Safety net

Even as I consider taking the leap to a fully home-cooked diet for my dogs, a backup bag of commercial dog food lurks in the cupboard. It creates a sort of safety net: a feeling of security rooted in convenience, regulatory standards and perhaps even brand reputation. An innate belief that all nutritional requirements are neatly wrapped up in these small, magical pellets called kibble. Just like astronaut food – open package, swallow. Rinse and repeat. All good.

And, to be fair, there is much to encourage that perception. An oft-cited study from 2013[1] evaluated deficiencies in home-cooked diets. Its opening paragraph sets the stage: “In general, many home-prepared diets are more costly, more time-consuming, and less convenient than are commercial diets, and many home-prepared diets have major nutritional imbalances.” The rhetoric is very clear: home-cooking is fundamentally risky, expensive and inconvenient. (Subtext as I see it – intended or otherwise – stick to commercial foods and you’ll be okay.)

Business is booming

But now, more than a decade since that study, what do we really know about commercial food? According to a 2023 report by Bloomberg Intelligence[2], the pet food industry is projected to reach $500 billion in revenue by 2030 – an increase of over 45%, driven by “expanding sales in pet food, the growing health and welfare sector, and the continued trend of humanisation”. Sounds impressive. Lots of “holistic” and “hypoallergenic” labels, no doubt – grander claims, grander prices.

Source: Bloomberg Intelligence

But here’s the thing: the nutrient requirements that underpin this industry were last drafted in 2006 — almost a different era, certainly in scientific terms. Studies into commercial food show that it may no longer be the nutritional panacea we’ve been almost conditioned to rely on. In fact, discoveries of deficiencies and excesses have led to calls from the scientific community for a guideline update, in light of new knowledge of canine diet and nutrition requirements.

Most aspects of the 2013 UC Davis study have arguably been superseded. More recent scientific studies have shown that commercial foods aren’t as reliable as that study reported: foods labelled as “complete” don’t always contain the ingredients they’re supposed to and, in some products, trace minerals even exceed legal limits. These findings prompted me to look more closely at various aspects of commercial food, from nutrition to labelling.

Deficiencies and excesses

Nutritional deficiencies probably spring to mind first as the potential challenge in pet food. But at the other end of the scale, excesses are also a serious concern – and scientific evaluations have found both.

As Vet Times[3] reported in 2022, “Many [pet foods] are deficient in essential nutrients (Dodd et al, 2021[4]; Zafalon et al, 2020[5]; Kazimierska et al, 2020[6]; Burdett et al, 2018[7]; Kritikos et al, 2018[8]; Davies et al, 2017[9]; Gosper et al, 2016[10]; Hill et al, 2009; Heanes, 1990). Some foods contain excess, and sometimes above, the legal maximum and safe upper limits of nutrients (Kazimierska et al, 2020[6]; Brunetto et al, 2019; Pereira et al, 2018[11]; Davies et al, 2017b). Some foods claiming to contain only specified species proteins were contaminated with other species proteins (Pagani et al, 2018[12]).” Multiple studies published since have reported similar findings: one found widespread non-compliance with FEDIAF guidelines in UK complete pet foods, with only 6% of wet (6/97) and 38% of dry (30/80) foods meeting all mineral and trace element standards[13].

The initial assumption of nutritional precision is undermined by the reality of “formulation”. Manufacturers are forced to rely on compensatory overages, premixes and stable, cost-effective inorganic mineral forms to ensue nutrients still meet labelled minima after heat processing and storage. Processing decisions involve selecting mineral sources for stability – and cost. Inorganic forms are cheap and highly stable under extrusion. Unfortunately, they are also less biologically available than some organic complexes. This, on top of overages, enhances the risk of the absorbed mineral load being higher than intended.

Excesses

Copper is a case in point, where scientists are calling for changes in requirements[14]. Commercial diets have typically used copper sulphate, an inexpensive and stable inorganic form that is often added with substantial overages to ensure label claims are still met after processing. More recently, some manufacturers have shifted to organic copper chelates which according to Cornell[15] may be 10–30% more absorbable than copper sulphate. Therefore, unless inclusion levels are reduced to reflect higher absorption, this leads to an effective copper load increase.

This isn’t abstract. Many clinicians are now seeing dogs – including breeds with no genetic predisposition – presenting with hepatic copper accumulation. Diet itself can provide sustained excess, especially when fed as the same complete product day after day. Where dogs lack efficient routes to excrete any surplus, copper accumulates in the liver until it begins to damage cells. Several referral centres have reported increases in such cases[16], prompting investigations into dietary copper sources, copper sulphate in particular, and the cumulative effect of long-term intake above requirement.

