BoneLESS Frankerprey - Anyone does this?

[ldg]

So, Carolina, does this mean that you are going to do eggshells for the entire gang, even though the holistic doc recommended the MCHA?  ( I realized Lucky cannot have MCHA, but that doesn't mean Bugsy and Hope can't, does it?)

I must say, this thread has my head reeling...I'm so confused by it, and maybe that's because I'm not to the Frankenprey stage yet.  I mean, I realize that if you feed boneless Frankenprey, you need to supplement with some sort of calcium but, jeez, this sounds awfully confusing. I was hoping I could just put a certain size spoonful of the eqqshell powder on the meat chunks and call it a day :happy3: .  If that's not the case, I may be in deep doo-doo. 

Well, it's confusing just because of my mistakes in the original MHCA amount posts. :anon:

Basically you just need 1/2 capsule per ounce of meat. If using eggshell, you need 1/32 teaspoon per ounce of meat. Each requires a little more for organs, as they have more phosphorus, and the balance between calcium and phosphorus needs to be considered. mschauer gets more exacting, but she makes home made ground. When feeding frankenprey, even if boneless and using a calcium supplement instead of bone-in meals, it averages out over time, so being exact isn't as important.

MHCA is freeze dried bone of young cattle (typically, though there are some on the market made from antlers), so has the same profile as bone, but doesn't run the same risk with toxins as bone meal (which is processed completely differently, and is usually made from old cattle). BUT, as Carolina points out, it takes quite a bit more volume to get to the right amount of calcium to balance the phosphorus using the MHCA than when you use eggshell. ALL kibble and canned uses a calcium supplement: you'll often find bone meal in kibble, and calcium carbonate in canned. Eggshell is 95% calcium carbonate, but IMO, it is a more species-appropriate source of calcium carbonate than from oyster shells, coral (which is a source of calcium carbonate that is not good for the environment!) or limestone or something.

Hope that helps!

 

[mschauer]

I was trying to figure out why my statement that 3x as much MCHA was needed as eggshell to balance the phosphorus in any given meat turns out to be way off. Then I realized there is a *big* difference in the densities of the two meaning it was a mistake to be talking about MCHA in terms of capsules and eggshell in terms of teaspoons. 

So:

1 tsp MCHA = 3.3 g = 412.5 mg calcium  

1 tsp eggshell = 6.1 g = 2440 mg calcium

So, it takes 6x as much, by volume, MCHA as eggshell to balance the same amount of phosphorus. WOW!

Note: The 412.5 mg of calcium is the result of adjusting the actual amount (825 mg) to account for 1/2 being needed to balance the phosphorus that is also present in MCHA.

Probably no one but me cares but it was bugging me. 

 

[mschauer]

 mschauer gets more exacting, but she makes home made ground. When feeding frankenprey, even if boneless and using a calcium supplement instead of bone-in meals, it averages out over time, so being exact isn't as important.

Actually with regards to the calcium issue feeding boneless frankenprey and adding a calcium supplement is identical to feeding ground. Whether the meat is ground or chunked makes no difference to the amount of calcium needed. Averaging only occurs if the amount used fluctuates equally as much above and below a mean. If the amount used is consistently above or consistently below the desired amount there will be no averaging to the desired amount over any length of time. This is why I've always had a problem with the "averaging over time" approach. 
 

OK, off my soapbox!  

MHCA is freeze dried bone of young cattle (typically, though there are some on the market made from antlers), so has the same profile as bone, but doesn't run the same risk with toxins as bone meal (which is processed completely differently, and is usually made from old cattle). 

Just a little added information. The reason preserving the full nutrient profile of bone is believed to be important is that that are micro-nutrients in whole bone that aren't in supplements like eggshell. Studies have shown that the calcium in MCHA is not only better absorbed than other sources of calcium but that it is more effective at building bone and cartilage and it is believed that this is because of those micro-nutrients. The studies are not conclusive however and I've never heard of any known problem with using a supplement like eggshells over a long period of time.

 

[ldg]

Actually with regards to the calcium issue feeding boneless frankenprey and adding a calcium supplement is identical to feeding ground. Whether the meat is ground or chunked makes no difference to the amount of calcium needed. Averaging only occurs if the amount used fluctuates equally as much above and below a mean. If the amount used is consistently above or consistently below the desired amount there will be no averaging to the desired amount over any length of time. This is why I've always had a problem with the "averaging over time" approach. 

 
OK, off my soapbox!  :lol3:

I do hear you, and I understand. But with ground, it is MUCH easier to add the supplement to the food. With frankenprey, it can't be done in advance, and has to be added per meal. Two very different approaches. :nod: Personally, the way I look at it - if I feed bone-in meals, the amount of bone will vary from chicken wing to whatever by small amounts. The phosphorus content of the meat will vary, so if I use the "right" amount of eggshell (or MCHA) calcium as per USDA listed phosphorus amounts in the meats, organs, etc., over time they should be getting the right amount of calcium in the right balance with the phosphorus.

 

[mschauer]

I do hear you, and I understand. But with ground, it is MUCH easier to add the supplement to the food. With frankenprey, it can't be done in advance, and has to be added per meal. Two very different approaches.

