
In 1973, the nutritional watchdog group Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) published a booklet, Food Scorecard, that claimed that one third of the canned dog food purchased in housing projects was consumed by people. Not because those people had developed a taste for it, but because they couldn’t afford a more expensive meat product. (When a reporter asked where the figure had come from, CSPI cofounder Michael Jacobson couldn’t recall, and to this day the organization has no idea.)
To my mind, the shocker was in the nutrition scores themselves. Thirty-six common American protein products were ranked by overall value. Points were awarded for vitamins, calcium, and trace minerals and subtracted for added corn syrup and saturated fats. Jacobson—believing that poor people were eating significant amounts of pet food and/or exercising his talent for publicity—included Alpo in the rankings. It scored 30 points, besting salami and pork sausage, fried chicken, shrimp, ham, sirloin steak, McDonald’s hamburgers, peanut butter, pure beef hotdogs, Spam, bacon, and bologna.
I mention the CSPI rankings to Rawson. We are back at AFB headquarters with Moeller, this time in a different conference room. (There are five of them: Dalmatian, Burmese, Greyhound, Calico, and Akita. The staff members refer to them by breed, as in “Do you want to go into Greyhound?” and “Is Dalmatian free at noon?”) It would seem that in terms of nutrition, there was no difference between the cheap meatball sub I ate for lunch and the Smart Blend the dogs were enjoying earlier. Rawson disagrees. “Your sandwich was probably less complete, nutritionally.”
The top slot on the CSPI scorecard, with 172 points, is beef liver. Chicken liver and liver sausage take second and third place. A serving of liver provides half the RDA for vitamin C, three times the RDA for riboflavin, nine times the vitamin A in the average carrot, and good amounts of vitamins B-12, B-6, and D, folic acid, and potassium.
What’s the main ingredient in AFB’s dog food palatants?
Organs are among the most nutritionally rich foods on earth. Lamb spleen has almost as much vitamin C as a tangerine.
“Liver,” says Moeller. “Mixed with some other viscera. The first part that a wild animal usually eats in its kill is the liver and stomach, the GI tract.” Organs in general are among the most nutritionally rich foods on earth. Lamb spleen has almost as much vitamin C as a tangerine. Beef lung has 50 percent more. Stomachs are especially valuable because of what’s inside them: The predator benefits from the nutrients of the plants and grains in the stomach of its prey. “Animals have evolved to survive,” Rawson says. They like what’s best for them. People blanch to see “fish meal” or “meat meal” on a pet food ingredient panel, but meal—which variously includes flesh, organs, skin, and bones—most closely resembles the diet of dogs and cats in the wild.
Animals’ taste systems are specialized for the niche they occupy in the environment. That includes us. As hunters and foragers of the dry savannah, our earliest forebears evolved a taste for important but scarce nutrients: salt and high-energy fats and sugars. That, in a nutshell, explains the widespread popularity of junk food. And the wide spreads in general—an attribute we now share with our pets. A recent veterinary survey found that more than 50 percent of dogs and cats are overweight or obese.
People devoted to a healthier lifestyle have also begun to project their food qualms and biases onto their pets. Some of AFB’s clients have begun marketing 100 percent vegetarian kibble. The cat is what’s called a true carnivore—its natural diet contains no plants. Moeller tilts his head. A slight lift of the eyebrows. The look says, “Whatever the client wants.”
Mary Roach is the author of the book Gulp: Adventures on the Alimentary Canal, published this spring.
This article is from the April 2013 issue of Popular Science. See the rest of the magazine here.
single page140 years of Popular Science at your fingertips.
Each issue has been completely reimagined for your iPad. See our amazing new vision for magazines that goes far beyond the printed page
Stay up to date on the latest news of the future of science and technology from your iPhone or Android phone with full articles, images and offline viewing
Featuring every article from the magazine and website, plus links from around the Web. Also see our PopSci DIY feed
For our annual How It Works issue, we break down everything from the massive Falcon Heavy rocket to a tiny DNA sequencer that connects to a USB port. We also take a look at an ambitious plan for faster-than-light travel and dive into the billion-dollar science of dog food.
