Carb content validation- Ideas?

[Staci & Ivy]

HI everyone, I am questioning some of the data we have about Dr. Pierson’s list of carb content. Just want to make sure if anyone can validate this information (maybe the data is just old and it’s been reformulated).

One specific food which is widely used is Fancy Feast Beef Feast In Roasted Beef Flavor Gravy. Listed as 20%, but with this calculator it comes up as only 14%.

https://www.walkervillevet.com.au/blog/carbohydrates-levels-cat-food/

Any ideas what the correct carb % is?

 

[CORKY]

HI everyone, I am questioning some of the data we have about Dr. Pierson’s list of carb content. Just want to make sure if anyone can validate this information (maybe the data is just old and it’s been reformulated).

One specific food which is widely used is Fancy Feast Beef Feast In Roasted Beef Flavor Gravy. Listed as 20%, but with this calculator it comes up as only 14%.

https://www.walkervillevet.com.au/blog/carbohydrates-levels-cat-food/

Any ideas what the correct carb % is?
View attachment 71378

the calculation is correct any wet food with gravy are considered high carbs, this are the %s to go by
LOW CARBS 0-10%
MEDIUM CARBS 11-15%
HIGH CARBS 16-24%
when in doubt you can go the Chewy.com web site , choose the food click on the photo scroll down, go to nutrients and you will have the %, then use those on the Carb calculator

 

[Staci & Ivy]

the calculation is correct any wet food with gravy are considered high carbs, this are the %s to go by
LOW CARBS 0-10%
MEDIUM CARBS 11-15%
HIGH CARBS 16-24%
when in doubt you can go the Chewy.com web site , choose the food click on the photo scroll down, go to nutrients and you will have the %, then use those on the Carb calculator

Chewy doesn’t list this one can of food any more. (I checked today).

Maybe they’ve changed their website since we had that food on the list.

 

[Staci & Ivy]

It looks like Dr Pierson’s list doesn’t use guaranteed analysis data, which is printed on the can.

And that is the data I put into the calculator, so it is not matching Dr Pierson‘s list.
So I don’t know how to compare.

It’s not apples to apples because they are different formulas to calculate.

The calculator I used in the link above Does use guarantee analysis, which is on the can, and it comes up as 14% for this product.

 

[Staci & Ivy]

Dr. Pearson’s list appears to use a TNA data and the calculator above uses a (guaranteed analysis) printed on the can.

 

[CORKY]

Dr. Pearson’s list appears to use a TNA data and the calculator above uses a (guaranteed analysis) printed on the can.

I doble check with Chewy.com as I explained how to find the nutrients, not on their list, and with Dr Pearson, so far I have not had a miss, for me and my Corky I know he's getting a good USA made food, and I am more concerned about the %s of carbs he intakes, and I know every cat is different, but this is what has my Corky's pancreas beginning to produce insulin, just see his Spreadsheet, and remarks, ( how I feed) it speaks for itself

 

[CORKY]

I doble check with Chewy.com as I explained how to find the nutrients, not on their list, and with Dr Pearson, so far I have not had a miss, for me and my Corky I know he's getting a good USA made food, and I am more concerned about the %s of carbs he intakes, and I know every cat is different, but this is what has my Corky's pancreas beginning to produce insulin, just see his Spreadsheet, and remarks, ( how I feed) it speaks for itself

Ok! Go to their web site in their search engine write the food you are looking for,,when it pops up click on the can picture, scroll down, you will se “Nutrients” open it and it will give you everything you need to know to calculate carbs

 

[Staci & Ivy]

Hi Maria, thanks. I’ve attached Chewy’s website screen shots. Looks like this product is now a 14% carb can. (beware, it’s not coming up as a 20% as I thought it was).
Must be why it’s not working to hold her up when needed

 

[CORKY]

Hi Maria, thanks. I’ve attached Chewy’s website screen shots. Looks like this product is now a 14% carb can. (beware, it’s not coming up as a 20% as I thought it was).
Must be why it’s not working to hold her up when needed
View attachment 71382
View attachment 71383