Zinc is another example. Zinc is essential under NRC requirements for dogs, as it is crucial for numerous physiological functions such as growth, development, antioxidant activity and immune function. Zinc is generally added to commercial foods at relatively high levels, to compensate for absorption inhibitors such as calcium and phytate or because of manufacturers’ reliance on premix stability. Research found zinc content in commercial diets at above recommended levels. Some products exceeded EU legal limits, reflecting both overages and the use of premixes to achieve post-processing nutrient guarantees.

Gold standard?

Taken together, the evidence undercuts the idea that commercial diets are (still?) the gold standard of precision. They are consistent, certainly, and consistency may feel reassuring. But nutritional consistency is not the same as physiological suitability. A tightly controlled formulation can still deliver years of marginal excess in elements like copper, zinc or manganese. This is especially true of diets built around premixes designed for processing resilience rather than canine biology. And if dogs eat the same product continuously, there is no natural dilution effect from dietary variety.

Hybrid feeding and mitigation

Recognising that the kibble may not be quite the safety net we imagined doesn’t necessarily mean abandoning convenience entirely. A hybrid approach with kibble facilitates a transition from static to dynamic: research into mixed-feeding models has found that substituting even a portion of a processed diet with fresh meat promotes more favourable metabolic responses, like decreased blood sugar, compared to a static 100% extruded diet[17].

Adding fresh food acts as a biological corrective. One study showed several potentially beneficial effects on health markers from the simple addition of fish oil to extruded food[18]. And while commercial foods can carry a synthetic load of inorganic mineral overages to survive extrusion, fresh toppings introduce organic, bioavailable nutrients that the body can utilise more efficiently[19].

Ultimately, these whole food additions provide some nutritional support, bridging the gap between convenient safety net and whole food nutrition.

*****

References:

