Respectfully I don't think feeding this and nothing else meets canine nutritional requirements as outlined by the AAFCO. If it were part of a 2-3 day meal pattern that did include the missing nutrients that would be different. Alone though it's lacking some crucial ingredients.
First I don’t see a source of calcium or phosphorous other than the bone which is removed and therefore inadequate calcium and phos. Second I don’t see any good fatty acids and other nutrients. Just protein and corn. Or protein and sugar.
Diabetic humans don't eat corn (unless very small amounts which they must offset to digest slower by eating non saturated fats and protein with it) because corn is a carb that converts straight to sugar. It does for your dog too. High fructose corn syrup used in most candy and high calorie sugary snacks obviously comes from corn. It is a cheap filler so a lot of dog food companies with profit minded bottom lines use it as the indigestible part of the dog food to make it look like it's a good filling meal. It's sweet and dogs have a sweet tooth so they like it. If you took the corn out what is left would be a small amount and your dog would not FEEL full at all.
Comparitively diet breads for humans contain cellulose which is wood. Humans are not capable of digesting wood because we lack the metabolism of a termite so we get no calories from it. We fill full with less food-however at the expense to our liver, kidneys, adrenal system, intestines which must then process what is a toxin (since we can't use it) out of our systems. The same goes for your dog but he weights a fraction of what you do so the impact to his system is bigger. Imaging feeding your kids sugar all the time. yow!
Vets despite their intelligence don't all specialize in nutrition, some do oncology, some orthopedic surgery, and some are highly educated on canine nutrition. Many also receive Science Diet (corn based) for a discount and do make a profit selling it. Therefore they stay in business and help more animals. Are they bad or wrong? Not nec. But there are only so many things one doctor can specialize in and most of them are not nutritionists.
What happens to a diabetic human after years of high blood sugar is organ damage, organ failure, and early death. Feeding high glycemic carbs like corn to your dog is like putting him in a permanent state of diabetes, followed by digestion and a sugar crash, then up again. It's very difficult to decipher a dog food nutrition label because the companies make it hard to sound better to humans. Humans buy it and are sold on it after all. Only in the last few years are companies putting consumer decipherable best by dates on the bags.
Dogs don't need or get much if any nutritional value from grains. Brown rice particularly is very hard for them to digest. White rice is easier but then you go back to the realm of higher glycemic carbohydrates(sugar). Is all this okay for some dogs sure, but the fewer ingredients that are not directly contributing to nutrition like preservatives, filler, beef digest (the contents of the rumen and colon that is not cleaned, antibiotics, growth hormone etc the better the chance your dog will not have a reaction or develop disease because of it. In this case less is better. Many foods contain wheat and corn gluten which are by-products of processing or trash and it is not removed but left in to be more cost effective and get a higher volume/cost ratio.
Any food that has to add vitamins or fortify is the best food either because the nutrition is not coming from the primary ingredients. They are added as non-natural supplements and are therefore underutilized or not metabolized by the body. Same reason it's better to get vitamins naturally from your food than take synthetic pill replacements. That's why humans should eat their veggies not just eat pills. There is an ongoing debate on just what percentage of synthetic nutrients a body is able to utilize. Certainly it's less than 100%, so whatever it says on the bag of food not all of it is metabolized.
Check the AAFCO guidelines for dog nutrition if you want to come closer to balancing your dog's diet with the proper nutrients. Though it's not perfect and a canine nutritionist would be better; it is readily available. The most common allergens are actually chemical preservatives and non-dairy proteins.
Less processing is better since less nutrients are chemically altered by cooking/processing and rendered ineffective. Kibble is the most highly processed, canned a little less, home cooked if done right better, and raw least processed. The last two because you control all the ingredients are purest with no preservatives, inedible parts, digest/poop, contaminants like melamine which killed 1000's of dogs and cats around 2005-6, carcinogenic preservatives like ethoxyquin and cyanuric acid. Only in the last two years did dog food companies start disclosing their ingredient sources or even testing for contaminants. Ingredients came mostly from countries where quality control did not exist thus were cheaper.
Most kibble protein source animals like cow are grain fed (much cheaper/pound to raise) their meat is much lower in healthy fatty acids which grass fed cattle are naturally rich in. Omega 3,6,9 fatty acids are necessary for cardiovacular health. So if you can buy grass fed beef/buffalo etc do so for you and your pets. If the company voluntarily discloses this all the better.
That said without some education on balancing a raw diet, especially the protein, fat, calcium, and phosphorous for a growing puppy, you can seriously damage your dogs bones and health. In that case a kibble might be better because a totally uneducated raw feeder could cause worse long term health problems than a kibble feeder which does at least come closer to nutritional standards required by law. It's all in what you want to put into it ingredient and research wise.
I am still researching raw after a year and it's not an easy thing considering the life of my dog and her years with me are a direct result of my competence. It's a little scary. If you are unsure ask a nutritionist. I believe someone here named UC DAVIS, perfect.