 |
 | 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 / October 2003Best wet food for keeping cystitis away?
Hello, First, let me thank y'all for the wealth of information that's been in here and archived - it's a *wonderful* resource. It's very much appreciated.... And hopefully this will be an easy question for y'all - our 5 year old female recently developed cystitis w/o crystals (and from what I've read, stress and eating dry food may aggravate it, and we just got a new kitten a few weeks ago and she eats dry food). I've read numerous posts about wet food being best, so we need to switch. Which wet food (readily available at either the grocery store or Petsmart) would be best for keeping cystitis at bay for the rest of her life? Or does it really matter what brand as long as it's wet and the cat likes it and eats it? She's also got the herpes virus, which flared up into a swollen eye during her first year and again about 3 years later, so we're thinking it's possible the cystitis could recur if it's aggravated by the virus and stress. Thanks much for any answers.... brian  SignatureIf you want to reply to this message by mail, you will have to change the reply address to beuchaw@beuchaw.net The best wet foods, in my opinion, are the low magnesium ones found in pet stores and some in grocery stores. These are Max Cat canned foods, Iams, and Science Diet. Gail > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > brian >From: "Gail" paulg@nac.net >The best wet foods, in my opinion, are the low magnesium ones found in pet >stores and some in grocery stores. These are Max Cat canned foods, Iams, [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] >> >> brian Personally I don't care for IAMS (owned by Proctor & Gamble) or Science Diet (owned by Colgage & Palmolive), mostly because the companies that own these foods do animal testing on their products. Also, when I fed Science Diet in the past, my cats never did very well on it. I think as long as you feed a high quality canned food that should be good. I dont' feed commercial food but my friends who do have cats that do well on Petguard, Felidae, or Wellness. These foods should be available at a large health food market like Whole Foods or Wild Oats, or small pet supply stores. Lauren ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >Personally I don't care for IAMS (owned by Proctor & Gamble) or Science Diet >(owned by Colgage & Palmolive), mostly because the companies that own these >foods do animal testing on their products. Here we go again. Colgate doesn't do animal testing on their products. Why slander them? > Also, when I fed Science Diet in >the past, my cats never did very well on it. My cats have always done fantastic on it. > I dont' feed commercial food but >my friends who do have cats that do well on Petguard, Felidae, or Wellness. >These foods should be available at a large health food market like Whole >Foods >or Wild Oats, or small pet supply stores. Those are all foods that are appropriate only for kittens and not adult or senior cats. Not to mention the fact that they haven't done animal feeding trials. What have they got to hide? >From: gaubster2@aol.com (GAUBSTER2) >>Personally I don't care for IAMS (owned by Proctor & Gamble) or Science Diet >>(owned by Colgage & Palmolive), mostly because the companies that own these [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] >senior cats. Not to mention the fact that they haven't done animal feeding >trials. What have they got to hide? I honestly don't know whether or not they use feeding trials. Can you prove that they don't or are you just saying it to bash them? Here's how good feeding trials are according to AAFCO: "8 dogs older than 1 yr. must start the test. At start all dogs must be normal weight & health. A blood test is to be taken from each dog at the start and finish of the test. For 6 months, the dogs used must only eat the food being tested. The dogs finishing the test must not lose more than 15% of their body weight. During the test, none of the dogs used are to die or be removed because of nutritional causes. 6 of the 8 dogs starting must finish the test." This is take from AAFCO directly. So, according to them, 25% of the dogs being tested can die while eating the food being tested, and the food will still pass. So much for feeding trials, huh? LOL ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >I honestly don't know whether or not they use feeding trials. Can you prove >that they don't or are you just saying it to bash them? I'm not bashing anyone, I'm simply pointing out facts and reality. If you don't believe me, pick up a can and read the AAFCO statement. Since AAFCO standards are so easy to pass, why don't they even try? >"8 dogs older than 1 yr. must start the test. At start all dogs must be >normal [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >tested can die while eating the food being tested, and the food will still >pass. You're reading this completely wrong and inserting your biases into it. If at least 6 of the 8 dogs must finish the test....that doesn't mean that 2 of the dogs have to die. They must simply FINISH the test. Why do you assume the worst? > You're reading this completely wrong and inserting your biases into it. If at > least 6 of the 8 dogs must finish the test....that doesn't mean that 2 of the > dogs have to die. They must simply FINISH the test. Why do you assume the > worst? You definitively have a comprehension problem. >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >> You're reading this completely wrong and inserting your biases into it. If >at [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >You definitively have a comprehension problem. Doesn't he though? LOL! ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >Doesn't he though? LOL! Apparently, you too, Lauren...cannot answer what I said or disagree w/ the logic. If you two and some others would actually learn the correct process of how things work and leave your knee-jerk reactions elsewhere, you might actually learn some facts. >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >Date: 9/13/03 8:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >You definitively have a comprehension problem. Apparently you don't care to answer me and can't argue w/ logic. > >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) > >Date: 9/13/03 8:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Apparently you don't care to answer me and can't argue w/ logic. Well, the animals that don't finish the test don't necessarily die; however, the statement allows that they could. What other reasons might you suggest for failure to complete the test? Steve. > >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) > >Date: 9/13/03 8:16 AM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the > >> dogs have to die. Further to my earlier response... On re-reading the AAFCO statement posted earlier in the thread, it specifically states that it's not permissible for animals to die during the feeding trial ... at least not of nutritional causes. (Which does have a certain logic, if you think about it!). So I guess it's just the curious and unexpected deaths during the trial (e.g, the animal gets dissolved by an alien space-ray such as) that are 'allowed', and which do not contribute to the trial results. Steve. > I honestly don't know whether or not they use feeding trials. You said you read the labels on Science Diet products..... ...or was that just another one of your conjured up stories to fit a particular discussion? Its pretty hard to miss the feeding trial statement :right next to the ingredients list and guaranteed analysis.... "Animal feeding trials using AAFCO procedures substantiate that Science Diet Adult Feline Maintenance provides complete and balances nutrition for maintenance of adult cats" > "Animal feeding trials using AAFCO procedures substantiate that Science > Diet Adult Feline Maintenance provides complete and balances nutrition for > maintenance of adult cats" Is that the same AAFCO that never required arachidonic acid to be added in feline diets? The one that is run mostly by representatives from the pet food industry? > > "Animal feeding trials using AAFCO procedures substantiate that Science > > Diet Adult Feline Maintenance provides complete and balances nutrition for > > maintenance of adult cats" > > Is that the same AAFCO that never required arachidonic acid to be > added in feline diets? AAFCO CAT FOOD NUTRIENT PROFILES BASED ON DRY MATTER .......Units DM Basis.. Growth & Repro. Adult Maint Crude Fat.. .. % ...... 9.0 ..... 9.0 Linoleic acid ...% ....0.5......................0.5 Arachidonic acid...%.......0.02.........0.02 Excerpted from: 2003 Official Publication of the Association of American Feed Control Officials, p. 131. You really should verify the accuracy of the information that you parrot... Are you au naturel cult fanatics going to disrupt yet another thread with your delirious ravings? >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >> "Animal feeding trials using AAFCO procedures substantiate that Science >> Diet Adult Feline Maintenance provides complete and balances nutrition [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >added in feline diets? The one that is run mostly by representatives >from the pet food industry? Well back in 1994, these were the specific members. I don't know if it's still these particular ones or new ones have taken their place. But here's an example: from page 304 in the Official Publication 1994, Association of American Feed Control Officials. Here they list the members who review the standards and terms for pet food labeling. There are 6 AAFCO members, 4 of whom work for the pet food industry: Ken Johannes, Hill's Pet Products Inc.; Dan Chauslow, Westreco, Inc.; Dave Bebiak, Ralston Purina Co.; and Mark Finke, Alpo Petfoods, Inc. Lauren ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm > >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Lauren I guess it's time for a little explanation. AAFCO is composed and GOVERNED by its' members who are the elected or appointed persons from each of the 50 states. Most often they work in the agriculture department or in the consumer rights department of the state government they represent. The members you note above are probably on one committee or another, but they have/had NO vote on any legislation that comes before AAFCO. The only people who have a vote are the state employees who represent thier respective states. If