# orijen adult vs. orijen lbp



## Iannotti (May 17, 2009)

Does anyone feed there pups orijen adult? Is it really that much different than the lbp formula?


----------



## roxy84 (Jun 23, 2007)

responded to this in your other post. same food esentially, with the large breed puppy being just a bit lower in calcium. my preference was to stick to the LBP until at least one year.


----------



## larrydee33 (Feb 25, 2007)

I agree I stayed with the LBP for the first year.


----------



## gsdlove212 (Feb 3, 2006)

The Orijiin website advises not to feed it to puppies I believe. I would go with the LBP and follow the guidlines set by Orijin.


----------



## Grims (Jul 3, 2008)

Calcium is the same, the only difference is a .1% variation in phosphorous levels. All in all I think LBP is simply a marketing tactic, and a way to make a couple more bucks a bag...as the adult formula should be fine for most pups.


----------



## Winkin (Feb 21, 2007)

Marketing tactic? It costs $1 more per bag on PetFoodDirect.com...


----------



## mastercave (May 2, 2009)

I'm in the process of switching my dogs to orijen. I have 4 adult dogs (small breeds) and 1 GSD puppy. I'm also doing a 50/50 kibble/raw for the puppy, so I'm just going with the orijen adult.

I have read that the puppy and senior foods are a marketing tactic not in the sense of charging more money, but by having more varieties, the brand takes more shelf space.


----------



## Mozart396 (May 11, 2009)

The differences between LBP and adult are:

1) .1% less phosphorus
2) a bit more fiber
3) significantly more glucosamine and chondroiten

I really don't know if any of that is significant or not. Anyone know at what age to switch from "puppy" food?


----------



## Winkin (Feb 21, 2007)

The difference used to be more than .1% - wonder why it is different now. Unless it is just a typo on their newly designed site (quite a typo, though).


----------



## Grims (Jul 3, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: WinkinMarketing tactic? It costs $1 more per bag on PetFoodDirect.com...


A dollar per bag for minimal cost difference adds up quick for any company, here it is 5 dollars more though. 

Also, this is what happens when a family with a new puppy walks into the pet store.

"Oh, I hear Orijen is good...but Wellness over there has a large breed puppy food...and Orijen just has adult and puppy...I better get the correct kind for my dog.."


----------



## Winkin (Feb 21, 2007)

> Originally Posted By: AxxelA dollar per bag for minimal cost difference adds up quick for any company, here it is 5 dollars more though.


Then your complaint is with your local retailer, not Orijen.



> Originally Posted By: AxxelAlso, this is what happens when a family with a new puppy walks into the pet store.
> 
> "Oh, I hear Orijen is good...but Wellness over there has a large breed puppy food...and Orijen just has adult and puppy...I better get the correct kind for my dog.."


Agreed, but as I just mentioned: the difference used to be more than .1%, and for calcium as well not just phosphorous. I believe it was .2-.3%, which is pretty significant when you're talking about something in the 1.x percent range.

Just to make it clear that I'm not blindly defending Orijen just because I feed it: I do not know why the numbers recently changed. If it is a typo, it is a significant one. If it isn't, then Orijen should have addressed it with a simple "Here's why we are changing the ingredient profile."

I will check the bags in my basement when I get home to see if they have the older numbers listed.


----------



## Grims (Jul 3, 2008)

> Originally Posted By: Winkin
> 
> 
> > Originally Posted By: AxxelA dollar per bag for minimal cost difference adds up quick for any company, here it is 5 dollars more though.
> ...


First off, I have no "issue". But, because you bring it up, manufactures have control over the pricing of their products, and can set advertised pricing to make sure their customers don't get ripped off. 

I also feed Orijen, and I think Champion is a great company....but I seriously doubt it is a typo...we are talking about information being printed not only on every online retailer and review site, but the information printed on every bag to leave the plant. If they are capable of such a massive error...i would change dog foods being concerned they could make another error that could have serious repercussions...like in the formula its self. 

But, the levels are fine, there is no reason to go with a formula with levels any lower. Calcium is with in acceptable levels...but more importantly there is more calcium than phosphorous. As I'm sure you know, for every part phosphorous there must an equal amount of calcium or it will be robbed from the bones. As long as that ratio is fine, I see little reason to worry about adult vs LBP. 

But, all we have to go on as consumers is the information they give us...and the information out there shows a very minimal difference, and I hold my stance that it is little more than marketing like most other dog food companies and their multiple close to identical formulas. 

That said, I feed the fish, adult, and LBP of their formulas on a rotation.


----------



## Winkin (Feb 21, 2007)

Well, we're both partially right it seems. Check out the old analysis on DogFoodAnalysis for both:

http://www.dogfoodanalysis.com/dog_food_reviews/showproduct.php/product/914/cat/8

http://www.dogfoodanalysis.com/dog_food_reviews/showproduct.php/product/915/cat/8

It seems Orijen changed the ingredient profile. Before it was like this:

Adult: 1.6-1.8 calcium / 1.2-1.4 phos
LBP: 1.4 min calcium / 1.1 min phos (no max listed for LBP)

It is now:

Adult: 1.5-1.7 calcium / 1.2-1.4 phos
LBP: 1.5-1.7 calcium / 1.1-1.3 phos

So, as I mentioned, the difference used to be more significant. However, it seems they've increased the calcium slightly for LBP while keeping the phosphorous the same.

I'm not sure why they would up the calcium on the LBP to the same as the Adult. Perhaps someone can confirm this with a newly bought bag of LBP? If it isn't a typo, I hope we can find out why Orijen made this change.

In either case, I'll gladly continue to pay $1 more per bag (I wouldn't pay $5 more, though) for the higher amount of fiber in the LBP vs Adult for a young GSD.


----------



## Grims (Jul 3, 2008)

I bet the change was to reduce costs by having to make fewer changes from one formula to another. 

My dog is such a picky eater I have to mix in tripe anyway to get him to eat it which takes care of any fiber problems. If the adult formula was unsafe or even on the line I would definitely go to the LBP (if it was different) but I just don't see a big enough difference to care...that and being I have to have it shipped I am already spending 70 bucks a bag, plus another 15 a month for the green tripe!


----------



## Mozart396 (May 11, 2009)

There is a large glucosamine/chrondroiten difference as well.


----------

