# TOTW Puppy calcium content.



## BlackGSD (Jan 4, 2005)

Decided to post this in a new thread since the last one is already 2 pages worth of mostly talking about how bad TOTW is. :rolleyes2:


Pacific Stream formula 1.3% as fed.

High Prairie formula 1.4% as fed.


----------



## jprice103 (Feb 16, 2011)

Thanks!!! And by off chance, do you know what the max suggested is for a puppy?


----------



## DJEtzel (Feb 11, 2010)

1.5% is typically the max calcium suggested for a large breed puppy.


----------



## BlackGSD (Jan 4, 2005)

Depends on who you ask!!!! (Seriously.)

I have heard you want 1.5% or less. Some folks want it to be closer to 1.0%. That is for a MAX % for a "large breed" puppy. Then there are those that don't consider a GSD a "large breed".

But there is a difference between min, max, and "as fed". All it does is fry my BRAIN trying to keep it all straight.


----------



## jprice103 (Feb 16, 2011)

BlackGSD said:


> But there is a difference between min, max, and "as fed". All it does is fry my BRAIN trying to keep it all straight.


I know! I've never wanted any puppy to get to adulthood as fast as this one...just so I don't have to stress over food anymore!!


----------



## GSDAlphaMom (Jul 20, 2010)

Pacific Stream formula 1.3% as fed.
High Prairie formula 1.4% as fed.[/QUOTE said:


> Are those minimums or maximums? If they are only showing one than it's more than likely minimum. The few that show maximum show both (min & max).


----------



## BlackGSD (Jan 4, 2005)

Those numbers are on an "as fed" basis. (Hence why I put "as fed" after it.  )


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

I believe that the "as fed" numbers are generally higher than the "minimum %", which would be a good thing in this case.


----------



## GSDAlphaMom (Jul 20, 2010)

Not to sound ignorant (though I may very well be with this term) ....what the heck does that mean? As fed?? Would it not be the same min/max approximate period??????


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

GSDAlphaMom said:


> Not to sound ignorant (though I may very well be with this term) ....what the heck does that mean? As fed?? Would it not be the same min/max approximate period??????


I have no idea. But I've seen labels that list min, max, and as-fed, and the as-fed usually falls between minimum and maximum.


----------



## BlackGSD (Jan 4, 2005)

jprice103 said:


> I know! I've never wanted any puppy to get to adulthood as fast as this one...just so I don't have to stress over food anymore!!


:rofl: I hear you!!!! Luckily my next puppy will not be a GSD, and will be in the 30 to 40 lb range as an adult.


----------



## BlackGSD (Jan 4, 2005)

Emoore said:


> I believe that the "as fed" numbers are generally higher than the "minimum %", which would be a good thing in this case.


Yep. 

I will use Canidae ALS as an example since they list both. 

Calcium is 1.2% MIN. But it is 1.8% "as fed".


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

Ok, so according to the AAFCO website, "as-fed" is as it is in the bag, while the minimum and maximums are after moisture is accounted for.


----------



## Rott-n-GSDs (Jul 7, 2010)

BlackGSD said:


> I have heard you want 1.5% or less. Some folks want it to be closer to 1.0%. That is for a MAX % for a "large breed" puppy. Then there are those that don't consider a GSD a "large breed".


I would say closer to 1% for a GIANT breed puppy, and GSDs definitely aren't giant breeds.


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

as-fed percentages recommended in literature *(.7-1.2%).....* for large/giant breed puppies.


----------



## BlackGSD (Jan 4, 2005)

Emoore said:


> Ok, so according to the AAFCO website, "as-fed" is as it is in the bag, while the minimum and maximums are after moisture is accounted for.


So does this mean that the "as fed" % is what folks need to start worrying about rather than the "max" calcium % ?

And if what is quoted is the case, then what does it mean when they list the guaranteed nutrient analysis on a "dry matter" basis and that number is higher that the "as fed" %?


----------



## BlackGSD (Jan 4, 2005)

gagsd said:


> as-fed percentages recommended in literature *(.7-1.2%).....* for large/giant breed puppies.


Do does that mean that the Orijen LBP that so many people love really isn't suitable for a LBP since it is 1.5% min and 1.7% max?


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

BlackGSD said:


> Do does that mean that the Orijen LBP that so many people love really isn't suitable for a LBP since it is 1.5% min and 1.7% max?


I think people just need to decide. I fed the Canidae chicken and rice, and raw, when my dogs were pups. As adults I use whichever Canidae I get, or TOTW.


----------



## Emoore (Oct 9, 2002)

BlackGSD said:


> Do does that mean that the Orijen LBP that so many people love really isn't suitable for a LBP since it is 1.5% min and 1.7% max?


Personally, I wouldn't feed it, but I don't see the big deal over Orijen either.




I'm so freakin glad my pup is 11 months old and I have a food that everybody does well on and doesn't break the bank.


Know what else? With all due respect, I don't give a rat's patootie what you people think of what I feed either.  It works for my dogs and it makes me happy.


----------



## BlackGSD (Jan 4, 2005)

gagsd said:


> I think people just need to decide. I fed the Canidae chicken and rice, and raw, when my dogs were pups. As adults I use whichever Canidae I get, or TOTW.


I agree. I fed Canidae ALS when Siren was a puppy. After she turned a year old, I switched her and the 2 seniors I had at the time to TOTW. (Which Siren still eats.)


----------



## gagsd (Apr 24, 2003)

Yep, just recently tried the TOTW canned products as I was looking for tasty and healthy tracking food. They LOVE it, and much better than Little Caeser's.


----------



## sable123 (Jul 11, 2010)

jprice103 said:


> Thanks!!! And by off chance, do you know what the max suggested is for a puppy?


What is suggested is not suggested on the basis of any credible science. To date, no official body has really set an upper limit on calcium, although the limited studies on the subject have used calcium levels at around 3%, but the data is very clouded by the dogs also being obese.

I have yet to see a commercial dog food with calcium anywhere near that 3% level.

Most of this is propogated by the pet food companies wanting to sell large breed foods, which because they are lower calorie are probably not going to do any harm.

I think in the end, if any objective science is ever done, the conclusion will be that the amounts of calcium in commercial foods has nothing to do with orthopedic problems.

JMO


----------



## Kyad02 (Oct 21, 2011)

I have fed TOTW to my boy since he was 14 months old. I believe there is a post that quotes a Diamond nutritionist as saying TOTW is NOT reccomende for pups under a year old. Looking at Solid Gold Wolf Cub for my new pup. Also made by Diamond and a bison/fish meat base


----------

