 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Health and Behavior / November 2004W vs GW Wellness food
Today I opened two cans of Wellness. I noticed one can was gold, the other silver and the consistancy of the food looked different. The silver can looked normal and smoother. I checked the labels on the bottom and neither of them appeared to have a GW. The cats get a half can each and the two cats I gave the gold can to refused to eat their food. I'm just wondering if something might have happened again. I have at least a case of this stuff, possibly more (I bought 10 cases at once, the rest are stacked in the basement). Anyone else encountered this? I suggest that you call Old Mother Hubbard at 1-800-225-0904 and ask them. Have the best by dates on hand when you call. If your cats won't eat it you can return the rest of the case. ---MIKE--- I was looking over the bottom of Wellness cans to sort out non GW from GW for my cats and I noticed that some of the GW cans appeared rather rusty and old on the bottom. -- Barb Of course I don't look busy, I did it right the first time. > Today I opened two cans of Wellness. I noticed one can was gold, the other > silver and the consistancy of the food looked different. The silver can [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > stuff, possibly more (I bought 10 cases at once, the rest are stacked in the > basement). Anyone else encountered this? I have several cases of Wellness 5.5oz and 3oz cans in different flavors on hand. Some are GW and some are W. All of the 5.5oz cans are silver colored and the 3oz cans are gold. My cats have been eating all of them with no problem. I usually split a 5.5oz can between the two in the morning, and split a 3oz can in the evening. I used to do another 5.5oz in the evening but they'd usually leave half of it. They both gobble up the Wellness no matter the flavor, can size or code. -- Liz > I have several cases of Wellness 5.5oz and 3oz cans in different flavors > on [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > but they'd usually leave half of it. They both gobble up the Wellness no > matter the flavor, can size or code. My cats also eat Wellness, any flavor, W and GW, with no problem. Any foster cats I've had also eat Wellness with no problem. I'm always surprised when I read that people have trouble getting their cats to eat it. Anyway, I haven't totally been following the W/GW situation, because none of my cats have a grain allergy. However, we have a cat at the shelter with persistent diarrhea and nothing (tried 8 different foods and several medications) has been working. Now I'm starting to think maybe it's a grain allergy. Is it only the GW Wellness with expiration date of 12/05 that has the rice, or all GW?  Signature-Kelly kelly at farringtons dot net www.kelltek.com Check out www.snittens.com Hi Kelly, It sounds like it was all flavors of GW, but they took out the rice and any can with an expiration AFTER 12/05 does not have it. Rhonda > Is it only the GW Wellness with expiration date of 12/05 that has > the rice, or all GW? > Today I opened two cans of Wellness. I noticed one can was gold, the other > silver and the consistancy of the food looked different. The silver can [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > stuff, possibly more (I bought 10 cases at once, the rest are stacked in the > basement). Anyone else encountered this? The difference between the "G" and "GW" is brown rice. I think the "GW" contains the rice - not sure. Looks like W or GW is the plant where it is made. Here's an excerpt from the food tables at http://www.sugarcats.net/sites/jmpeerson/canfood.html: November 17, 2003. Warning on Wellness canned food: The customer service department at Wellness has confirmed that the company has been adding brown rice to their canned foods without changing the label or their website to reflect this difference. Although they say that this only occurred with a "test batch" of Beef & Chicken flavor, I have seen reports that all flavors have been affected, and the problem is geographically widespread in the USA. People who do not want to feed grain to their cats, or whose cats are objecting to the altered formula, should avoid purchasing any cans with a batch number beginning with "GW". UPDATE, mid-December: Wellness has seen the error of their ways and has told people that they will be returning to the original formula. Cans with the GW label with an expiration date after December, 2005 should be okay. Some people are reporting that their cat does not care for the food made at this plant; others have no problem. Rhonda >>Today I opened two cans of Wellness. I noticed one can was gold, the >> [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > The difference between the "G" and "GW" is brown rice. I think the "GW" > contains the rice - not sure. >From: Rhonda san-toki@attremovethis.net >Date: 11/13/04 8:40 AM Pacific