This is consider high carbs between 14-24% carbs any gravies from FF are high carbs, so be very careful how to use them if you need to because of lows in the 50’s test and give 1 tsp at a time every 1/2 hour and repeat you don’t want to hike up the BG. If is one thing I have gotten to be very good at in this Forum is about our beautiful diabetic babies, If you reviewed Corky’s SS you can see I’m obsessed with testing and how I feed, I truly believe that this has saved his life with the help I blindly have towards this Forum and their members

 

[SmallestSparrow]

I’ve said this before that I have no idea how the chart used here was calculated. It is NOT done using %dry matter because the numbers don’t match for the food I use and have calculated already. It may be calculated using metabolized energy but for wet food those numbers should (I believe) be very close (I have NOT calculated metabolized energy and don’t have the bandwidth to deal with it right now but I read those numbers will be similar)

Carb calculators you find online use percent dry matter (I’ve never found one for metabolized energy), probably bc the main comparison people make is between wet food and dry food so to make it apples to apples it gets converted to % dry matter (calculations account for how much moisture is in wet food)

I do not think you can make a blanket statement re “gravy” being high or medium carb—gravy is a term used just for advertising. The food chart used in this site lists some “gravy” foods as medium carb and if you calculate %dry matter indeed it is (and for the one I did the calculations on I think it’s more likely the carb content came from rice and not the “gravy”. Moreover, that brand (proplan) had the label printed on English and French (I assume they sell in Canada). In English it said “gravy” in French “sauce”

One of the mods said in a different thread that the food chart used “as fed” and I’m not exactly sure what that means either. I’m happy to double check the math of an online calculator but it will likely come out the same—what I do think would be helpful is knowing just exactly what manipulations were done on the food chart we are referencing, and how that algorithm compares to %dry matter (and why %dry matter wasn’t used). That would be much more useful than a chart.

as for wondering if it’s enough to help on a low day here’s my suggestion—since I have NO CLUE what algorithm was used for the food chart, take another food you use from the food chart and put it in the calculator and compare those numbers. If they are all about the same degree off then the content of the food in question probably hasn’t changed. What exactly the carb content is I couldn’t say since no one knows how the chart was calculated, but if it’s been your reference point and you want to continue to use it as the standard then there you go.

 

[CORKY]

I’ve said this before that I have no idea how the chart used here was calculated. It is NOT done using %dry matter because the numbers don’t match for the food I use and have calculated already. It may be calculated using metabolized energy but for wet food those numbers should (I believe) be very close (I have NOT calculated metabolized energy and don’t have the bandwidth to deal with it right now but I read those numbers will be similar)

Carb calculators you find online use percent dry matter (I’ve never found one for metabolized energy), probably bc the main comparison people make is between wet food and dry food so to make it apples to apples it gets converted to % dry matter (calculations account for how much moisture is in wet food)

I do not think you can make a blanket statement re “gravy” being high or medium carb—gravy is a term used just for advertising. The food chart used in this site lists some “gravy” foods as medium carb and if you calculate %dry matter indeed it is (and for the one I did the calculations on I think it’s more likely the carb content came from rice and not the “gravy”. Moreover, that brand (proplan) had the label printed on English and French (I assume they sell in Canada). In English it said “gravy” in French “sauce”

One of the mods said in a different thread that the food chart used “as fed” and I’m not exactly sure what that means either. I’m happy to double check the math of an online calculator but it will likely come out the same—what I do think would be helpful is knowing just exactly what manipulations were done on the food chart we are referencing, and how that algorithm compares to %dry matter (and why %dry matter wasn’t used). That would be much more useful than a chart.

as for wondering if it’s enough to help on a low day here’s my suggestion—since I have NO CLUE what algorithm was used for the food chart, take another food you use from the food chart and put it in the calculator and compare those numbers. If they are all about the same degree off then the content of the food in question probably hasn’t changed. What exactly the carb content is I couldn’t say since no one knows how the chart was calculated, but if it’s been your reference point and you want to continue to use it as the standard then there you go.