you have a problem with AAFCO does, or does not do, in your state, then you need to talk to your state government. Personally I'm quite sure Hill's would be ecstatic to see far stronger and heavier enforcment of AAFCO rules. It would virtually eliminate most of your favorite foods who make "snake oil" claims and get away with it becasue they are too small to be important. > ________ > 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >Well back in 1994, these were the specific members. I don't know if it's >still >these particular ones or new ones have taken their place. Lauren, as usual you try to make a point based on info that is almost 10 YEARS OLD!! LOL, you're killing me!! ;) >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >Date: 9/13/03 8:12 AM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >added in feline diets? The one that is run mostly by representatives >from the pet food industry? Liz, have you ever even lived in the US? Each state has an AAFCO official. It's a governmental position and isn't "run" by the pet food industry. >>Personally I don't care for IAMS (owned by Proctor & Gamble) or Science Diet >>(owned by Colgage & Palmolive), mostly because the companies that own these >>foods do animal testing on their products. > > Here we go again. Colgate doesn't do animal testing on their products. Why > slander them? Bullshit. Yes they do. Call the company and ask them yourself. >>Also, when I fed Science Diet in >>the past, my cats never did very well on it. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Those are all foods that are appropriate only for kittens and not adult or > senior cats. My cats are doing great on Wellness. My vet agrees. One of them is officially a "senior", The other two are adults. Before you go on your SD spew, my cats did very poorly on it. Some do great, mine didn't. Not to mention the fact that they haven't done animal feeding > trials. What have they got to hide? Wellness certainly does do feeding trials. And I quote: "Animal feeding tests using Association of American Feed Control Officials procedures substantiate that Wellness Super5mix Adult Cat Food provides complete and balanced nutrition for all life stages." This would have been quite easy to check up on before making false statements. >From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com >>>Personally I don't care for IAMS (owned by Proctor & Gamble) or Science >Diet [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] >This would have been quite easy to check up on before making false >statements. Thanks for an informative and accurate post, Karen. Gabster is so intent on defending Hill's at all costs, that he'll say anything, even if it's untrue. Lauren ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm Well, my God. I'm so sick of the 'SD is great everything else is sh.t' spewing going on. It's not the only food out there and this is a freaking ad board for Hill's. You like SD, great. Feed it. But don't malign food you know nothing about. Ya know? >>From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com > [quoted text clipped - 54 lines] > http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html > Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com >Date: 9/13/03 6:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >freaking ad board for Hill's. You like SD, great. Feed it. But don't >malign food you know nothing about. Ya know? Who are you responding to? Easy on the temper, btw. There is a ton of Hill's bashing also, so I'm not sure what you mean unless you are picking and choosing what to react to? >>From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com >>Date: 9/13/03 6:01 PM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > bashing also, so I'm not sure what you mean unless you are picking and choosing > what to react to? I'm talking about in these current threads. You and a few others bash any other product out there, and accuse anyone feeding foods like Wellness, or Felidae, etc.. of being 'au naturel cult fanatics' and frankly I'm tired of reading it. I have fed SD in the past to my cats and dog and they did poorly on it. I know of many others who have experienced the same thing. Other people's cats have done fine or great on it and I've always stated this. But for people like you to insult me for choosing to feed my cats something *I personally* consider a superior food for my animals really pisses me off. And I won't sit back and let you spout untruths without challenging them. That's what a newsgroup is all about. >From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com >I'm talking about in these current threads. You and a few others bash >any other product out there, and accuse anyone feeding foods like >Wellness, or Felidae, etc.. of being 'au naturel cult fanatics' and >frankly I'm tired of reading it. I've never used that term before, so maybe you'll want to check your sources or recollection a little bit closer next time. I'm simply pointing out facts about those foods. Don't get your knickers in a knot over it. If people want to feed that stuff to their cats, fine by me. Most of them don't know the risk factors, however. >But for people like you to insult me >for choosing to feed my cats something *I