Earth Animal has printed two rebuttals – in an effort to talk – of the submit on TruthaboutPetFood.com titled Is No-Hide Dog Chews Actually Hide? While Earth Animal claims the analysis printed in this site used to be/is wrong, there are some important flaws of their analysis that are supposed to be addressed as neatly.
Starting with Dr. Timothy Bowser’s digestibility find out about that Earth Animal printed to validate the digestibility in their No-Hide chews. Click Here to learn Dr. Bowser’s find out about of the No-Hide treats.
Of importance, Dr. Bowser simply occurs to possess a patent for a procedure to make animal chews extra digestible – a procedure that seems to be just like the method used to make Earth Animal No-Hide. Patent no. US20110142993 A1, “Method for Making Pet and Animal Comestibles“. The patent claims (daring added):
One way for making elements for puppy or animal chunk merchandise in a batch or steady procedure, comprising:
making ready mentioned base through cleansing and isolating out mentioned dust and undesirable parts;
saturating digestive enzymes into mentioned base;
forming mentioned base into product shapes; and
processing mentioned product shapes to shelf-stable merchandise that include mentioned enzymes, wherein mentioned enzymes can support in digestion of items or chunks of mentioned merchandise when fed on.
In one case in point, rawhide base is layered, lower and wrapped through hand or robotically pressed into paperwork.
In some other case in point, protein base is blended with rice gluten and different elements to shape a liquid base matrix this is molded into shapes.
In the second one “working example” above – “protein base is mixed with rice gluten and other ingredients to form a liquid base matrix that is molded into shapes” – – this case is nearly just like the method described to make the Earth Animal No-Hide chunk.
It can be a major worry if Dr. Bowser – the Earth Animal ‘digestibility expert’ – is acting research on a product he receives royalty on.
Next, let’s have a look at precisely how Dr. Bowser determines a No-Hide or rawhide is or isn’t digestible.
Q. What is the principle chance of rawhide? A. A canine swallowing a big piece that may get logged in it’s throat or intestine. So how did Dr. Bowser decide that No-Hide is digestible?
“Tests were conducted on 10 mm slices of the No-Hide from samples that were provided by the customer and as described in this report. The pieces were cut to simulate chunks that could potentially be swallowed by dogs.”
Ten millimeters is VERY small. As in comparison to an inches…
10 millimeters is lower than half of inch.
Would a 10 mm slice be a chance to any canine? Even the smallest Chihuahua? If assessments had been being finished to in point of fact “simulate chunks that could potentially be swallowed by dogs” – wouldn’t a bigger piece – comparable to a 1 or 2 inch piece the dimensions that a mean dimension canine would swallow be a extra suitable check? Is a 10 mm slice the precise check for a digestibility declare for all canines? Opinion: no, it’s no longer.
In Dr. Bowser’s patent – he verified the digestibility of rawhide ready with “digestive enzymes” in accordance with a 1 centimeter sq. piece. This will give you an instance of the way small this is. The brown sq. (cardboard) is 1 centimeter sq. – as in comparison to a dime.
It is regarding that digestibility research of goods canines are identified to swallow massive items of include in accordance with trying out subject matter smaller than a dime.
Earth Animal’s 2nd rebuttal of the proof equipped on TruthaboutPetFood.com is research of producing of the No-Hide deal with, additional DNA research of the treats, and formaldehyde research of the treats. This Earth Animal rebuttal used to be carried out through Ryan M. Yamka, PhD, MS, MBA, FACN, PAS, Dipl. ACAS, Luna Science and Nutrition, LLC.
Dr. Yamka starts through wondering the validity of DNA effects printed in this site. “In the article, allegations were made that the majority of the No-Hide™ chew is made from rawhide, when it is not. Test samples, submitted by unknown individuals, to two labs showed the presence of beef DNA which was used to support their claim. There was a misinterpretation of that data in the article. Although beef was identified via DNA in both No-Hide™ chews, the DNA data is not quantitative (i.e. it does NOT measure the percentage of composition).”
Dr. Yamka is proper that the DNA research carried out through Eurofins lab used to be no longer “quantitative” – BUT…Dr. Yamka neglects to say that some other DNA research of the No-Hide deal with (bought immediately from retail) printed in this site WAS quantitative – if truth be told, it used to be carried out through the very same laboratory that Dr. Yamka used — Authen Technologies.