[1] Stockman, J., Fascetti, A. J., Kass, P. H., & Larsen, J. A. (2013). Evaluation of recipes of home-prepared maintenance diets for dogs. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 242(11), 1500-1505. Retrieved Nov 17, 2025, from https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.242.11.1500
[2] https://www.bloomberg.com/company/press/global-pet-industry-to-grow-to-500-billion-by-2030-bloomberg-intelligence-finds/
[3] https://www.vettimes.com/news/vets/small-animal-vets/why-pet-food-legislation-needs-revision-and-enforcement
[4] Dodd SAS, Shoveller AK, Fascetti AJ, Yu ZZ, Ma DWL, Verbrugghe A. A Comparison of Key Essential Nutrients in Commercial Plant-Based Pet Foods Sold in Canada to American and European Canine and Feline Dietary Recommendations. Animals (Basel). 2021 Aug 9;11(8):2348. doi: 10.3390/ani11082348. PMID: 34438805; PMCID: PMC8388700.
[5] Zafalon RVA, Risolia LW, Vendramini THA, Ayres Rodrigues RB, Pedrinelli V, Teixeira FA, Rentas MF, Perini MP, Alvarenga IC, Brunetto MA. Nutritional inadequacies in commercial vegan foods for dogs and cats. PLoS One. 2020 Jan 17;15(1):e0227046. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0227046. PMID: 31951617; PMCID: PMC6968870.
[6] Kazimierska K, Biel W, Witkowicz R, Karakulska J, Stachurska X. Evaluation of nutritional value and microbiological safety in commercial dog food. Vet Res Commun. 2021 Sep;45(2-3):111-128. doi: 10.1007/s11259-021-09791-6. Epub 2021 Apr 26. PMID: 33903989; PMCID: PMC8373756.
[7] Burdett, S.W., Mansilla, W.D., & Shoveller, A.K. (2018). Many Canadian dog and cat foods fail to comply with the guaranteed analysis reported on packages. Canadian Veterinary Journal, 59(11)
[8] Kritikos G, Weidner N, Atkinson JL, Bayle J, van Hoek I, Verbrugghe A. Quantification of vitamin D3 in commercial dog foods and comparison with Association of American Feed Control Officials recommendations and manufacturer-reported concentrations. J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2018 Jun 15;252(12):1521-1526. doi: 10.2460/javma.252.12.1521. PMID: 29889635.
[9] Davies, M. et al. Mineral analysis of complete dog and Cat foods in the UK and compliance with European guidelines. Sci. Rep. 7, 17107 (2017).
[10] Gosper EC, Raubenheimer D, Machovsky-Capuska GE, Chaves AV. Discrepancy between the composition of some commercial cat foods and their package labelling and suitability for meeting nutritional requirements. Aust Vet J. 2016 Jan-Feb;94(1-2):12-7. doi: 10.1111/avj.12397. Epub 2016 Jan 14. PMID: 26763535.
[11] Pereira AM, Pinto E, Matos E, Castanheira F, Almeida AA, Baptista CS, Segundo MA, Fonseca AJM, Cabrita ARJ. Mineral Composition of Dry Dog Foods: Impact on Nutrition and Potential Toxicity. J Agric Food Chem. 2018 Jul 25;66(29):7822-7830. doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.8b02552. Epub 2018 Jul 11. PMID: 29953228.
[12] Pagani E, Soto Del Rio MLD, Dalmasso A, Bottero MT, Schiavone A, Prola L. Cross-contamination in canine and feline dietetic limited-antigen wet diets. BMC Vet Res. 2018 Sep 12;14(1):283. doi: 10.1186/s12917-018-1571-4. PMID: 30208880; PMCID: PMC6136174.
[13] Davies M, Alborough R, Jones L, Davis C, Williams C, Gardner DS. Mineral analysis of complete dog and cat foods in the UK and compliance with European guidelines. Sci Rep. 2017 Dec 7;7(1):17107. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-17159-7. PMID: 29215022; PMCID: PMC5719410.
[14] Center SA, Richter KP, Twedt DC, Wakshlag JJ, Watson PJ, Webster CRL. Is it time to reconsider current guidelines for copper content in commercial dog foods? J Am Vet Med Assoc. 2021 Feb 15;258(4):357-364. doi: 10.2460/javma.258.4.357. PMID: 33539212.
[15] https://www.vet.cornell.edu/departments-centers-and-institutes/riney-canine-health-center/health-topics/canine-health-information-obsolete/copper-hepatopathy-and-dietary-management
[16] https://thecaninereview.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Center-Diet-Liver-disease-Letter-Vet-REc-2021.pdf
[17] Holm S, Baarman E, Anturaniemi J, Hemida M, Salin S, Vuori KA, Moore R, Hielm-Björkman A. The effect of a kibble diet versus a raw meat-based diet on energy metabolism biomarkers in dogs. Vet J. 2025 Dec;314:106462. doi: 10.1016/j.tvjl.2025.106462. Epub 2025 Oct 2. PMID: 41046069.
[18] Jackson MI, Jewell DE. Feeding of fish oil and medium-chain triglycerides to canines impacts circulating structural and energetic lipids, endocannabinoids, and non-lipid metabolite profiles. Front Vet Sci. 2023 Aug 24;10:1168703. doi: 10.3389/fvets.2023.1168703. PMID: 37691632; PMCID: PMC10484482.
[19] Tanprasertsuk J, Tate DE, Shmalberg J. Roles of plant-based ingredients and phytonutrients in canine nutrition and health. J Anim Physiol Anim Nutr (Berl). 2022 May;106(3):586-613. doi: 10.1111/jpn.13626. Epub 2021 Sep 8. PMID: 34495560; PMCID: PMC9291198.

Important Considerations:

  • Always consult your veterinarian before making any significant dietary changes, particularly where there are pre-existing health conditions or dietary restrictions.
  • If you are feeding commercial food, check the label for ingredients before giving more. Excessive intake of any foods can have adverse effects.
  • Ensure (where possible) that you use high-quality, organic products specifically formulated for pets (or better still, human grade ingredients) to avoid any potential adverse effects.
  • Introduce new foods gradually to avoid adverse effects such as gastrointestinal upset or diarrhoea.
  • I provide nutritional information purely as a helpful guide. Nutritional information on ingredients is obtained from the US Department of Agriculture’s FoodData Central site (https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/index.html) and any nutritional information provided in recipes is based on an online calculator: calories and other information will vary based on brands, ingredients and other factors.
  • Check nutrient levels and recommendations for your dog’s weight, age and activity. For example this nutritional guideline produced by FEDIAF.
  • I am not a professional canine nutritionist but supporting research is cited.
  • The recipes shared were created by me and tested in my kitchen – and tasted and approved by our doggy friends!

[/fusion_text][/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]