personally* consider a >superior food for my animals really pisses me off. And I won't sit back >and let you spout untruths without challenging them. I'm not insulting you. When it comes to actual nutrition, though, those companies market their foods based on how the consumer reacts to the "warm and fuzzy" ingredients, not nutrition. How else do you explain away their "one size fits all" approach? Don't get so defensive. I'm just asking. >That's what a >newsgroup is all about. Exactly right. >Thanks for an informative and accurate post, Karen. Gabster is so intent on >defending Hill's at all costs, that he'll say anything, even if it's untrue. Lauren, you're a proven liar on this ng. Go look at Wellness products--not all of them are animal tested. Why would they test some and not others? Why would they include (in some of their canine products...I would have to go look at their feline products) bacteria from feces in their foods? Why do they focus on ingredients instead of lifestage nutrition? Clearly they are basing their foods on marketing and not what's in the best interest for the cat. How's that for some information? >From: gaubster2@aol.com (GAUBSTER2) >>Thanks for an informative and accurate post, Karen. Gabster is so intent on >>defending Hill's at all costs, that he'll say anything, even if it's untrue. > >Lauren, you're a proven liar on this ng. Gaubster, you are really an idiot, you know that? If anyone is a proven liar, it's you. ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >Gaubster, you are really an idiot, you know that? If anyone is a proven >liar, >it's you. >________ Ooh, nice comeback. The problem is you've been caught quite a few times stretching the truth or just outright making things up. >From: gaubster2@aol.com (GAUBSTER2) >Date: 9/14/03 9:08 PM East >>Gaubster, you are really an idiot, you know that? If anyone is a proven >>liar, [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Ooh, nice comeback. The problem is you've been caught quite a few times >stretching the truth or just outright making things up. Listen loser, you apparently showed up on this board very recently. My guess is your another one of Phil's sock puppets. Prove I've lied about anything. You, on the other hand, have not once proven anything you've ever posted about, even when asked by other posters to do so. ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >Listen loser, you apparently showed up on this board very recently. My guess >is your another one of Phil's sock puppets. Prove I've lied about anything. >You, on the other hand, have not once proven anything you've ever posted >about, >even when asked by other posters to do so. You're starting to sound like Ann Martin and acting like her too. You haven't proven anything you've ever said, so I find it ironic that you have this complaint. Gaubster wrote: >Why would they include (in some of their >canine products...I would have to go look >at their feline products) bacteria from >feces in their foods? CITE?? You have made this claim several times and have yet to show PROOF that it happens. The one link you posted had absolutely NOTHING to do with or proved what you were trying to claim. How EXACTLY does Welllness use bacteria from feces in their foods? Where EXACTLY do they they get this supply of feces from? What process EXACTLY do they use to extract this bacteria? Show us a webpage or article that verifies this and names Wellness as an offender. You haven't backed up one single thing you've said so far although you expect everyone else to. PPOSTFU. 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 >Gaubster wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >Megan What???!!! He's saying there is feces in Wellness? This proves this guy is absolutely freakin' bonkers! What a lunatic! ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >What???!!! He's saying there is feces in Wellness? This proves this guy is >absolutely freakin' bonkers! What a lunatic! I'm saying they use bacteria from feces. It's right there in the ingredient list. See for yourself if you don't believe me. >From: gaubster2@aol.com (GAUBSTER2) >>What???!!! He's saying there is feces in Wellness? This proves this guy is >>absolutely freakin' bonkers! What a lunatic! > >I'm saying they use bacteria from feces. It's right there in the ingredient >list. See for yourself if you don't believe me. You know, I, and I'm sure others, are completely sick of your bogus claims with absolutely no proof or cites whatsoever. You are a waste of time and you are completely clueless about anything. ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >You know, I, and I'm sure others, are completely sick of your bogus claims >with >absolutely no proof or cites whatsoever. You are a waste of time and you are >completely clueless about anything. >________ Look in the mirror. It's bacteria found in the gastrointestinal tract. Could it be detected in feces? Yes, and probably yours too but I'm betting they don't root around in your sh.t for their ingredients. It's clearly listed on their dog and cat food as a "probiotic", which are standardly made in a laboratory setting... However, if you see a man in a lab coat fishing in your toilet you let me know. >>What???!!! He's saying there is feces in Wellness? This proves this guy is >>absolutely freakin' bonkers! What a lunatic! > > I'm saying they use bacteria from feces. It's right there in the ingredient > list. See for yourself if you don't believe me. >From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com >>>What???!!! He's saying there is feces in Wellness? This proves this guy >is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >ingredient >> list. See for yourself if you don't believe me. >It's bacteria found in the gastrointestinal tract. Could it be detected >in feces? Yes, and probably yours too but I'm betting they don't root >around in your sh.t for their ingredients. It's clearly listed on their >dog and cat food as a "probiotic", which are standardly made in a >laboratory setting... However, if you see a man in a lab coat fishing in >your toilet you let me know. LMAO! That sure would be an awful lot of bullSHIT he'd have to be fishing through! Lauren ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >It's clearly listed on their >dog and cat food as a "probiotic", which are standardly made in a >laboratory setting... Oh, so you mean it's ARTIFICIAL?? What happened to the "all natural" aspects that are so strongly touted here as being superior?? As for the "probiotic" part, I've NEVER seen that specific term listed on their ingredient list. I've have to check it out again sometime, but I just don't recall that being the case. Are you sure you're not just making that assumption? >It's bacteria found in the gastrointestinal tract. Could it be detected >in feces? Yes, Thank you for clarifying my point. Now tell Megan she doesn't need to file a libel suit. > >It's clearly listed on their > >dog and cat food as a "probiotic", which are standardly made in a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > have to check it out again sometime, but I just don't recall that being the > case. Are you sure you're not just making that assumption? It's real bacteria, fool, not artificial. You can grow bacteria anywhere. You probably know that better than anyone. And yes, the "probiotic" part is right there on the ingredient panel. Once again, check yourself before spouting off. > >It's bacteria found in the gastrointestinal tract. Could it be detected > >in feces? Yes, > > Thank you for clarifying my point. Now tell Megan she doesn't need to file a > libel suit. Your point was that they *obtain* it from feces, not that it could detected there. You can often find corn in feces too, but should one assume that is where the pet food companies are getting their supply from? Maybe you shouldn't answer that... >From: misskittymcgill71@yahoo.com (Karen M.) >> >It's clearly listed on their >> >dog and cat food as a "probiotic", which are standardly made in a [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] >assume that is where the pet food companies are getting their supply >from? Maybe you shouldn't answer that... ROFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ack, I could just imagine his answer! ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >It's real bacteria, fool, not artificial. You can grow bacteria >anywhere. Using some people's logic, anything that comes out of a lab is artificial....including some preservatives--even though those preservatives are found in nature. Hell, everything on this planet is derived from nature in some manner. That's why the fear-mongers on preservatives are so wrong from a logic standpoint. >And yes, the >"probiotic" part is right there on the ingredient panel. Once again, >check yourself before spouting off. I simply was stating my recollection. Again, why are you so defensive? Would it hurt you to be civil and polite or are you this was in real life all the time? >Your point was that they *obtain* it from feces, not that it could >detected there. I never said they "obtained" it from feces. You jumped to that conclusion in your bias. > Oh, so you mean it's ARTIFICIAL?? Artificial bacteria. This one is a pearl. I haven´t been reading this thread and now that I´m at it, I´m roflmao. This thread is totally hilarious. >CITE?? You have made this claim several times and have yet to show PROOF >that it happens. The one link you posted had absolutely NOTHING to do >with or proved what you were trying to claim. How EXACTLY does Welllness >use bacteria from feces in their foods? Where EXACTLY do they they get >this supply of feces from? What process EXACTLY do they use to extract >this bacteria? Welcome back, Megan. Apparently you missed my post a couple of weeks back where I listed the (correct) weblink that defines the ingredient in question. How do they process it and where does it come from--I have no idea...maybe from 4D animals? ;) Try www.hc-sc.gc.ca and then do a search for enterococcus faecium. You'll see for yourself. >From: gaubster2@aol.com (GAUBSTER2) >>CITE?? You have made this claim several times and have yet to show PROOF >>that it happens. The one link you posted had absolutely NOTHING to do [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >see >for yourself. What exactly is Megan going to see? The definition of the term enterococcus faecium? So what? She asked you for the specific cite saying that Wellness has it in their food. Once again, you offer nothing to the discussion. ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >What exactly is Megan going to see? The definition of the term enterococcus >faecium? So what? She asked you for the specific cite saying that Wellness >has it in their food. Once again, you offer nothing to the discussion. Lauren, I'm going to have to let you in on a little tidbit just as I had to clue in Megan many weeks ago--GO OUT IN REAL LIFE AND SEE FOR YOURSELF--NOT EVERYTHING IS DONE THESE DAYS BY COMPUTER!! There. Go look at an ACTUAL bag and see for yourself. Gaubster2 Wrote: >Try www.hc-sc.gc.ca and then do a >search for enterococcus faecium. You'll >see for yourself. You have proven once agaion that you have ZERO comprehension skills. Apparently you don't know what a probiotic is. Enterococcus faecium is classified as a "good" bacteria that occurs naturally in the intestine. It is not extracted from feces. Maybe this didn't occur to you, but you can grow bacteria in a dish. Fancy that! "E. faecium has been shown to be important in the nutritional support of diarrheal diseases, especially in cases where pathogenic microbes, such as rotavirus, invade the bowel. This particular organism only transiently colonizes the GI tract. A recent study indicated that an E. faecium-containing yogurt was able to significantly lower LDL cholesterol. E. faecium is safe, and has been researched extensively by the World Health Organization." "How do the Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifidobacterium & Enterococcus faecium bacteria help my dog? The Lactobacillus acidophilus, Bifidobacterium and Enterococcus faecium bacteria can be collectively referred to as health-promoting or beneficial bacteria for many reasons suggested by research studies. Each of these species work in both the small and large intestines. However, the L. acidophilus and E. faecium tend to be more active in the small intestine, while the Bifidobacterium are more important in the large intestine. a. These health-promoting bacteria attach to the villi lining the small intestine to improve nutrient absorption.b. The attachment or colonization by the beneficial bacteria prevents harmful bacteria from attaching and increasing in number.c. The health-promoting bacteria are also considered lactic acid-producing bacteria and assist in maintaining a stable digestive tract pH to restrict E. coli and Salmonella growth.d. The beneficial bacteria also produce bacteriocins and other metabolites to restrict E. coli and Salmonella growth. e. Increasing evidence suggests that the health-promoting bacteria enhance immune function. This could be the result of increased nutrient absorption to support the immune system. Another possibility is that immune receptors recognize the beneficial bacteria in the digestive tract and cause the heightened activity." I would suggest you stop scaremongering and misleading people, and you might want to stop the libel as well. 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 >You have proven once agaion that you have ZERO comprehension skills. >Apparently you don't know what a probiotic is. >I would suggest you stop scaremongering and misleading people, and you >might want to stop the libel as well. Nobody is libeling anybody here. Try some comphrehension yourself. As for probiotics, please show some peer-reviewed, published research that indicates the need in HEALTHY cats. Sick cats, yes...but healthy cats? >"E. faecium has been shown to be important in the nutritional support >of diarrheal diseases, especially in cases where pathogenic microbes, >such as rotavirus, invade the bowel. See, even your own cite lists this as something for diarrhea--not something that a healthy cat should be experiencing. Gaubster2 Wrote: >Nobody is libeling anybody here. Yes, you did. You stated that Wellness uses bacteria from feces in their food. That is a lie and *is* libel, which you specifically posted to try to discredit the company. >As for probiotics, please show some >peer-reviewed, published research that >indicates the need in HEALTHY cats. Sick >cats, yes...but healthy cats? I have made *no* claims regarding this. Nice try to deflect from the fact that you were, once again, wrong. It didn't work. On the subject, I don't know of a study in cats, but there was one done in healthy chicks that showed that feeding probiotics was beneficial: "These results show that Enterococcus faecium Cernelle 68 will bring economic advantage to the breeders by improving feed efficiency ratio and carcass weight, and it is safe for the host animal and it is well tolerated by the organism." You can read the study here: http://www.medwet.lublin.pl/Year%202003/Vol03-06/art226-02.htm 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 To follow up to my own post here is an article on the VIN that clearly states that probiotics are beneficial to healthy animals: http://www.vin.com/VINDBPub/SearchPB/Proceedings/PR05000/PR00533.htm 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 >To follow up to my own post here is an article on the VIN that clearly >states that probiotics are beneficial to healthy animals: > >http://www.vin.com/VINDBPub/SearchPB/Proceedings/PR05000/PR00533.htm > >Megan I didn't see anything in there about cats. Megan...I'm just waiting for Lauren to blast you for your lack of "reading comphresenion". Actually I won't hold my breath since she plays favorites. Has that opinion been published anywhere or peer-reviewed? :) Gaubster2 wrote: >I didn't see anything in there about cats. >Megan... Here's a newflash for you...cats are *animals!