Curious about EVO & large breed puppies

I'm just curious about this. I've heard over and over again that EVO is not good for large/giant breed puppies (and even read a couple where it said it's best to avoid even for medium-size puppies), but for the life of me I can't find anything that says WHY!

I've searched through old threads here on Chaz, dogfoodproject.com, and the EVO website. This is something that has been bugging me for a while now because I can't find the answers!

So my questions are these:

-Why is EVO bad for large/giant breed puppies?
-What is considered large/giant breed?
-When is it appropriate for a dog that is considered large/giant breed to start on EVO?

Thanks in advance!

It's something about the slow growth of the skeletal structure of the large breeds and the muscle ratio, I believe.

I probably started mine earlier than recommended (they were about a year and a half old) but as they were also getting extra stuff (calf milk replacer, for one) to support their bones and joints I wasn't terribly worried about it. They've done extremely well.

Thanks for the info. I hadn't thought of the slower growth in larger dog breeds, so that makes a lot of sense. I wonder if Morgan fits in that category...

Thanks again!

I've heard that the "cut-off" for feeding EVO as a young dog is around 50 lbs as an adult. If they are going to be smaller than that, you don't have to be as concerned.

The last time I asked, it was if they were going to be over 50/60 pounds as an adult you should weight until they have matured..

Now, Im not saying that is right for your pup.. (because all dogs are different).. but I switched Chloe to EVO when she was roughly about a 16 months old.. and she has seemingly had NO problems and she is about 2 yrs and 4 months old (she is 52 lbs)

If EVO is supposed to be very close to a raw diet, and wolves eat raw, why is it dangerous? Just never made sense to me. Sounds like the complany just wouldn't want to be held liable if a dog developed hip displasia and was fed EVO. I feed grain-free, but none of my dogs are over 50 lbs.

The problem with Evo and many other grain free foods is the calcium level, as well as other minerals, is entirely too high for a growing puppy and can lead to skeletal issues as well as uneven growth. Puppies are not able to regulate how much calcium their body absorbs so too high calcium levels in food can be dangerous.

Evo RM lists an 8-11wk feeding amount for a 20-30lb puppy. I bet those will be over 50lbs in a year. In fact, they call it all life stages.

Does it meet the standard, but not what some people want?

EVO is not meant as an ALS food. The calcium/phosphorus ratios aren't appropriate for dogs that will be over 50lbs as adults.

Why this is different than raw diets, I'm not entirely sure, but it is.

For RM Small Bites, the bag says ALS so someone should tell them that.

I hate dog food. But dogs love it... why can't they just graze like cows.

Actually, when I asked about feeding EVO and/or raw I was told to wait on both accounts until Bella had matured more. Soon after she hit a year and had the bulk of her muscle, we switched her to EVO.

I think Natura is actually in the process of taking a long, hard look at their bags in relation to what sizes/ages should actually be eating which formula...

Thank you all for the information! This has really been a big help!

The shelter we adopted Morgan from guess-timated that he would weigh in about 65-75lbs full grown. I personally don't think he's going to get -quite- that big, but better safe than sorry always! Sounds like I'll be waiting another year or so before I make the decision on EVO.

Thanks again! You guys are the best!

The calcium to phosphorus ratio is very relevant to growing puppies, particularly so for large breeds, but so is the overall calcium content in the food. So, while a food's ca to ph ratio may be appropriate, the overall calcium amounts may not be. If a food has a 1.3:1 ratio, that would be appropriate, but not if the calcium level is over 1.5%, depending on the caloric density. For example, the food that we make has a 1.3:1 ratio, but, the overall calcium amount is 1.92%. Now, we'll get a bit technical and say that this calcium level is on the higher end of the scale for what's acceptable for puppies, and higher than what I'd feel comfortable feeding a large breed pup, but the food is considered appropriate for all life stages and due to the caloric density of the food, it is not completely inappropriate considering the calcium needs of puppies based upon calories consumed.

A food is considered ALS if it meets all minimum nutrient requirements for puppies and adults according to AAFCO's recommendations. This does not mean a food is ideal for puppies, it simply means it meats nutrient minimums.