Personally, the way I look at it - if I feed bone-in meals, the amount of bone will vary from chicken wing to whatever by small amounts. The phosphorus content of the meat will vary, so if I use the "right" amount of eggshell (or MCHA) calcium as per USDA listed phosphorus amounts in the meats, organs, etc., over time they should be getting the right amount of calcium in the right balance with the phosphorus.
 

I think we may be using the phrase "averaging over time" differently. When most raw feeders use the term they mean it as the reason why no measuring of any kind is needed to achieve nutritional balance because everything just "averages out over time". But you are actually measuring and adjusting amounts based on the content of the diet. Because you are adding measured amounts what you are doing by adding the calcium to every meal is no different from me adding it all at once to ground. You are just splitting the same amount over X number of meals.

From what I have read, and I haven't read nearly all of your transitioning posts, I have the impression you are taking a much more disciplined approach than what a lot of "frankenprey" feeders do. I completely agree that it isn't necessary for each and every meal to be perfectly balanced. I'm just not comfortable with the idea that all there is to achieving nutritional balance is 85% meat, 10% bone and 5% liver.

 

[ldg]

I think we may be using the phrase "averaging over time" differently. When most raw feeders use the term they mean it as the reason why no measuring of any kind is needed to achieve nutritional balance because everything just "averages out over time". But you are actually measuring and adjusting amounts based on the content of the diet. Because you are adding measured amounts what you are doing by adding the calcium to every meal is no different from me adding it all at once to ground. You are just splitting the same amount over X number of meals.

From what I have read, and I haven't read nearly all of your transitioning posts, I have the impression you are taking a much more disciplined approach than what a lot of "frankenprey" feeders do. I completely agree that it isn't necessary for each and every meal to be perfectly balanced. I'm just not comfortable with the idea that all there is to achieving nutritional balance is 85% meat, 10% bone and 5% liver.

Oh. I don't know any raw feeders other than those posting here and AC. :lol3: Had no idea that's what you were referring to.

My understanding is that there's a slight adjustment to those numbers - 80% meat (including muscle organs, such as heart, gizzard, lung, etc.), 10% bone, 5% liver, and 5% other secreting organ (spleen, kidney, pancreas, etc.); and that rotating proteins is considered essential - and I know AC and Cindy (at least) additionally feed sardines and crickets - basically a rather wide variety of things. But yes, again, point taken. Different approaches. :nod:

 

[mschauer]

My understanding is that there's a slight adjustment to those numbers - 80% meat (including muscle organs, such as heart, gizzard, lung, etc.), 10% bone, 5% liver, and 5% other secreting organ (spleen, kidney, pancreas, etc.); and that rotating proteins is considered essential - and I know AC and Cindy (at least) additionally feed sardines and crickets - basically a rather wide variety of things. But yes, again, point taken.

Different approaches.

It's quite common for raw feeders to say 80-10-5-5 BUT if no other secreting organ is available it's OK to use more meat. Hence the 85-10-5 and most insist that nothing else is necessary. 

 

[mrsgreenjeens]

Well, it's confusing just because of my mistakes in the original MHCA amount posts.

Basically you just need 1/2 capsule per ounce of meat. If using eggshell, you need 1/32 teaspoon per ounce of meat. Each requires a little more for organs, as they have more phosphorus, and the balance between calcium and phosphorus needs to be considered.

So, now I need to ask another question.  I think I am reading that it doesn't matter which protein source I will be using, I can either use 1/2 capsule (per oz) of MHCA or 1/32 teas (per oz) of eqqshell, and if serving up organs, add a little extra powder.  Is that right?  That's really all there is to it?  Rabbit would be the same as Chicken, and Beef, and Lamb?  (Boy, I am really making an assumption here...that my fur kids will actually get to this point

)

 

[ldg]

So, now I need to ask another question.  I think I am reading that it doesn't matter which protein source I will be using, I can either use 1/2 capsule (per oz) of MHCA or 1/32 teas (per oz) of eqqshell, and if serving up organs, add a little extra powder.  Is that right?  That's really all there is to it?  Rabbit would be the same as Chicken, and Beef, and Lamb?  (Boy, I am really making an assumption here...that my fur kids will actually get to this point :bigwink: :cross: )

Beef is the only one that has a seriously different phosphorus profile. But my cats can't tolerate beef, so it won't be in the rotation here. But the others all seem to be similar enough that yes, IMO, it doesn't matter the protein source (I didn't look up bison). I use 1/32 teaspoon eggshell per ounce of meat, and 3/64 per ounce of organs (1.5 x 1/32 teaspoon). :nod: (Thus the mini teaspoons come in very handy!).

 

[carolina]

Beef is the only one that has a seriously different phosphorus profile. But my cats can't tolerate beef, so it won't be in the rotation here. But the others all seem to be similar enough that yes, IMO, it doesn't matter the protein source (I didn't look up bison). I use 1/32 teaspoon eggshell per ounce of meat, and 3/64 per ounce of organs (1.5 x 1/32 teaspoon). :nod: (Thus the mini teaspoons come in very handy!).

For Bugsy, for example, who eats 1.8oz per meal, I am just going to do the Pinch spoon.... which is the 1/16tsp - it will balance out with the organ meal days :nod:

For Hope and Lucky, who eat 1.6oz, I will do the Smidgen spoon (1/32) + the Drop (1/64). On the organ days, I will just up it to 1/16 on those meals :nod: