Royal Canin, a brand under the Mars Petcare umbrella, has been a significant player in the pet food industry since its inception in 1968 by veterinarian Jean Cathary. While the company has made strides in sustainability, aiming for carbon neutrality by 2025, its product offerings raise concerns regarding ingredient quality and transparency. This review delves into the various Royal Canin dog food lines, evaluating them based on ingredient quality, safety, and overall nutritional value for canine companions. Dog food reviews often highlight the importance of understanding these factors for your pet’s well-being.
Understanding Royal Canin’s Product Lines
Royal Canin offers a comprehensive range of dog food, including four distinct lines: two dry dog food lines with 86 recipes and two canned dog food lines with 22 recipes. The brand emphasizes breed, size, age, and health-specific formulas, suggesting a tailored approach to canine nutrition. However, a closer examination of the ingredient lists reveals commonalities across these specialized recipes, often featuring a base of grains and starches, followed by a lengthy list of additives and synthetically added vitamins and minerals.
Ingredient Quality and Safety Concerns
A primary concern identified across most Royal Canin formulas is the reliance on high carbohydrate content derived from grains and starches such as corn, rice, wheat, barley, and oat groats. These ingredients are often found among the top ten ingredients, contributing to a significant portion of the food’s carbohydrate profile. Furthermore, the absence of discernible whole food ingredients like fruits and vegetables means that essential nutrients, fiber, and beneficial phytonutrients are lacking.
The company compensates for this by adding an extensive list of 15-30 synthetic vitamins, minerals, and amino acids to achieve nutritional balance and meet AAFCO minimum requirements. While these additions provide essential nutrients, their synthetic origin raises questions about bioavailability and safety compared to nutrients derived from whole food sources. Notably, the use of sodium selenite as a source of selenium is a point of concern, as research suggests potential toxicity, with selenium yeast being a preferred and safer alternative.
Several Royal Canin recipes also include ingredients derived from the human food industry’s waste products, such as brewers rice, dried beet pulp, powdered cellulose, and psyllium seed husk. While these are presented as sources of fiber, whole fruits and vegetables offer a more nutritionally complete and beneficial option. Additionally, ingredients like chicken by-product meal, described as rendered slaughterhouse waste, and unnamed animal or fish products raise quality and consistency concerns.
Evaluating Royal Canin’s Formulas
Royal Canin Dry Dog Food Lines
Both the general “Royal Canin Dry” and “Royal Canin Breed Specific Dry” lines, encompassing a total of 86 recipes, consistently score low marks in ingredient quality and safety. These formulas average around 26% protein and a high 38% carbohydrate content. Concerns include:
- High Carbohydrate Content: Averaging around 40% in dry formulas.
- Excessive Additives: Numerous added vitamins, minerals, and amino acids.
- Inflammatory Ingredients: Inclusion of seed oils, plant proteins, and cellulose.
- Low-Quality Proteins: Use of unnamed animal protein sources.
- Ultra-Processing: High-heat processing that can degrade nutrients.
- Potential Contaminants: High pesticide foods, GMO crops, and rice with potential arsenic contamination.
- Synthetic Preservatives and Natural Flavors: Use of artificial preservatives and “natural flavors,” which can be derived from low-quality sources like animal digest or MSG.
- Lack of Transparency: Failure to specify the source of fish or fish oil (farmed vs. wild-caught) and the omega-6:omega-3 ratio.
The “Small Sensitive Skin Care” recipe, for example, lists several inflammatory foods and waste products in its top ingredients. Similarly, the “Breed Specific Dry” line, despite catering to specific breeds, shows ingredient lists that are largely reordered versions of the same core components.
Royal Canin Canned Dog Food Lines
The “Royal Canin Canned” and “Royal Canin Breed Specific Canned” lines, with 22 recipes combined, score slightly higher than their dry counterparts but are still considered high-risk according to evaluation criteria. These canned foods typically feature an average protein content of 37% and carbohydrates around 27%. While they list meat products within the first few ingredients, concerns persist:
- High Carbohydrate Content: Averaging around 27% for canned foods.
- Excessive Added Nutrients: Similar to dry foods, they contain numerous added vitamins and minerals.
- Inflammatory Ingredients: Inclusion of cellulose, seed oils, and carrageenan, a thickener linked to intestinal inflammation.
- Highly Processed: Multiple stages of high-heat processing.
- Potential Contaminants: High pesticide foods, GMO crops, and rice with potential arsenic contamination.
- Lack of Transparency: Similar issues with omega-6:omega-3 ratios and fish sourcing.
- Ingredient Splitting: A practice that can artificially elevate desirable protein ingredients on the ingredient list.
Royal Canin Recalls and Evaluation Criteria
As of the review’s current data, Royal Canin has not issued any recalls or voluntary withdrawals for its dog food products. The evaluation of dog food is based on two key criteria: ingredient quality and ingredient safety.
Ingredient Quality Assessment:
- Excessive carbohydrate content.
- Presence of unnamed proteins.
- Use of cellulose (wood pulp) instead of whole food fiber.
- Over-reliance on synthetic vitamins and minerals.
- Excessive added amino acids or plant proteins in lieu of meat protein.
- Inclusion of inflammatory processed seed oils.
Ingredient Safety Assessment:
- Degree of food processing.
- Inclusion of genetically modified (GMO) foods.
- Use of ingredients known to be high in pesticides.
- Presence of “natural flavors” derived from low-quality sources.
- Use of rice, which can contain arsenic.
This comprehensive review, developed in partnership with DogFoodReviews.com, aims to provide an unbiased assessment to help consumers make informed decisions about their pet’s nutrition.