* "Probiotics are defined as "live microbial feed supplements, which beneficially effect the host animal by improving its intestinal microbial balance". Or maybe you missed the part where they specifically took strains from *cats*... "To investigate potential health beneficial effects of probiotics in pets over 50 different strains of lactic acid bacteria were isolated from cats and dogs, identified and characterized for relevant technological and physiological properties." Or the part where two of six of those strains (specifically stated to have been taken from those cats that you said were not mentioned,) in particular were able to inhibit and inactivate pathogenoic bacteria: "Based on this first evaluation six strains were selected and their potential to inhibit the growth of pet enteropathogens was investigated in co-cultivation experiments in an in vitro model simulating small intestinal conditions. It could be demonstrated that two out of the six isolates were able to inhibit and inactivate pathogenic bacteria such as enterotoxinogenic strains of E. coli, Salmonella typhimurium and Shigella dysenteriae." Can you grasp the concept of preventative supplementation? >Has that opinion been published >anywhere or peer-reviewed? :) ROTFLMAO! You looked at VIN right? You saw this was from the WSAVA right? Do I have to spell it out for you? >I'm just waiting for Lauren to blast you >for your lack of "reading comphresenion". Errr... I think that's comprehension... >Actually I won't hold my breath since she >plays favorites. No, don't hold your breath because she can't blast me for something I haven't done. 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 >Gaubster2 wrote: >>I'm just waiting for Lauren to blast you >>for your lack of "reading comphresenion". >Errr... I think that's comprehension... > >>Actually I won't hold my breath since she >>plays favorites. No favorites here, Gaubster. Unlike you, Megan actually has knowledge about feline nutrition, something which you know nothing about. Now I wouldn't mind if you still want to hold your breath though ;) Lauren ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >>>I'm just waiting for Lauren to blast you >>>for your lack of "reading comphresenion". [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >No favorites here, Gaubster. Unlike you, Megan actually has knowledge about >feline nutrition, something which you know nothing about. It's too bad she doesn't use that knowledge w/o spewing her venomous verbiage at people that don't agree w/ her. I actually question her "feline nutritional" knowledge, since she hates anything associated w/ Hill's. You don't have to like them, but you can't deny that they are the leader in small animal nutrition. To ignore that is to be in denial. >>I didn't see anything in there about cats. >>Megan... > >Here's a newflash for you...cats are *animals!* Another example of your flawed logic. Pitiful. > >To follow up to my own post here is an article on the VIN that clearly > >states that probiotics are beneficial to healthy animals: [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Has that opinion been published anywhere or peer-reviewed? :) She didn't say it was for cats, she noted very clearly for healthy *animals*. Why don't you show us some "peer-reviewed" documentation that's it's not okay for healthy animals? >She didn't say it was for cats, she noted very clearly for healthy >*animals*. Why don't you show us some "peer-reviewed" documentation >that's it's not okay for healthy animals? Which wasn't the topic. And you want me to prove a negative? >>Nobody is libeling anybody here. > >Yes, you did. You stated that Wellness uses bacteria from feces in their >food. That is a lie and *is* libel, which you specifically posted to try >to discredit the company. That's not libel. You would have to prove that they lost money as a result of what they are doing. By your definition, Ann Martin (your queen) would be sued on a daily basis. >I have made *no* claims regarding this. Nice try to deflect from the >fact that you were, once again, wrong. It didn't work. I didn't say you did. I was just posing the statement. You jump to conclusions so often, I'm glad I don't have to deal w/ you in real life! >>As for probiotics, please show some >>peer-reviewed, published research that >>indicates the need in HEALTHY cats. Sick >>cats, yes...but healthy cats? >On the subject, I don't know of a study in cats, but there was one done >in healthy chicks that showed that feeding probiotics was beneficial: Well, there you go. Where is the peer-reviewed, published research indicating the need for probiotics in healthy cats? Gaubster2 wrote: >>> Nobody is libeling anybody here. >> Yes, you did. You stated that Wellness >> uses bacteria from feces in their food. >> That is a lie and *is* libel, which you >> specifically posted to try to discredit >> the company. > That's not libel. You would have to > prove that they lost money as a result > of