@Sienne and Gabby (GA)

 

[Staci & Ivy]

I’ve said this before that I have no idea how the chart used here was calculated. It is NOT done using %dry matter because the numbers don’t match for the food I use and have calculated already. It may be calculated using metabolized energy but for wet food those numbers should (I believe) be very close (I have NOT calculated metabolized energy and don’t have the bandwidth to deal with it right now but I read those numbers will be similar)

Carb calculators you find online use percent dry matter (I’ve never found one for metabolized energy), probably bc the main comparison people make is between wet food and dry food so to make it apples to apples it gets converted to % dry matter (calculations account for how much moisture is in wet food)

I do not think you can make a blanket statement re “gravy” being high or medium carb—gravy is a term used just for advertising. The food chart used in this site lists some “gravy” foods as medium carb and if you calculate %dry matter indeed it is (and for the one I did the calculations on I think it’s more likely the carb content came from rice and not the “gravy”. Moreover, that brand (proplan) had the label printed on English and French (I assume they sell in Canada). In English it said “gravy” in French “sauce”

One of the mods said in a different thread that the food chart used “as fed” and I’m not exactly sure what that means either. I’m happy to double check the math of an online calculator but it will likely come out the same—what I do think would be helpful is knowing just exactly what manipulations were done on the food chart we are referencing, and how that algorithm compares to %dry matter (and why %dry matter wasn’t used). That would be much more useful than a chart.

as for wondering if it’s enough to help on a low day here’s my suggestion—since I have NO CLUE what algorithm was used for the food chart, take another food you use from the food chart and put it in the calculator and compare those numbers. If they are all about the same degree off then the content of the food in question probably hasn’t changed. What exactly the carb content is I couldn’t say since no one knows how the chart was calculated, but if it’s been your reference point and you want to continue to use it as the standard then there you go.

Hi Colleen, I started down this rabbit hole basically trying to figure out why this one food that is listed says it’s 20%.

When I plugged in the data on the label of the can (which it says to do on the calculator I used and is linked at the top of this thread) the food came up as 14% and not 20% so that’s why I was questioning if anybody knew anything different.

I’m not “telling” anyone a fact, I’m asking questions because I’m certainly not an expert at this.

I just don’t want anybody assuming it’s 20% if in fact it’s 14% because that could cause a big problem for somebody relying on 20%, if it’s not really that.
Maybe the formulation has changed from when it was originally calculated, I don’t really know.

Just asking questions for myself and hoping I can help others along the way.

 

[SmallestSparrow]

why this one food that is listed says it’s 20%.

Listed on the forum food chart? Or somewhere else?

I wish I understood how the forum food chart was calculated but since it’s been discussed a few times without (for me at least) resolution it may stay a mystery.

I’m sorry if it sounded like I said you were telling not asking—I get that you were confused and were asking—the only answer I have is the calculator you used (and probably any online calculator you find) calculated carbs in %dry matter and the forum food chart does not. I don’t know what it uses but its numbers don’t align with % dry matter. There’s also the fact that it’s old so food formulations can change. I wish they’d provided *how* they calculated carbs then we could just do it ourselves. I appreciate that it was compiled by a vet, so undoubtedly a better estimate than just %dry matter but I can’t tell what they used

 

[Staci & Ivy]

Listed on the forum food chart? Or somewhere else?

I wish I understood how the forum food chart was calculated but since it’s been discussed a few times without (for me at least) resolution it may stay a mystery.

I’m sorry if it sounded like I said you were telling not asking—I get that you were confused and were asking—the only answer I have is the calculator you used (and probably any online calculator you find) calculated carbs in %dry matter and the forum food chart does not. I don’t know what it uses but its numbers don’t align with % dry matter. There’s also the fact that it’s old so food formulations can change. I wish they’d provided *how* they calculated carbs then we could just do it ourselves. I appreciate that it was compiled by a vet, so undoubtedly a better estimate than just %dry matter but I can’t tell what they used

I wasn’t offended, Colleen, just wanted to clarify.

I agree, wish we had the proper tool to do it ourself so we could be sure easily.

 

[SmallestSparrow]

Well this was a good diversion from worrying about Methos’ BG.