Plus the latest Legos, Cadillac's plug-in hybrid, a tractor built for the apocalypse, and more.


Online Content Director: Suzanne LaBarre | Email
Senior Editor: Paul Adams | Email
Associate Editor: Dan Nosowitz | Email
Assistant Editor: Colin Lecher | Email
Assistant Editor:Rose Pastore | Email
Contributing Writers:
Rebecca Boyle | Email
Kelsey D. Atherton | Email
Francie Diep | Email
Shaunacy Ferro | Email
Kibble: Never A Good Option
www.dogsnaturallymagazine.com/kibble-never-a-good-option/
Sigh, this article is harolding "better" kibble based off more meat products. Auroria's article is based off cheaper cardboard-ish kibble. Both are biased. If your dog is happy and healthy, who cares?
Must be doing something wrong, I've fed all of my dogs kibble, and not the expensive, organic, scientific stuff either. They have lived long, healthy lives. Healthy enough that when I have to change vets, they always comment on my pets' condition and say, "You must be feeding them the expensive, organic, scientific stuff!" "No, no, and nope."
Thanks for the fascinating article. I laughed out loud a couple of times.
While “The Chemistry of Kibble” [April, 2013] provided an interesting insight into what most pet food manufacturers try to do to make their food palatable. The article states that pet foods are mixed with “soy and wheat grains… [and that] cats and dogs are not grain eaters.” I think it is worth noting that there are plenty of pet foods available that are grain-free that do not require tricks to “entice [pets] to eat enough for it to be nutritionally sufficient.”
One wonders where Spanky, Thomas, Skipper, Porkchop, Mohammid, Elvis, Sandi, Bela, Yankee, Fergie, Murphy, Limburger, and some 300 other dogs and cats came from before they 'resided' in a lab cage at this facility and where they'll go once the lab is finished with them. There are plenty of good kibble manufacturers who make high quality food without using lab animals to taste-test. Given the ultimate consumers are pets at home, it makes more sense to taste test to pooches with the diet and lifestyle of a pet, rather than lab animal.
This is an unnecessary article glorifying an extremely unnecessary 'science' industry created not for pet health or welfare, but simply profit.
Absolute garbage. Why must everything have some freekin' chemical to cover up the fact that it's made with more chemicals and processed crap? I like Doritos, but I'm not going to live on them no matter how tasty they are.
First off, the first ingredient of these cheap kibble recipes is corn meal, wheat is way down the list, and K9's cannot digest cornmeal. It requires feeding them twice as much kibble to get the benificial protein that they need at the risk of overloading them on the carbohydrates that they do not need, which not only is bad for them and causes weight gain, but also much higher rates of digestive and health issues along with shortend life spans and quality of life in their later years. Cheap kibble is also way more expensive in reality because you do feed twice as much as you would with premium foods that are not quite double the price. If you feed a 90lb. dog 3 cups of cheap kibble twice a day along with canned food, you could do the same job with just 2 cups of premium kibble twice a day with no canned food at all. Premium kibble is almost all protein, this is the fuel K9's require for a long vibrant life. Not to mention that they leave alot less waste to clean up and are way less gassy.
All of our rescues have come in overweight and lethargic compared to their healthy counterparts, even at 4 and 5 years old they acted closer to 10 in vitality, 2 months of premium and not only do they lose weight dramatically, they regain their vibrance and playfullness, coats improve and problem health issues diminish add to the overall reduction in the cost of caring for your best friend.
Sure, you can go cheap, but your buddy will die sooner and the last years of his life will suck compared to a life of proper nutrition. Not one K9 trainer will ever recommend a cheap kibble brand, even iams has corn meal in it. TIP: if you see a comercial for it, it's garbage, if it's sold in a grocery store, it's garbage. Pet store and feed houses are where you find what you need, they rarely carry grain based food. If you see corn anywhere in the ingredient list, move on. Try it for a couple of months, you will see the difference and you will spend less over time. The only downside is that your dog will be more energetic.
I can change my cats' food any time I want, as long as the new stuff costs more than the old stuff. The problem is, I can never reverse the process.
I thoroughly enjoyed this article and its insights. I turned away from kibble long ago and I'm glad that I did.