Maltodextrin in Dog Food and Supplements: An Innocent Carrier or Something Worth Avoiding?

Maltodextrin is one of those ingredients that can look completely harmless on a dog food or supplement label. A white powder, almost tasteless, highly soluble and technologically convenient. It is used as a carrier, filler, texture improver, stabiliser or processing aid in powdered products. It is also very common in bars and sports products made for people.

But for me, the next question is always the same: does this ingredient give anything to the dog, or only to the manufacturer?

I do not automatically consider maltodextrin a “toxic” ingredient. At the same time, it is not completely neutral dust that can be added indefinitely while its effects on the body are ignored.

What exactly is maltodextrin?

Maltodextrin is a carbohydrate produced from starch. The source material may be corn, potato, rice, wheat or tapioca, for example. The starch is partially broken down with enzymes or acid into shorter glucose chains, producing a highly soluble, usually white powder with a fairly neutral taste.

Maltodextrin is often characterised by its dextrose equivalent, or DE value. For maltodextrin, this is below 20. That does not mean the product contains “less than 20% sugar”; it describes how far the starch has been hydrolysed.

And this is the first important point where the label can look deceptively calm.

Maltodextrin may not taste very sweet, but that does not mean the body handles it like a slowly absorbed complex carbohydrate.

Fast glucose, even when it does not taste sweet

Digestible maltodextrin is rapidly broken down into glucose, and in human studies its absorption has been very similar to pure glucose. In some studies, its glycaemic index has been around 100 or even higher.

This matters to me because maltodextrin can appear in very different products: supplements, powders, energy mixes, probiotics and sometimes processed foods.

If only a very small amount is given, that does not automatically mean a clinically important rise in blood glucose. Dose matters.

But if a dog is already overweight, has impaired glucose metabolism, suspected insulin resistance or diabetes, I do not think it makes sense to treat a rapidly absorbed carbohydrate as an invisible ingredient.

There is less direct research in dogs than in humans in this area. For that reason, I would not claim that “maltodextrin causes insulin resistance in dogs”. We cannot say that on the basis of current evidence.

What we can say is that digestible maltodextrin is a rapidly available source of glucose, and its metabolic effect should not simply be counted as zero.

If you want to go deeper into the sugar question, see also Does a Dog Need Sugar? and our Estonian article Sugar in Dog Food?!

Then why is it used in probiotics?

This is actually one of the more interesting parts of the topic.

In powdered supplements and probiotic products, maltodextrin is used as a carrier, filler or processing aid. In spray-drying, for example, it may help protect microorganisms and improve powder stability.

Maltodextrin has also been used simply as a placebo in canine probiotic studies. In several dog studies, control groups have received around 250 mg to 1.25 g of maltodextrin per day.

That distinction matters.

Ordinary digestible maltodextrin is not a probiotic. And for the same reason, it should not automatically be called a prebiotic either.

It can, however, be the carrier in a probiotic preparation.

Resistant maltodextrin is a very different animal

This is where things become especially confusing, because the names sound almost identical.

Resistant maltodextrin is a specially processed form that is not digested in the small intestine in the same way and behaves more like soluble fibre. It has been studied as a prebiotic ingredient and may increase short-chain fatty acid production and alter the microbiome.

In human studies, resistant maltodextrin has even reduced post-meal glucose and insulin responses.

So it is important to check which type of maltodextrin a product actually contains.

Digestible maltodextrin and resistant maltodextrin are not metabolically the same thing.

Why does the gut become a question from an integrative perspective?

This is where the picture becomes much more interesting.

Laboratory and animal studies have found changes with ordinary maltodextrin that make it reasonable to question whether it should be treated as a completely inert additive.

In one study, maltodextrin increased biofilm formation and adhesion to intestinal epithelial cells by adherent-invasive E. coli (AIEC), a bacterial type associated with Crohn’s disease.

In other mouse models, adding maltodextrin has:

• damaged the intestinal mucus barrier,
• reduced mucus-producing goblet cells,
• altered the microbiome,
• and worsened existing inflammatory colitis.

But this needs to be stated precisely.

These studies do not prove that maltodextrin causes inflammatory bowel disease in a healthy dog.

Most of this evidence comes from mice, cell cultures and the context of inflammatory bowel disease in humans.

But from an integrative perspective, I think it is completely reasonable to ask:

If a dog already has a chronic digestive problem, dysbiosis, a sensitive gut or inflammatory bowel disease, does it make sense to add a daily excipient when there is at least a mechanistic reason to ask how it might affect the intestinal barrier and microbiome?

For me, the answer is not automatically “yes, because it is an approved ingredient”.

Does maltodextrin kill beneficial bacteria?

I would not make that claim so strongly.