Most (likely all) online calculators calculate %dry matter from the guaranteed analysis. Many values listed are either Min or Max percents. Obviously these can vary (especially from a high max or a low min). We can probably assume the companies won’t up the protein, but may up the fat (cheap) or just let carbs fill up the rest (also cheap)

it appears the vet asked companies to provide typical nutritional analysis (narrowing their “guesstimated” percents a bit) then used those numbers rather than the GA numbers in calculations (so you could approximate her calculation if you had TNA and just plugged them into the online calculator.

If it seems carbs are less than the chart says then the somewhat proprietary info she squeezed out of them probably had a tad less moisture, fat, or fiber than the max listed. That would cause the carb content to be greater (since carbs are what you have after you take away all the listed values).

when I’m not as concerned with his BG I will try running calculations with a few variations on the content to see if I can make the carb vary as much as you found (was it 16 vs 20? I’ll go back to see)

 

[SmallestSparrow]

Also I’m making an assumption on what Typical Nutrional Analysis is, hoping it means “yes you’ve guaranteed at least X% protein but in a *typical* can what is the %protein … still I find it hard to believe it can throw it off by 4%

 

[Diane Tyler's Mom GA]

Hi Colleen it was 14 vs 20
I found this discussed on this thread about how carbs are figured. I have no clue what all this means only because when Tyler was alive all I fed him was FF Pates , never had to use any med or high carb foods
On this thread members are talking about carbs. Don't ask me because I have no clue what they are talking about lol Maybe you can understand what they are talking about
https://felinediabetes.com/FDMB/threads/carb-formula-discrepancies.280282/#post-3093426

@SmallestSparrow

Found Dr P said this on the food chart whatever this means



Regarding updating the sortable chart - that will not be done since someone else did that I and I do not know how to set one up so what is there will just have to be enough. There will also not be a chart for ascending phosphorus values like there was before.

You will also note that I streamlined the chart and removed DMB data. Only ME (calorie-basis) values are shown which is the best way to look at food composition.

And, finally, keep in mind that the numbers on the chart are VERY loose so don't get neurotic about whether a food says 7% carb or 10% carbbecause they are virtually the same number. Due to the way carbs are figured, a food that states 10% carb content could even be 0% or 2%. Food compositon numbers are just not that accurate.

 

[SmallestSparrow]

Ok I’m assuming when you say “listed as 20%” you mean on Dr Pierson’s chart (The Chart). So I did a little math (for the nerds will put that in a separate reply). To make carbs increase from the 14% calculated by dry matter that means some other ingredient had to decrease in percent (because carbs are what you get after subtracting everything else…there will not be a quiz)

ingredients that could decrease: fiber, moisture, and ash. I doubt they decreased moisture bc (for now at least) water is cheap. Idk what purpose ash serves so it’s probably not good. I’ll leave it alone for now. Let’s say that while fiber is *guaranteed* to be no more than 1.5% it *typically* is around 0.5%. that increases the carbs enough to be 19.5%. So in other words, it’s entirely possible to have % dry matter based on Guarenteed Analysis be 14% (using the max and min stated values) but if it typically has less fiber (or ash or water) when plopped into the can it would still meet the guaranteed analysis but the %dry matter carb could increase from 14 to 20%

Math will follow in probably 90 min —need to clean cat rooms and agonize over BG and feed.

 

[SmallestSparrow]

And, finally, keep in mind that the numbers on the chart are VERY loose so don't get neurotic about whether a food says 7% carb or 10% carbbecause they are virtually the same number.

In this I totally agree—but I understand some cats may be more or less sensitive to carbs and I totally get someone wanting to know. Personally I’ve just been stumped over what she used bc when people ask about The Chart I could never reconcile it with my calculations. From my example above it’s easy to see that if an ingredient varies just by a percent it can significantly alter the carb number but we should (I believe) be more focused on in general is this low/medium/or high carb food.

the various tiki cat products vary a bit. But I can roughly know what the math will end up on a new flavor just by looking at what everything else is, and which ingredients have “max”s. That lets me know roughly how it compares to what he usually gets. Some of his flavors or textures are a bit more than others but he also sometimes leaves a bit, etc.

