Meat vs Meat Meal vs By-Products: A Label-Decoding Comparison Guide
Three wordings on a pet food label cause more confusion than any others: fresh meat, meat meal (the dehydrated form) and by-products or "meat and animal derivatives". They describe materials at different stages of processing and different levels of detail, not a simple ladder from good to bad. Fresh meat is about 70% water and loses most of its mass on drying; a meal is already dehydrated and far more concentrated; a by-product is a non-muscle part that, in the EU and UK, must come from Category 3 material fit for human consumption at slaughter (AAFCO, 2024; Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009). This guide decodes each term and shows what actually separates them: traceability, not vocabulary.
Last updated :General documentary information. For an individual animal, a veterinarian's advice takes precedence over any online content.
What does "fresh meat" really contribute once the food is cooked?
Answer capsule. Fresh meat is about 70% water (FEDIAF, 2019). Ranked by fresh weight, it rises to the top of the ingredient list, but extrusion and drying evaporate that water, leaving only about 30% of its starting mass. In a finished kibble at 8 to 10% moisture, its real contribution drops by roughly two-thirds, so its high position overstates the final share.
The ingredient list ranks materials by their weight at mixing, before any heat treatment (FEDIAF, 2019). Fresh meat, heavy with water, therefore claims a position that its finished contribution does not always justify. Of 100 g of fresh meat at 70% water, only about 30 g of dry matter survive drying.
The practical consequence reverses many intuitions. A kibble listing "fresh chicken" first can ultimately contain less chicken protein than a recipe placing a chicken meal third, because the meal entered the mix already dehydrated (Tufts Petfoodology, 2021). Fresh meat is not inferior, but its rank on the list flatters it, and the only fair way to judge its real share is on a dry-matter basis rather than by position.
Why is meat meal more concentrated than fresh meat?
Answer capsule. Because it lost its water before inclusion. Meat meal (dehydrated protein) is cooked, pressed and dried to a powder at a few percent moisture, so weight for weight it supplies far more protein than fresh meat at 70% water (AAFCO, 2024). A meal ranked mid-list can deliver more final protein than fresh meat placed first (Tufts Petfoodology, 2021).
"Dehydrated poultry protein" and "fresh poultry meat" often name the same animal protein at different stages, differing by degree of dehydration rather than necessarily by origin (AAFCO, 2024). The meal is a concentrated form; the fresh meat is added raw and soaked with water. This is why the meal's modest position on the list understates its contribution.
Neither form is inherently better. Quality depends on the raw material and the process: temperature-controlled drying preserves amino acids better than excessive cooking, and a meal made from a well-traced source can outperform poorly handled fresh meat (FEDIAF, 2019). The deciding factor is the traceability of the source, not the fresh-versus-dehydrated label. Reading a meal as automatically "lower grade" because it sits lower on the list is the mistake to avoid.
What do "meat and animal derivatives" and "by-products" mean?
Answer capsule. They are generic category names governed by regulation. In the EU and UK, only Category 3 material, defined by Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009, may enter pet food: parts of animals passed fit for human consumption at slaughter but redirected from the human market. The terms cover muscle and organ meats without naming the species or proportion. US rules use comparable group terms.
"Meat and animal derivatives" names a category of ingredients, not a specific raw material, and the FEDIAF labelling code permits these group names, which give recipe flexibility at the cost of precision (FEDIAF, 2019). The safety floor rests on Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009, adopted on 21 October 2009, which sorts animal by-products into three risk categories.
Only Category 3 may go into pet food. Defined in Article 10 of the regulation, it gathers material from animals passed fit for human consumption at slaughter inspection but not sent to the human market; Categories 1 and 2 are excluded (Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009). US rules reach a similar outcome through AAFCO definitions and FDA oversight of rendered material. The term, in other words, describes a safety status, not a quality grade.
Are by-products always poor quality?
Answer capsule. No. "By-product" names a non-muscle animal part, not waste. Liver, kidney, heart and lung are among the most nutrient-dense parts of the carcass, supplying heme iron, preformed vitamin A and high-value protein (WSAVA, 2021). In the EU and UK, only Category 3 material fit for human consumption at slaughter is allowed. Quality depends on traceability, not on the term.
The idea that "by-product" means "low grade" rests on a confusion of vocabulary. In regulatory terms the material is sound, and nutritionally the organ meats it can contain partly reproduce what a predator naturally eats beyond muscle alone (WSAVA, 2021). For a carnivore, this is closer to the ancestral diet than a pure fillet, not a degradation of it.
The real criterion is not the word but traceability and the maker's transparency. A detailed line such as "chicken liver 5%" tells you far more than a generic "animal by-products", and a serious maker can state the species, the part and the origin on request. Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 guarantees a safety floor; it does not, on its own, guarantee commercial detail, which is why a named, specific declaration is preferable to a vague group term.