Standard Time [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >should be okay. Some people are reporting that their cat does not care >for the food made at this plant; others have no problem. This just confirms my point about Old Mother Hubbard's products. They don't utilize a fixed formula. Seems they may have some quality control concerns as well. Now Gaubster, you have destroyed your credibility. Your unfounded attack on Old Mother Hubbard is not warranted. They did add rice to their formula briefly (the GW cans) but quickly realized their mistake and stopped. They were also willing to take back any cans that the cats wouldn't eat. Other than that I have not noticed any change in the product (and neither have my cats - one of which (Amber) is very fussy. You should be more careful in the future. ---MIKE--- >Now Gaubster, you have destroyed your credibility. Your unfounded >attack on Old Mother Hubbard is not warranted. They did add rice to [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > ---MIKE--- LOL! >From: twinmountain@webtv.net (---MIKE---) >Date: 11/14/04 5:41 AM Pacific Standard Time [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >product (and neither have my cats - one of which (Amber) is very fussy. >You should be more careful in the future. This isn't the first time this issue has come up on this board. I refrained from saying anything before, but since this problems seems to persist, it makes me question their quality control--not to mention their lack of a fixed formula. I'm not the one making "unfounded" attacks on them, btw. If adding rice is a "mistake" (as you put it), where is their nutritional expertise?? Hmm? Why did they add it in the first place? What benefit did it provide? And they are just now figuring out that they need to "go back" to a previous formula? It seems as if they are the ones with a problem? No? (...) > makes > me question their quality control--not to mention their lack of a fixed > formula. A fixed formula is fixed for a given food composition, not fixed in time forever - somehow I doubt even your Most Revered SD (all bow before the Omnipotent Can of Truth) has had the same formula for the past 843 years. > I'm not the one making "unfounded" attacks on them, btw. If adding > rice is a "mistake" (as you put it), where is their nutritional expertise?? What's wrong with rice as an ingredient? You're making the mistake of focussing on the ingredients, not the nutritional composition of the food. (Now, where have I heard that before?) > Hmm? Why did they add it in the first place? Trying a new formula? OMH just bought a gross of paddy fields? > What benefit did it provide? The benefit of nutrition. Do you have a problem with rice in cat foods? > And they are just now figuring out that they need to "go back" to a previous > formula? Yes, but probably only because one of the main selling points of Wellness is that it contains no grains. Adding rice removes this USP, and there was a certain amount of resistance to the change by cats and their owners. Well, the owners who ate the food anyway. > It seems as if they are the ones with a problem? No? Your last question is its own answer. Steve. >From: news@stevethepsycho.co.uk (Steve G) >> I'm not the one making "unfounded" attacks on them, btw. If adding >> rice is a "mistake" (as you put it), where is their nutritional expertise?? > >What's wrong with rice as an ingredient? You're making the mistake of >focussing on the ingredients, not the nutritional composition of the >food. (Now, where have I heard that before?) Surely, you aren't speaking for OMH? Obviously they have some question in their minds as to the nutritional efficacy of their products--you know, with all the switching back and forth! >> What benefit did it provide? > >The benefit of nutrition. Do you have a problem with rice in cat >foods? IF OMH added rice for the "benefit of nutrition", then why did they take it right back out? Wouldn't this be contradictory? >> And they are just now figuring out that they need to "go back" to a >previous >> formula? > >Yes, but probably only because one of the main selling points of >Wellness is that it contains no grains. So what you're advocating is that Wellness is concerned primarily with marketing and NOT nutrition? >Adding rice removes this USP, >and there was a certain amount of resistance to the change by cats and >their owners. Well, the owners who ate the food anyway. I've learned from reading your posts, Steve, to ask lots of questions! ;) (...) > Surely, you aren't speaking for OMH? Yes, I am channeling them. > Obviously they have some question in > their minds as to the nutritional efficacy of their products--you know, with > all the switching back and forth! Maybe, but not necessarily - could be an economic decision. Besides, rice or oher vegetable matter, probably doesn't really matter much either way, especially when the proportion is small. We're not talking about replacing (e.g.) chicken with CGM! (...) > >The benefit of nutrition. Do you have a problem with rice in cat > >foods? > > IF OMH added rice for the "benefit of nutrition", then why did they take it > right back out? Wouldn't this be contradictory? Maybe they're Walt Whitman fans? (...) > >Yes, but probably only because one of the main selling points of > >Wellness is that it contains no grains. > > So what you're advocating is that Wellness is concerned primarily with > marketing and NOT nutrition? All companies' primary aim is to shift units. Hence SD's 'Nature's best', for example, which comes in a hemp sack, knitted by aging hippies, complimented by a free pair of tree-huggin gloves. A new formula! Lawks, Hills must be uncertain about their products, eh...? However, marketing aside, many people want a cat food that doesn't contain grains. Wellness fits the bill, but not if they add rice. In doing this they are now competing with (e.g.) Newman's Own, who add rice to all their foods. Nutritionally, it probably doesn't matter much whether rice is present or not (unless there is some truth in the popular anecdotes that grains are bad for cats), especially given that Wellness (and other canned foods) contain low amounts of carbs anyway. > >Adding rice removes this USP, > >and there was a certain amount of resistance to the change by cats and > >their owners. Well, the owners who ate the food anyway. > > I've learned from reading your posts, Steve, to ask lots of questions! ;) Yah, it distributes the keyboard wear more evenly. Steve. Steve wrote: >All companies' primary aim is to shift >units. Hence SD's 'Nature's best', for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >formula! Lawks, Hills must be uncertain >about their products, eh...? I just petsat for someone who *was* feeding this food and it's scary. It comes in mixed colors(!) and shapes and looks not much different than Meow Mix or the other assorted grocery store garbage that's supposed to "visually appealing." >However, marketing aside, many people >want a cat food that doesn't contain >grains. Wellness fits the bill, but not if >they add rice. Wellness does not add rice to the canned foods. At one time they were experimenting with adding rice to the foods and the test batches were accidentally packaged and sent out to retailers. At that time they were also dealing with a new canning facility, GW in the code on the can. This facility is where the mistake happened. The other plant, with the code W, continued production as always and those that needed grain free food simply bought cans with the W code on them. When customers, including myself and many from the IBD list, contacted the company with their concerns about adding grains to the food, Wellness listened and decided against adding rice to the canned foods. They were also more than happy to exchange the cans of foods that were accidentally sent out. Megan Signature"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke Learn The TRUTH About Declawing http://www.stopdeclaw.com Zuzu's Cats Photo Album: http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22 "Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his way." - W.H. Murray >From: zuzu22@webtv.net >Wellness does not add rice to the canned foods. At one time they were >experimenting with adding rice to the foods and the test batches were [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >than happy to exchange the cans of foods that were accidentally sent >out. This sounds like you're issuing a press release! LOL! When a company decides to let the consumer dictate nutritional "expertise", this just makes my point. Wellness is only interested in selling cat food, not providing a superior nutritional product. This is a company that focuses on ingredients in their sales pitch and that connects with a certain segment of the population. I'll ask the question again (which never seems to get answered), what exactly is so great about Old Mother Hubbard? I know their marketing scratches some people where they itch, but what nutritional expertise do they have to fall back on? What peer-reviewed, published studies have they put forth or sponsored? It really seems to me that they moisten the metaphorical finger, stick it in the air, see which way the wind is blowing, and then go from there! According to your words, Megan, OMH was "experimenting" on unsuspecting consumer's cats. Once they were "caught", they decided to pull back. You're simply trying to cover up the lack of quality control on OMH's part. And that certainly doesn't sound like a fixed formula to me! Different plants have different formulations??!! >From: news@stevethepsycho.co.uk (Steve G) >> Surely, you aren't speaking for OMH? > >Yes, I am channeling them. I thought so. >> Obviously they have some question in >> their minds as to the nutritional efficacy of their products--you know, [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >either way, especially when the proportion is small. We're not talking >about replacing (e.g.) chicken with CGM! What are they more interested in? Making money or making a nutritional product for cats? You're trying to argue both sides of the issue for them. This just makes my point. >> >Yes, but probably only because one of the main selling points of >> >Wellness is that it contains no grains. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >hippies, complimented by a free pair of tree-huggin gloves. A new >formula! Lawks, Hills must be uncertain about their products, eh...? You're all over the board, here. Try to stay focused. >However, marketing aside, many people want a cat food that doesn't >contain grains. Wellness fits the bill, but not if they add rice. In >doing this they are now competing with (e.g.) Newman's Own, who add >rice to all their foods. The problem is people like to experiment on their cats. Thus you get products like Wysong's "vegetarian" feline diets (for instance). People who are "ingredient" focused and rely on that as their sole nutritional focus are only going to end up damaging their feline friends. > >From: news@stevethepsycho.co.uk (Steve G) > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > I thought so. Or it could be the Space Aliens again. (...) > What are they more interested in? Making money or making a nutritional product for cats? You're trying to argue both sides of the issue for them. Every company's first aim is to shift units. However it's not a choice between shiftin' boxes OR having a good product. (...) > You're all over the board, here. Try to stay focused. The focus is - every successful company (yes, even The Most Revered Hills) will response to consumer demands. Those that don't, fail. (...) > The problem is people like to experiment on their cats. Thus you get > products like Wysong's "vegetarian" feline diets (for instance). Major misrepresentation there, Mr G - hope it wasn't a deliberate one. From the Wysong web site: "A meatless clinical animal diet for use in nutritional management of adverse food reactions in both dogs and cats. Entirely vegetarian, containing no meat or meat by-products. Designed to be used with meats which are non-allergenic for your specific animal. Does not achieve feline protein recommendations. This product is intended for intermittent or supplemental feeding only." Steve. There goes Gaubster's credibility again!!! ---MIKE--- >There goes Gaubster's credibility again!!! > > ---MIKE--- You sound like you're surprised (?!?) eq >From: ">equalizer <> >Date: 11/18/04 3:54 PM Pacific Standard Time [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > >eq All 3 of you are members of the same mutual admiration society! You'd rather make personal attacks when you can't refute the substance of the message. It amounts to little more than sour grapes on each of your parts. >>From: ">equalizer <> >>Date: 11/18/04 3:54 PM Pacific Standard Time [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >make personal attacks when you can't refute the substance of the message. It >amounts to little more than sour grapes on each of your parts. Yep -- and we **ALL** voted for Kerry, too, LOL!!!! *****EVERYBODY***** who disagrees with you, voted for Kerry!!!! EeeeeeeHeeeeeeeeHeeeeeeeHeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!! eq wrote: >Yep -- and we **ALL** voted for Kerry, >too, LOL!!!! >*****EVERYBODY***** who disagrees >with you, voted for Kerry!!!! >EeeeeeeHeeeeeeeeHeeeeeeeHeeeeeee >eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!! You certainly know your way into a girl's heart...:-) Megan Signature"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke Learn The TRUTH About Declawing http://www.stopdeclaw.com Zuzu's Cats Photo Album: http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22 "Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his way." - W.H. Murray >>From: ">equalizer <> >>Date: 11/18/04 3:54 PM Pacific Standard Time [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >make personal attacks when you can't refute the substance of the message. It >amounts to little more than sour grapes on each of your parts. >>From: ">equalizer <> > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > >See? Who's been spanked now? :/ >From: twinmountain@webtv.net (---MIKE---) >There goes Gaubster's credibility again!!! Mike, Globster never had any credibility to begin with. As soon as he opened his yap he was a goner. ________ See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html Declawing Info: http://www.wholecatjournal.com/articles/claws.htm >From: news@stevethepsycho.co.uk (Steve G) >> The problem is people like to experiment on their cats. Thus you get >> products like Wysong's "vegetarian" feline diets (for instance). > >Major misrepresentation there, Mr G - hope it wasn't a deliberate one. You know how stupid some people can be. Those who *want* to feed a vegetarian diet to their own cats because it's how they like to eat don't always take the time and trouble to read the label or do any further investigation. I have more of a problem w/ how "dr." Wysong is hawking his DVDs and video tapes over his food! (...) > You know how stupid some people can be. Those who *want* to feed a vegetarian > diet to their own cats because it's how they like to eat don't always take the > time and trouble to read the label or do any further investigation. Pandering to idiots is nonsense, especially in this case when the vegetarian diet has a specific and valuable use. Moreover, if you follow your argument onward, then SD had better drop the 'kitten', 'maintenance' and 'senior' diets - hell, people are so droolingly stupid that these labels would just confuse the poor lambs. Better add extra instructions in BIG LETTERS to the cans, too, like 'To be fed by mouth only - Do not shove up cat's arse', 'Not to be used as a weapon' and 'Remove from can before feeding to your cat'. > I have more of a problem w/ how "dr." Wysong is hawking his DVDs and video > tapes over his food! "dr"? Was Wysong's PhD not obtained fairly, then? Steve. >(...) >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >Steve. There was NOTHING fair about it. He voted for Carter, and then Mondale/Ferraro and got the PhD as a kickback.... eq >From: "Steve G" news@stevethepsycho.co.uk >Pandering to idiots is nonsense, especially in this case when the >vegetarian diet has a specific and valuable use. Cats should not be fed a vegetarian diet. PERIOD. >Moreover, if you >follow your argument onward, then SD had better drop the 'kitten', >'maintenance' and 'senior' diets No, your lack of logic is all wrong (that's not new for you). There are distinct nutrient profiles contained within each diet and the designator (kitten, senior) is entirely appropriate and true. However, that's not true for some companies that make all life stage foods, yet label them as if they are true lifestage diets. >>From: "Steve G" news@stevethepsycho.co.uk > >>Pandering to idiots is nonsense, especially in this case when the >>vegetarian diet has a specific and valuable use. > >Cats should not be fed a vegetarian diet. PERIOD. my god, they are carnivores! of course they shouldn't be on a veg diet! carnivores' digestive tract is designed to digest and eliminate meat quickly. it takes a much longer time for carnivores to digest vegetable fiber. besides, carnivores do not get the nutrients they need from a vegetarian diet and need supplements. it's unhealthy for humans to have an all vegetarian diet too. those canines are there for a reason. -L > >Cats should not be fed a vegetarian diet. PERIOD. > > my god, they are carnivores! I knew someone who had two kittens that she fed a vegetarian diet. She could never figure out why they weren't thriving despite how many people told her that they need kitten food with MEAT. It was incredibly sad. I think she finally wised up, or gave them away -- not sure. I saw them only once, and they were clearly not happy campers. Signaturehttp://www.mindspring.com/~slywy/pages/hodge.html >> >Cats should not be fed a vegetarian diet. PERIOD. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >think she finally wised up, or gave them away -- not sure. I saw them >only once, and they were clearly not happy campers. that's horrible. i don't understand what she was thinking! if she did that to a child, it would be considered neglect. imagine feeding a child only vegetables! -L > >From: "Steve G" news@stevethepsycho.co.uk > > >Pandering to idiots is nonsense, especially in this case when the > >vegetarian diet has a specific and valuable use. > > Cats should not be fed a vegetarian diet. PERIOD. An aide memoire for you: "A meatless clinical animal diet for use in nutritional management of adverse food reactions in both dogs and cats. Entirely vegetarian, containing no meat or meat by-products. Designed to be used with meats which are non-allergenic for your specific animal. Does not achieve feline protein recommendations. This product is intended for intermittent or supplemental feeding only." The diet is vegetarian as supplied, but not veggie as fed. > >Moreover, if you > >follow your argument onward, then SD had better drop the 'kitten', [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > distinct nutrient profiles contained within each diet and the designator > (kitten, senior) is entirely appropriate and true. Just as the designation for the veggie Wysong is 'appropriate and true', unless you think that allergies to specific meats do not occur in cats I suppose. Besides, the argument you are making is that people are too stoopid to read the can anyway. Why should you trust people to read cans of SD but not cans of Wysong veggie? S. Mike wrote: > Now Gaubster, you have destroyed your > credibility. He