 

[Diane Tyler's Mom GA]

Ok I’m assuming when you say “listed as 20%” you mean on Dr Pierson’s chart (The Chart

Yes it says 20% on The Chart

 

[CORKY]

Yes it says 20% on The Chart

Guys I definitely know where you are coming from, but as much time I have on my hands, I do not trouble myself doing all these, sometimes research, , I learned all about FD thru this Forum, I follow the expert member in my concerns and their suggestions and advise blindly, what I have learned, I’ve learned it here, sometimes too much research, confusion can come about, so I, here follow directions blindly, I personally don't need any more, my Corky’s Spreadsheet speaks for itself, even if I would've followed my Vets direction, I would have failed Corky, my main goal is to keep his BF in the low 90’s , and even at that I cannot deny it took a lot of time and teachings, and specially courage to shoot as I just did with a BG o low 80’s, but I am certain I have this Forum’s back at all times

 

[SmallestSparrow]

For everyone: as suspected “typical” varies from “guaranteed” in that its numbers come from an average of several tests done on a batch of food. In theory this can make a difference because some foods may vary in trace element, mineral content etc seasonally. Considering how ultra processed our food is not sure how much it applies. The cynic in me thinks variation is more likely due to lack of strict control on the line (doubt any calipers were used in the making of this food ), or the cost of an ingredient. But I digress.

Dr Pierson felt it was important so good enough for me. BUT it also sounds like she got the run around seeking the TNA even with DVM after her name (hence her black balling some companies on her site).

For the nerds: I’ll explain how to calculate % dry matter (you can also use a calculator but hopefully I can explain how the calculator gives you the number—it is useful for getting a feel about a food choice.

first calculate “dry matter percent” by subtracting percent moisture from 100%. In this example 100-82=18.

next calculate percent carb by adding all other listed ingredients (including moisture) and subtracting that number from 100:
100-(9+2+1.5+82+3)=100-97.5= 2.5

To calculate any ingredient %dry matter divide the GA (on the label) or TNA (from the manufacturer) % by the dry matter percent and multiply by 100.
For example in this food protein by GA:
(9/18)x100= 50% protein by dry matter

for example in this food carbs by GA:
(2.5/18)x100= 13.89

but in my imaginary example if the company said the TNA of fiber was 0.5, not 1.5 (max) then

100- (9+2+0.5+82+3)=3.5
so
Dry matter carbs by TNA:
(3.5/18)x100=19.44

edit: so if you want to calculate a food exactly like The Chart you will need to look at the manufacturers website and if not there probably contact the cimpany for the Typical Nutritional Analysis info. Then use math or an online calculator for percent dry matter. I’m pretty sure if you ask chewy they will default to the Guaranteed Analysis found on the package but I could be wrong. They don’t strike me as math nerds. Doing the calculations with GA will put you in the ball park for The Chart results but depending on how many ingredients have “max” values and how large those values are, they can affect carb numbers.

 

[SmallestSparrow]

Guys I definitely know where you are coming from, but as much time I have on my hands, I do not trouble myself doing all these, sometimes research, , I learned all about FD thru this Forum, I follow the expert member in my concerns and their suggestions and advise blindly, what I have learned, I’ve learned it here, sometimes too much research, confusion can come about, so I, here follow directions blindly, I personally don't need any more, my Corky’s Spreadsheet speaks for itself, even if I would've followed my Vets direction, I would have failed Corky, my main goal is to keep his BF in the low 90’s , and even at that I cannot deny it took a lot of time and teachings, and specially courage to shoot as I just did with a BG o low 80’s, but I am certain I have this Forum’s back at all times

It’s all good Maria—no math is required if you just want to use the chart. I’m just explaining how those numbers were put on the chart, and how people can calculate numbers for food not found there.

I’d make a joke about someone promising there’d be no math but I don’t think it would mean anything outside the US and perhaps outside my generation —so rest assured, The Chart is not being criticized just explained

 

[Staci & Ivy]

In this I totally agree—but I understand some cats may be more or less sensitive to carbs and I totally get someone wanting to know. Personally I’ve just been stumped over what she used bc when people ask about The Chart I could never reconcile it with my calculations. From my example above it’s easy to see that if an ingredient varies just by a percent it can significantly alter the carb number but we should (I believe) be more focused on in general is this low/medium/or high carb food.

the various tiki cat products vary a bit. But I can roughly know what the math will end up on a new flavor just by looking at what everything else is, and which ingredients have “max”s. That lets me know roughly how it compares to what he usually gets. Some of his flavors or textures are a bit more than others but he also sometimes leaves a bit, etc.

