Ok, another thread made me start thinking about this. Many will have heard how the ratio isn't really a good indication of food quality when comparing different foods, a pair of old leather boots… some used motor oil… and a scoop of sawdust, blended and tested wouldn't be fed to my dogs but would come up with Protein 32%, Fat 18% and Fiber 3%. You need to understand ingredients far more than these base figures.

I've seen recommendations where large breeds aren't meant to be fed more than 26% protein. In my mind surely it's the actual amount of protein by weight that matters rather than a percentage ratio? After all adding junk and fillers may have no benefit other than to match a possible desired ratio. Or am I missing something here ?

If it's the amount of protein by weight that matters do these figures have any real meaning, not just for dog food but for human food as well? Or is it all another disguised marketing gimmick ?

__________________

Well you are right not all protein is the same!

Is it complete or incomplete?

Complete proteins come from animal sources bar soya and a few pulses.

They contain all the essential amino acids.

Incomplete proteins are plant based and need amino acids ADDING to make them complete ( you will see this on some labels)

Do dogs have a requirement for protein per se or nitrogen?

Is the protein metabolisable or, like leather, unavailable to the dog?

What are using the protein for, merely growth, or growth, repair and energy?

As for fats again are they plant or animal based.

They are the prime energy source for dogs (rather than carbs).

Is not the proteins themselves which are the question I'm looking at. I'm more looking towards what's the point of the ratio to begin with even if the protein is right for for the dog?

One link is https://www.msu.edu/~silvar/hips.htm where it states:
Key phrase is obviously high biologic value. In this case though why is protein listed as a percentage? Surely, although each dog is different, they require a certain amount by weight of high value protein along with other minerals etc rather than a ratio which can be adjusted by nutritionally poor ingredients?

To state, as in several sites for large breeds that protein should be limited by ratio is, in my mind, misleading when what is far more important is the quantity of high quality, nutritionally digestible ingredients.

I know I'm coming from a certain viewpoint but trying to allow an informative open discussion.

__________________