THE FIRST INGREDIENT ON DOG FOOD: IMPORTANT, BUT NOT THE WHOLE STORY
Turn over a bag of dog food. The first ingredient is the one used in the greatest amount by weight when the recipe was mixed.[1]
We want that first ingredient to tell us something real. Fresh chicken, beef or salmon? Good. At least we know what we're looking at. “Meat and animal derivatives”? That could cover a range of animal ingredients without telling us clearly which ones are in the food.
But even a lovely first ingredient cannot tell you what fills the rest of the bag. Our rule is simple: read the first ingredient, then keep reading.
Start with the name
“Chicken” tells you what animal you're buying. “Meat and animal derivatives” doesn't give you that same clarity. It isn't proof that the contents are harmful or worthless. The problem is that you're being asked to trust a description that tells you very little.
For us, the first requirement is straightforward: name the ingredients clearly. Let owners decide for themselves.
Why we prefer fresh meat
We prefer clearly named fresh meat. We think it's a positive when a maker starts with chicken or another named animal ingredient that hasn't already been dried or rendered before going into the food.[2]
There's a nutritional reason to care about that history. How meat is heated, and for how long, can affect the protein a dog is able to use. Particularly harsh or prolonged heating can reduce the availability of some essential amino acids, including lysine.[3][4]
That's why we favour fresh meat when the other important things are right.
Fresh meat still needs to be handled and cooked safely. And a good named dried meat ingredient can certainly provide useful protein. The evidence doesn't show that every food made with fresh meat beats every food made with meal.[5]
But here is the catch with a label that says “chicken meal”: it names the animal, yet it may tell you little about the quality of the starting material or how severely it was processed. It might be excellent. It might not. The ingredient list alone won't settle that, and we don't think customers should have to fill the gaps with faith.
But doesn't fresh meat contain more water?
Yes. And it matters.
Ingredient lists rank things by their weight when they're added to the recipe. Fresh chicken contains plenty of water; dried chicken has already lost much of it. So fresh chicken can come first partly because it weighs more with that water included.[1][6]
That isn't a trick. The fresh chicken really did go into the mix at that weight. But it does mean “chicken first” doesn't prove that chicken supplies the most solid material in the finished food.
The water point changes how we interpret the list. It doesn't change our preference for clearly named fresh meat.
What if dried chicken meal gives more protein?
That's the strongest objection to our preference. Dried chicken meal is concentrated, so it can add a lot of protein even when it sits below fresh chicken on the ingredient list. And the fresh meat will still be cooked as the food is made.
Fair points. Cooking can improve food safety and, in some circumstances, digestibility. Heat isn't the enemy; the ingredients, temperature, duration and final nutritional result all matter.[3][5][7]
But a protein figure alone doesn't tell us how clearly a recipe is labelled, how a raw ingredient was processed or how the food as a whole was made. We still choose a named fresh meat as a positive, and we still judge the rest of the recipe.
The rest of the label has to earn your trust
If the pack makes a feature of an ingredient, look for its percentage.[1] Then read the next few lines. Fresh chicken followed by clearly named ingredients is a different proposition from fresh chicken followed by vague categories and a list you can't make sense of.
Here's our quick test:
1. Is the first ingredient clearly named?
2. Is it fresh, dried or a meal?
3. Does the pack tell you how much of its headline ingredient is included?
4. What are the next few ingredients, and do you know what they actually are?
5. Would the full recipe still look good if you ignored the big claim on the front?
We're pleased to see named fresh meat first. We're not impressed by a single attractive ingredient surrounded by fog.
That's the Bounce & Bella standard:
No grain. No vague derivatives. Ever.
Every ingredient clearly named.
Peace of mind for you.
Sources and footnotes
- UK Pet Food, Understanding Pet Food Labels. Supports the rule that ingredients are listed in descending order by weight and that ingredients emphasised on the label require percentage declaration. Industry guidance, checked 17 September 2026.
- UK Pet Food, ingredients/proteins factsheet. Supports the recognised pet-food meaning of “fresh” before manufacture: not previously dried, frozen, cured or cooked, with chilling allowed. It also notes that fresh and dry animal-protein sources can both be good-quality protein sources.
- van Rooijen et al., The Maillard reaction and pet food processing: effects on nutritive value and pet health, Nutrition Research Reviews (2013). Review evidence that heat processing can reduce the bioavailability of essential amino acids, particularly lysine, through Maillard reactions. This does not mean all heating is harmful.
- Johnson et al., Effects of species raw material source, ash content, and processing temperature on amino acid digestibility of animal by-product meals by cecectomized roosters and ileally cannulated dogs, Journal of Animal Science (1998). Lower-temperature meat-and-bone meal showed higher amino-acid digestibility than higher-temperature meal. One author was affiliated with The Iams Company; the study is old but directly relevant to the processing-temperature question.
- Geary et al., Standardized amino acid digestibility and nitrogen-corrected true metabolizable energy of frozen raw, freeze-dried raw, fresh, and extruded dog foods, Journal of Animal Science (2023). Processing format was associated with differences in amino-acid digestibility, but the authors explicitly caution that ingredient inclusion and macronutrient composition may also have influenced results. One author was employed by Primal Pet Group. This source supports caution about processing, not a universal claim that fresh meat always produces the best food.
- FEDIAF, Code of Good Labelling Practice for Pet Food. Supports the mixing-bowl principle and the treatment of fresh, dehydrated and concentrated ingredients in composition declarations and claims. It explains why ingredient order by added weight is real information but cannot by itself be treated as a ranking of final dry-matter contribution.
- Standardized amino acid digestibility and nitrogen-corrected true metabolizable energy of frozen raw, freeze-dried raw, mildly cooked, and retorted dog foods using the precision-fed cecectomized and conventional rooster assays, Journal of Animal Science (2025). Using matched formulations processed in different ways, mildly cooked sous-vide and steamed diets retained higher energy availability and some amino-acid digestibility measures than high-heat retorted food. This supports the bounded point that temperature and duration matter, not a blanket claim that lower-temperature cooking is always best. The study used rooster digestibility models and the authors call for further work in dogs.