What does a meat percentage like "30% chicken" actually mean?
Answer capsule. Highlighting an ingredient triggers a duty to declare its proportion, but the figure is usually calculated as-fed, before cooking (FEDIAF, 2019; AAFCO). "30% fresh chicken" means 30% at mixing, when the meat still holds about 70% water; after drying, its real share in the finished kibble falls to roughly 9%. The same 30% as "dehydrated chicken" would mean far more protein.
A printed percentage follows a labelling rule: a highlighted ingredient must be quantified (Regulation (EC) No 767/2009; AAFCO named-ingredient rules). The figure is useful, but how it is calculated changes everything, and most makers express it as-fed, at the inclusion weight, before water evaporates (AAFCO, 2024).
The reliable cue is therefore the form of the ingredient tied to the figure. A percentage on a meal or a dehydrated protein is worth more, value for value, than the same percentage on fresh meat. A high figure is a better signal than a bare "with chicken", without being proof of quality, so the full ingredient list and a dry-matter reading remain necessary (WSAVA, 2021). The number and its basis must always be read together.
Open vs closed terms: how much detail does the label give?
Answer capsule. An "open" term names a generic category, such as "cereals" or "meat and animal derivatives"; a "closed" term names the specific ingredient, such as "rice" or "chicken" (FEDIAF, 2019). Closed declarations are more transparent and lock in the stated material; open ones let a maker reformulate within the category from batch to batch without changing the label.
The FEDIAF code permits both ways of declaring ingredients, and AAFCO follows comparable conventions in the US (FEDIAF, 2019; AAFCO, 2024). "Cereals" groups wheat, maize, rice or barley without saying which; "rice" names a single identifiable material. The choice is the maker's, within the legal frame, and it directly affects how much the buyer can know.
A closed declaration matters most for food sensitivities. An open term lets a maker change the composition with supply, as long as it stays within the declared category, which makes identifying a single component during an elimination diet impossible (WSAVA, 2021). For a sensitive animal, a closed declaration, species by species and material by material, is clearly preferable. The same logic applies to meat: "chicken liver" tells you more than "meat and animal derivatives".
The three forms compared side by side
The table sets fresh meat, meat meal and by-products against the criteria that actually separate them: water content, concentration, list position and what decides their quality.
| Criterion | Fresh meat | Meat meal (dehydrated) | By-products / derivatives |
|---|---|---|---|
| Water content | About 70% | A few percent | Varies by part |
| Protein concentration | Low when fresh | High, weight for weight | High for organ meats |
| Typical list position | Often first | Often lower | Varies |
| Regulatory footing | Permitted | Governed (AAFCO, FEDIAF) | Category 3 only (Reg. 1069/2009) |
| What decides quality | Source and process | Source and drying process | Traceability and named part |
The table makes the point plainly: no single form wins by default. Each can be excellent or mediocre depending on its source and handling, and the list position tells you almost nothing about which.
A clear recommendation for judging meat on a label
The recommendation is to judge the source, not the word. Treat fresh meat near the top as worth less than its rank suggests, because water inflates its position, and do not penalise a meal for sitting lower, since it is already concentrated (Tufts Petfoodology, 2021; AAFCO, 2024). Read any highlighted meat percentage together with its form, fresh or dehydrated, and its likely as-fed basis.
On by-products, set the vocabulary aside. In the EU and UK only Category 3 material fit for human consumption at slaughter is permitted, and organ meats are among the densest sources of iron, vitamin A and high-value protein in a ration (Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009; WSAVA, 2021). The genuine weakness of a generic term is opacity, not toxicity: it hinders allergy management and tells you nothing about the species or part.
So favour a label that names the organ or species, "chicken liver", "lamb meal", over a group designation such as "meat and animal derivatives", above all for an animal with a suspected food allergy. Where a maker stays vague, a direct question about the source is the most reliable next step, and a clear, specific answer is itself a mark of quality. Read the back of the pack rather than the front, and let the named detail, not the headline image, settle your judgement.
---
Keep reading
Related questions: What does "dehydrated poultry protein" mean versus "fresh meat"? | Are animal by-products always poor quality? | What does "30% chicken" on a label mean?
Glossary: meat meal | meat and animal derivatives
Hub: Reading and decoding a label
Sources: Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009 on animal by-products (Category 3, Article 10) and Regulation (EC) No 767/2009 (EUR-Lex; retained in UK law); FEDIAF Code of Good Labelling Practice (2019); AAFCO, Understanding Pet Food (2024); WSAVA Global Nutrition Guidelines (2021); NRC, Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats (2006); Tufts Petfoodology (2021).