So based on all of this science and math (which is way above my pay grade and background in marketing and advertising, lol) would the darned can being discussed… is it 14% carbs as listed on Chewy and the GA calculator or is it 20% as listed on “The List” from Dr. Pierson’s List ?????

 

[SmallestSparrow]

So based on all of this science and math (which is way above my pay grade and background in marketing and advertising, lol) would the darned can being discussed… is it 14% carbs as listed on Chewy and the GA calculator or is it 20% as listed on “The List” from Dr. Pierson’s List ?????

Have you heard of Schrödinger’s cat?

it’s both. It is 14% as calculated using the GA. BUT at some point Dr Pierson strong armed Purina into giving her TNA numbers based on their sampling of some batches and averaging the results. She then used the math above (or a percent dry matter calculator like you did)—the difference was the TNA numbers didn’t exactly match the GA numbers.

think of it like this: you make your mom’s cheese cake for Thanksgiving. But not every egg is exactly the same size. Maybe you don’t scrape all the cream
Cheese in or your kid dumps a bit extra sugar. We take three cheesecakes and chemically break them down to measure ingredients

the GA is your moms recipe. The average of the three results from deconstructing finished cheesecakes in the TNA. While the numerical difference isn’t huge, once we use it to calculate carbs it can be a few percentage points.

edit: I would suggest using The Chart as we do human glucometers—as long as everyone agrees to nomenclature it doesn’t really matter about Schrödinger cat —so use her numbers and just be aware if using a new food not on the list there is a slight (slight) difference AND if feeling nerdy contact the company, ask for the TNA, and plug those numbers into a dry matter calculator or ask me and I will crunch them

 

[Staci & Ivy]

Have you heard of Schrödinger’s cat?

it’s both. It is 14% as calculated using the GA. BUT at some point Dr Pierson strong armed Purina into giving her TNA numbers based on their sampling of some batches and averaging the results. She then used the math above (or a percent dry matter calculator like you did)—the difference was the TNA numbers didn’t exactly match the GA numbers.

think of it like this: you make your mom’s cheese cake for Thanksgiving. But not every egg is exactly the same size. Maybe you don’t scrape all the cream
Cheese in or your kid dumps a bit extra sugar. We take three cheesecakes and chemically break them down to measure ingredients

the GA is your moms recipe. The average of the three results from deconstructing finished cheesecakes in the TNA. While the numerical difference isn’t huge, once we use it to calculate carbs it can be a few percentage points.

edit: I would suggest using The Chart as we do human glucometers—as long as everyone agrees to nomenclature it doesn’t really matter about Schrödinger cat —so use her numbers and just be aware if using a new food not on the list there is a slight (slight) difference AND if feeling nerdy contact the company, ask for the TNA, and plug those numbers into a dry matter calculator or ask me and I will crunch them

Thanks, Colleen. It’s goood to have a science nerd among us (said with love and appreciation)

 

[SmallestSparrow]

Thanks, Colleen. It’s goood to have a science nerd among us (said with love and appreciation)

I’m just sorry I don’t have a better answer for you (but I smiled when you set me up perfectly for a Schrödinger cat reply…)

I’m also grateful that your question finally solved the Puzzle of The Chart, it had been bothering me for many weeks.

 

[SmallestSparrow]

And so everyone can laugh
Edit: for the young folks it’s SNL during the Ford-Carter debates

 

[Staci & Ivy]

And so everyone can laugh
Edit: for the young folks it’s SNL during the Ford-Carter debates

Love the SNL clip!!

 

[SmallestSparrow]

Love the SNL clip!!

I’m sure many hear it in their heads as I ramble on about calculating carbs—I’m sorry to all you youngsters but I think we boomers had the best SNL and definitely the best music