never had any to begin with. >Your unfounded attack on > Old Mother Hubbard is not warranted. That doesn't matter to him. He'll do it and post lies regardless of what the truth is. He's doing it in this thread as we speak. > They did add rice to their formula > briefly (the GW cans) but quickly [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > the product (and neither have my cats - > one of which (Amber) is very fussy. I've been feeding this food for years and when the test batch mistake happened, they were very easy to deal with and dealt well with the issue. That's been over and done with for quite awhile and the batch of food in question has been long gone from store shelves. >You > should be more careful in the future. Don't count on it. Being a blatant hypocrite, and bashing and outright lying about all foods that are not Science Diet, is what he lives for and the only thing he does on the newsgroups. He has already done it in this thread, lying and saying Wellness does not use a fixed formula when in fact they DO use a fixed formula. This is easily verifiable by calling the company at 1-800-225-0904, but apparently he has a masochistic streak and enjoys being made to look the fool time and time again. Megan Signature"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." -Edmund Burke Learn The TRUTH About Declawing http://www.stopdeclaw.com Zuzu's Cats Photo Album: http://www.PictureTrail.com/zuzu22 "Concerning all acts of initiative (and creation), there is one elementary truth the ignorance of which kills countless ideas and splendid plans: that the moment one definitely commits oneself, then providence moves too. A whole stream of events issues from the decision, raising in one's favor all manner of unforeseen incidents, meetings and material assistance, which no man could have dreamt would have come his way." - W.H. Murray >From: zuzu22@webtv.net >> Now Gaubster, you have destroyed your >> credibility. > >He never had any to begin with. Not in your warped mind. But you're not one to worry about things like reality, now are you? >>Your unfounded attack on >> Old Mother Hubbard is not warranted. > >That doesn't matter to him. He'll do it and post lies regardless of what >the truth is. He's doing it in this thread as we speak. Please show where I've attacked OMH? You're letting your rhetoric run away with you AGAIN! >> They did add rice to their formula >> briefly (the GW cans) but quickly [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >issue. That's been over and done with for quite awhile and the batch of >food in question has been long gone from store shelves. "Test Batch"? Is that what you're (euphemistically) calling it? So let's get this straight. OMH decided to "test" their food on the general public's cats? They can't do that in-house? Was the change noted on the ingredient label? I'm just asking here. Or is the only evidence of a change being that which is noted as a "code on the bottom of a can"?? > Being a blatant hypocrite, and bashing and outright >lying about all foods that are not Science Diet, is what he lives for >and the only thing he does on the newsgroups. He has already done it in >this thread, lying and saying Wellness does not use a fixed formula when >in fact they DO use a fixed formula. I gave my OPINION and asked some QUESTIONS, Megan. Nothing more and nothing less. You are the one that is outright lying. You are trying to portray my posts as something they are not and that just continues to illustrate that you are a shill for OMH and that you HATE Hill's. I haven't brought up Science Diet any where in this thread, but YOU have. In your warped, little world, nobody can question anything that OMH does or doesn't do. Yet you're sure quick to attack anybody that feeds/defends Hill's or Steve Crane who works for Hill's. BTW, if Wellness uses a fixed formula, then what is up with all of the rice/no rice formulations on the market? They put rice in, then they pull rice out? Why? As for hypocrisy, you have yet to provide *any* examples. Yet you do what you accuse me of doing. Nice game you're playing! LOL! > Today I opened two cans of Wellness. I noticed one can was gold, the > other silver and the consistancy of the food looked different. The silver [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > of this stuff, possibly more (I bought 10 cases at once, the rest are > stacked in the basement). Anyone else encountered this? The rest of my cases are all silver cans (with directions printed on how to open them), they definitely don't like the gold 5oz cans (which have nothing printed on them). The stamp on the bottom is very difficult to read. They are all smeared or missing the top half of the letters. There is no expiration date (unlike on the silver cans which all start with W). The old cans could be a W an O or a V I think. I'll call OMH on Monday. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.