Is 4 years long enough for Orijen trials?

I contacted Champion Foods as I was concerned that 4 years might not be long enough to prove that Orijen's high protein levels don't have an adverse effect on kidneys/liver & asked why a longer study had not been undertaken. I also asked them to comment on the following which I found on the internet:

"About a year ago I decided to put my dog on a better food as she was (at the time) 11 yeas old and I was directed toward Orijen. Little did I know how damaging the food was to her, as quite honestly, she exhibited no symptoms. Back in January my dog had to be put in the ICU due to an accident. It was during that stay where the vet noticed how high her liver levels were. Her alkaline & phosphatase as well as her calcium levels in the kidneys were all very high as well. The vet put her on 3 different liver support medicines and we had to follow up every month with more blood work to reassess the situation. After the 3rd month, the vet was suspicious that cancer was present. When I hear that, I immediately did some research on the food. It was then that I noticed how high the protein content is and what that much protein could do to a body. I presented my research and concerns to the vet, who wasn't as convinced as I was. After the 4th blood draw, and still no changes, we made the mutual decision to wean her off of Orijen and on to Science Diet (although just about any other brand would have worked too). A month later after the switch, and my dog was presented with a clean bill of health. Her alkaline & phosphatase levels are still slightly elevated, but I'm told there is nothing to worry about now. We concluded it was the food that was damaging and slowly killing her, as she was deemed healthy at the start of feeding her the food

I write this not to slander Orijen, I only want to educate others on my own personal experience. While it happened to my dog, that doesn't mean it will effect all dogs the same. Just please keep in mind, my dog showed no symptoms while on the food that anything was wrong. If it weren't for her stay in the hospital, we never would have known how much damage this food was causing her. If your dog is presently on this food, maybe a precautionary blood draw at their next exam would be worth your while."

This is Champion Food's reply:-

… Our 80-20 diets currently contain 38% protein in the dog diets. In the wild, wolves eat between 90-95% of their diet from animal sources, so at 80% we are still well below what the digestive, kidney and hepatic (liver) system is capable of handling.

As for long term feeding trials, as far as I am aware there have been no lifelong feeding trials for ANY diet from any company. ORIJEN has been on the market for almost 6 years now and ACANA for over 25 and we have had great success with all of our products. High protein diets have been around for decades and have proved to be a safe and Biologically Appropriate choice for feeding dogs and cats.
Because the internet posting is based on an individual case I cannot really comment on their specific results. From customer and veterinary feedback and from blood pulls done on healthy animals (that haven’t recently experienced trauma) that have been fed Orijen we have found all liver enzymes to be within the normal healthy range. Unfortunately situations like this happen with all dog foods and this dog may have had underlying metabolism issue or situation for which ORIJEN may not have been the ideal diet to feed.

Feeding ORIJEN or ACANA is definitely not dietary indiscretion- these diets are well proven diets that contains the highest quality of ingredients in the entire pet food industry"

My dog seems to be doing very well on Orijen, but, I do still worry about the internet article, so I've ordered some Arden Grange tinned to have with it to lower the protein levels. Just wondered what anyone else thinks

If you are worried about protein levels I am not sure why you would continue feeding it?

I am also interested in why you are more influenced by ONE posting by a "member of joe public" which has no evidence based information to support their claim?

As I am often fond of saying, correlation does not equal causation. (That is how superstitions are born)

I would rather address both the manufacturer (as you have done) and those who are specialists in canine nutrition.

Perhaps the following may be of interest?

http://www.b-naturals.com/newsletter/protein/

http://www.b-naturals.com/newsletter/dogs-and-protein/

http://www.b-naturals.com/newsletter...s-senior-dogs/

I continue feeding it because I believe it has the best quality ingredients/production methods & she prefers it to any other kibble I've tried. It's just that nutritionalists seem to change their mind every five minutes about what's good or bad for people, let alone dogs

I would think that one piece of anecdocal evidence, written by a random member of the public and only involving one dog would mean very little. How many other people feed Orijen worldwide with no problems, I wonder?

There are only two nutritionally qualified vets in the UK, thus if you want educated answers to your question you might want to address your questions to them.

One of them is Marge Chandler who operates out of the Royal Dick and the other name escapes me at the mo.

Aye? I didn't know that. What qualifaction do they have? I could have sworn there were vets in Glasgow completing nutritional studies as part of their PhDs while I was there?

What is the protein level for a raw fed dog??

Forgot which one of these initials denote the qualification, but you might know

Marge Chandler DVM, MS, MACVSc, DACVN, DACVIM, DECVIM-CA, MRCVS

Can you elaborate?

Would it be much higher than Orijen?
Do people who fed raw do a 80 20 spilt ?