Page 170 - Small Animal Clinical Nutrition 5th Edition
P. 170

172        Small Animal Clinical Nutrition



                    Box 8-4. True Cost of Feeding.
        VetBooks.ir


                    Pet owners usually compare the cost of pet foods on the price
                    per unit (price per bag or price per can) rather than the true cost
                    of feeding (cost per day or cost per year). It is easy to compare
                    the price per unit when evaluating two different pet foods, but
                    more difficult to compare the true cost of feeding. The following
                    example demonstrates that veterinarians and their health care
                    team need to discuss the true cost of feeding with pet owners
                    when clients are concerned about the price of a particular food.

                    MOIST CAT FOOD
                    A 5-kg, three-year-old neutered male cat is diagnosed with lower
                    urinary tract disease due to struvite urolithiasis. A moist veteri-  Figure 8-9. Typical fat and protein concentrations (% as fed) of
                    nary therapeutic food is recommended to help prevent further  common grains used in commercial pet foods.
                    episodes of struvite urolithiasis. The cat’s owner is concerned
                    about the cost of the veterinary therapeutic food. She now feeds
                    her cat more than two small cans/day of a gourmet grocery
                    brand. This calculation shows that the veterinary therapeutic
                    food costs less to feed than the cat’s current food.

                                         Veterinary
                                      therapeutic food  Current food

                    a) Cost/can ($)        1.52          0.69
                    b) Weight of contents of
                      container (g) (from label)  404    85
                    c) Cost/g ($) (a ÷ b = c)  0.004    0.008
                    d) Feeding amount (g)
                      (300 kcal/1,255 kJ)*/**  285***    185
                    e) Cost/day ($) (c x d = e)  1.07    1.50
                    f) Cost/year ($) (e x 365 = f)  391.38  547.68
                    *The amount of energy currently being fed was obtained from  Figure 8-10. Typical phosphorus and magnesium concentrations
                    the label (in this example it was 138 kcal or 418 kJ/can).
                    Manufacturer’s recommended feeding equals 2.17 cans/day;  (% as fed) of common grains used in commercial pet foods.
                    therefore, 2.17 cans x 138 kcal/can = 300 kcal/day.

                    **To feed the same amount of energy in the form of the veteri-  Nutritional Characteristics
                    nary therapeutic food, first the amount of energy/can is deter-  Grains primarily provide energy to the food, but are also a
                    mined from the label (424 kcal or 1,773 kJ). Then the amount  source of many different nutrients (protein, fat, fiber, minerals,
                    of energy currently being fed is divided by the energy/can of
                    the veterinary therapeutic food: 300 kcal/day ÷ 424 kcal/can =  vitamins) at various proportions. For example, corn contains
                    0.70 cans/day.                                    average levels of protein, but is a good source of linoleic acid. By
                                                                      comparison, rice is lower in fat, phosphorus and magnesium.
                    ***To obtain the grams of the veterinary therapeutic food to
                    feed, multiply 0.70 x 404 g/can = 285 g/day.      Barley and rice bran are higher in protein, but also higher in
                                                                      phosphorus. Wheat middlings are higher in protein, but also
                                                                      higher in fiber, and higher in nutrient variability (Figures 8-9
                  on the label in order of predominance (Chapter 9).This section  and 8-10). Grains differ analytically and in nutrient availabili-
                  will discuss the benefits and characteristics of ingredients avail-  ty. Although corn, rice, barley and oats have nearly identical
                  able to pet food manufacturers.                     ileal and total tract carbohydrate digestibility (all >98%), whole
                                                                      grains have differing DM digestibility (rice >corn >barley
                  Carbohydrate Ingredients                            >oats). Varying fiber levels between the grains account for this
                  Grains are typically classified as carbohydrate ingredients.  difference (Walker et al, 1994).
                  These ingredients are composed primarily of starch (>60%)  Awareness of nutrient composition and availability differ-
                  with protein, fat and fiber fractions making up most of the bal-  ences is important when formulating foods in order to select
                  ance.The amount of starch, as a percentage of the whole ingre-  ingredients with nutrient compositions that agree with the
                  dient, will vary depending on the degree of milling, as in the  overall design of the food being formulated. For example, if a
                  case of whole corn vs. cornstarch. Examples of carbohydrate  product were being formulated to maximize energy and linole-
                  ingredients used in pet foods are found in Table 8-4 (Box 8-5).  ic acid content, then corn would be the prime choice as the car-
   165   166   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175