Our effects – which the lab didn’t need us to submit the overall report publicly (however allowed Dr. Yamka to) equipped this quantitative research…(underneath is a duplicate graph taken from knowledge equipped through Authen Technologies effects)…
The above used to be trying out carried out on “No Hide Salmon Chew” bought immediately from retail. Ingredients of the Salmon No-Hide chunk in line with the Earth Animal site are: “Salmon, Vegetable Gelatin, Brown Rice Flour, Organic Eggs, Olive Oil, Banana, Bromelain (Pineapple).” There is NO pork (Bos taurus) factor. Dr. Yamka provides the reason that our trying out discovered pork when none used to be indexed used to be because of “has multiple animal protein DNA likely because of protein migration” right through production. However Dr. Yamka didn’t be offering an evidence as to why/how our result of the Salmon No-Hide deal with – which incorporated no pork factor, bought immediately from retail – may check as majority pork beneath quantitative research – from the very same lab. Majority pork in a no pork factor deal with can be huge quantities of “protein migration”.
Next, Dr. Yamka scrutinizes PhD colleague Dr. Waldo Kallenberger who carry out research for us at the No-Hide deal with. Dr. Yamka states “If the investigator would have known that the product contained chicken (flesh) and gelatin (partially hydrolyzed collagen), I am sure he would have questioned his findings. Since this information was not provided to him or secondary scientific analysis was not performed, his findings become fatally flawed.”
Dr. Kallenberger DID know the elements of the product – he won a product immediately from retail acquire with label incorporated. Ingredients are indexed at the product label.
Next we get into a space the place two PhD scientists are professionals in two very various things. Dr. Kallenberger equipped this symbol in his research…
Note the highest of the slide states “Flesh Side”. A PhD scientist aware of pores and skin/cover refers back to the underside of the surface because the ‘Flesh Side’ – the ‘flesh side’ of the surface (cover). This is the typical terminology inside of this realm of science. Dr. Yamka – obviously no longer knowledgeable within the science of animal pores and skin/cover – mistakenly interpreted his PhD colleague pointing out the slide merely confirmed ‘flesh’ which Dr. Yamka explains can be conventional of a product containing rooster flesh. But this is NOT used to be Dr. Kallenberger said – he very obviously wrote “Flesh Side” – flesh facet/underside of the surface (cover). Dr. Kallengerger PhD – professional within the science of pores and skin/cover – additional said “the fabric is really rawhide break up subject matter“.
To learn the overall rebuttal from Dr. Yamka, Click Here.
What customers are left with continues to be a large number of unanswered questions about the No-Hide deal with. Does Dr. Timothy Bowser have a monetary passion (royalty) in No-Hide canine chews? Is a digestibility find out about suitable for all canines the use of subject matter smaller than a dime? Why did quantitative research discover a Salmon chunk shipped immediately from retail to the very same lab utilized by Earth Animal that contained no pork factor to be majority pork?
We do know – with sure bet – a couple of issues…
- The deal with continues to be beneath FDA investigation; FDA will give no remark till investigation is whole.
- As required through legislation – Earth Animal did NOT check in the deal with with Department of Agriculture in Georgia, South Carolina and Texas. It is unknown if the corporate didn’t check in the deal with in different states. A “Stop Sale” order has been issued within the state of Georgia because of the loss of registration. Georgia Department of Agriculture is within the procedure in their investigation of the deal with.
- The deal with got rid of from the throat of the canine that died in Georgia used to be a four inch chunk – the chunk swelled to six inches in period (as documented through the veterinarian that got rid of the deal with from the canine’s throat and as documented through Earth Animal’s Dr. Timothy Bowser – patent proprietor – who later tested the deal with).
- A canine in Texas stays very unwell after swallowing a work of No Hide chunk. Texas Department of Agriculture started their investigation/assembly with the puppy proprietor the previous day (eight/31/17).
We all will have to look ahead to FDA and Department of Agriculture investigation – and for all folks on all sides of the fence at the No Hide deal with – we will be able to must believe that FDA and different government will do a right kind investigation and supply us with the overall main points quickly.
Wishing you and your puppy(s) the most efficient,
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
Association for Truth in Pet Food
What’s in Your Pet’s Food?
Is your canine or cat consuming chance elements? Chinese imports? Petsumer Report tells the ‘rest of the story’ on over four,000 cat meals, canine meals, and puppy treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. Click Here to preview Petsumer Report. www.PetsumerReport.com
The 2017 List
Susan’s List of relied on puppy meals. Click Here
Have you learn Buyer Beware? Click Here
Cooking dog food made simple, Dinner PAWsible
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here