Various materials and online discussions repeat the claim that maltodextrin “blocks the growth of beneficial bacteria”. We do not have sufficiently strong dog-specific evidence for that statement.

The stronger evidence suggests instead that, in certain models, maltodextrin may promote the behaviour of some potentially problematic bacteria and influence the intestinal barrier and microbiome balance.

To me, that is actually a more interesting question than a simple “good bacteria versus bad bacteria” story.

The microbiome does not work as a black-and-white list.

Is a small amount a problem?

This is where common sense comes in for me.

If a dog receives 250 mg of maltodextrin from a capsule each day, I would not put that in the same category as a dog whose main diet or several daily supplements contain substantial amounts of rapidly digestible starch derivatives.

Maltodextrin has been used as a placebo in dog studies at relatively small doses, and those studies have not shown any major, obvious toxicity.

So I would not swing to the opposite extreme and declare: “If your probiotic contains maltodextrin, throw it away immediately.”

My questions would rather be:

• how much is in the product?
• why is it being used?
• does the dog have a sensitive digestive system?
• can the same goal be achieved with a simpler product?
• how many similar fast carbohydrates are already coming from the rest of the dog’s diet?

Our question would be: not whether the ingredient name sounds frightening, but whether this particular dog actually needs it in this particular product.

This also fits our earlier principle about supplements: the more sensitive the dog, the fewer variables at once. See Can You Give a Human Supplement to a Dog?.

What about GMO?

Maltodextrin is often made from corn, and depending on its origin, that corn may be genetically modified.

I would still treat that as a separate question.

The origin of a GMO raw material is not the same question as the glycaemic or intestinal effect of maltodextrin itself.

If you want to avoid GMO-derived ingredients, it is worth asking the manufacturer what raw material the maltodextrin comes from. But I would not use GMO origin alone as evidence that maltodextrin harms a dog’s gut.

And this brings us to the most practical question: does it need to be there at all?

Maltodextrin has genuinely useful technological properties for manufacturers.

It:

• dissolves well,
• has a fairly neutral taste,
• helps powders remain workable during processing,
• acts as a carrier,
• helps stabilise other ingredients,
• and is relatively inexpensive.

So I do not believe every manufacturer adds it with some sinister plan.

But as consumers, we are allowed to ask whether technological convenience for the manufacturer is the same thing as nutritional value for the dog.

If I have two products with the same purpose and one contains the active ingredient with a minimal number of excipients, while the other also contains maltodextrin, sweeteners, flavour enhancers and additional carriers, I tend to choose the first.

Especially for a dog with sensitive digestion.

Should maltodextrin be avoided?

My answer is:

Not necessarily at any cost, but I would not treat it as a completely meaningless excipient either.

If the amount is very small and there is a clear technological reason for using it, it may have little practical significance for the dog’s health.

But if:

• the dog has a chronic digestive problem,
• the dog is overweight or has a glucose-metabolism problem,
• the dog receives several maltodextrin-containing products,
• or an equally good product without it is available,

then I would choose the simpler option.

For me, an integrative approach does not mean that every synthetic or industrially processed ingredient must automatically be banned.

It means that I ask: why is this here, what does it do in the body, and does my dog need it?

That final question is often much more important than “is this ingredient legally permitted?”

In summary

Before buying a new product, it is worth asking the manufacturer, importer or distributor directly whether the product contains maltodextrin.

That gives you a better answer than assuming or guessing.

I would be particularly interested in:

• whether maltodextrin is used as a carrier in a vitamin or mineral premix;
• whether it is present in a supplement or functional blend;
• which raw material it comes from;
• and whether it is digestible or resistant maltodextrin.

Sources used:

• Nutrition, Health, and Regulatory Aspects of Digestible Maltodextrins
• Process Development for the Spray-Drying of Probiotic Bacteria and Evaluation of the Product Quality
• Effects of Bacillus coagulans (GBI-30, 6086) supplementation on apparent total tract nutrient digestibility and the fecal characteristics and metabolites, immunity, and microbiota of healthy adult dogs
• Effects of Bacillus subtilis ATCC PTA-122264 on apparent total tract macronutrient digestibility and fecal characteristics, metabolites, and microbiota of healthy adult dogs
• Continuous intake of resistant maltodextrin enhanced intestinal immune response through changes in the intestinal environment in mice
• Interventions to lower the glycemic response to carbohydrate foods with a low-viscosity fiber (resistant maltodextrin): meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials
• Crohn’s disease-associated adherent-invasive Escherichia coli adhesion is enhanced by exposure to the ubiquitous dietary polysaccharide maltodextrin
• Maltodextrin Consumption Impairs the Intestinal Mucus Barrier and Accelerates Colitis Through Direct Actions on the Epithelium

---

---