test is the condition of your dog?

First, I'm not sure what is so controversial about my post. I merely explained the process to determine the caloric distribution of food.

Even if all someone did was tinker with their dog's food and monitor the condition of their dog, why would you be opposed to them knowing having more information about their food so they can duplicate it using other sources?

However, I prefer not to make decisions that are insulated from scientific study or methods, and i don't like duplication of effort. When there is mounds of research and scientific study that indicate performance injury nearly disappears when diets exceed 30% of calories from protein, maybe people should have the tools to check.

Finally, how do measure condition of your dogs? Are you using a control group and a test group? Are blood sampling? Taking biopsies? Running tests like determining VO2Max? Are you merely relying on eyeballing and anecdotal evidence?

Well, I think you've done a great service. Only wish I'd thought of it myself. Well done!

The colliery point to performance-related injuries essentially disappearing (according to numerous studies) when feeding over 30% protein is that such performance-related injuries rise dramatically the lower the percentage of calories from protein dips below 30%. Feeding 25% protein (for example) puts a dog a fairly high risk.

The only "flaw" I see in this method is assumes all the nutrients are digested and assimilated by the dogs, when anyone that knows kibble-fed dogs is aware that copious amounts of the feed pass right through as waste. And incomplete plant proteins do not match animal protein.

Still a cool tool. Thanks!

Bill

Very interesting. Thanks Al.