what they are doing. By your > definition, Ann Martin (your queen) > would be sued on a daily basis. You have no idea what you are talking about. The definition of libel is as follows: "a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression." Whether or not you can win a judgement in court has no bearing on whether you committed libel. By definition, and for all intents and purposes, you did. >> I have made *no* claims regarding this. >> Nice try to deflect from the fact that >> you were, once again, wrong. It didn't >> work. > I didn't say you did. I was just posing > the statement. You jump to conclusions > so often, I'm glad I don't have to deal > w/ you in real life! Yes, I am sure you would hate to be made a fool of in person. >>> As for probiotics, please show some >>> peer-reviewed, published research that >>> indicates the need in HEALTHY cats. Sick >>> cats, yes...but healthy cats? >> On the subject, I don't know of a study >> in cats, but there was one done in >> healthy chicks that showed that feeding >> probiotics was beneficial: > Well, there you go. Where is the > peer-reviewed, published research > indicating the need for probiotics in > healthy cats? What part of "I don't know of a study" didn't you understand? I know you're desperately grasping at straws at this point, but you don't need studies for *everything* to know something works or is true. The fact that probiotics have been shown to be beneficial to many different species gives cause to assume they will be beneficial in all species. Instead of grasping at straws it might serve you well to try grasping a few concepts instead. 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 > >>> As for probiotics, please show some > >>> peer-reviewed, published research that [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Instead of grasping at straws it might serve you well to try grasping a > few concepts instead. Megan, just so you know this fella's tactic goes like so: People (general members of a group like this) state, with distaste, that Science Diet (or Brand X) contains chemical preservatives or by-products. Perhaps they might have even said at some point, "Ethoxyquin...did you know that's a Rubber Stabilizer?" or "By-products could contain Diseased Parts!" So Gaubster attempts to turn the argument back on the anti-SciDie folks. He says "Did you know that food has PHOSPHOROUS?" "Yes, that food is a KITTEN FOOD!" "That product has ingredients with MSDSs!" "That product has ingredients also found in POOP!" His/her poop-phobia has become clear here because the POOP BACTERIA argument has gotten a lot of recent play. Unfortunately no matter how clearly and logically you address these concerns (I spent quite some time on PubMed gathering abstracts of articles indicating that probiotics are beneficial) Gaubster will repeat the argument to the next comer like a child playing with a shiny new toy. Your choices are to repeat your rebuttal for the benefit of other readers, or ignore the trolling. It's a tough decision. -Alison in OH > Megan, just so you know this fella's tactic goes like so: People > (general members of a group like this) state, with distaste, that [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > -Alison in OH Well said. He's hopeless and I suspect I'll take anything he says about anything with a grain of salt. >Well said. He's hopeless and I suspect I'll take anything he says >about anything with a grain of salt. Well, that's your loss. See what happens when somebody speaks up for the truth? >Megan, just so you know this fella's tactic goes like so: People >(general members of a group like this) state, with distaste, that >Science Diet (or Brand X) contains chemical preservatives or >by-products. Alison, I know you are a Hill's basher from way back too. Science Diet is now preserved naturally. I guess you can drop that talking point. Not that there is anything wrong w/ that...no one can show any evidence of a single cat suffering from the use of synthethic antioxidants. Let's just cut through the hyperbole and stick to the facts. >Perhaps they might have even said at some point, >"Ethoxyquin...did you know that's a Rubber Stabilizer?" or "By-products >could contain Diseased Parts!" Oops, too late on your part. >So Gaubster attempts to turn the argument back on the anti-SciDie folks. >He says "Did you know that food has PHOSPHOROUS?" "Yes, that food is a >KITTEN FOOD!" "That product has ingredients with MSDSs!" "That product >has ingredients also found in POOP!" You are mischaracterizing my previous posts, but I've learned to expect that from you. >Unfortunately no matter how clearly and logically you address these >concerns (I spent quite some time on PubMed gathering abstracts of >articles indicating that probiotics are beneficial) None of which indicated a benefit in healthy cats, IIRC. As far as logic, Megan would rather smear and use insults--logic is not her strong suit. >Your choices are to repeat your rebuttal for the benefit of other >readers, or ignore the trolling. It's a tough decision. Another of your tactics is to label people you don't agree with a troll. Megan supposedly killfiled me several weeks ago, but she's back. Hmm, wouldn't that be a lie? > >Your choices are to repeat your rebuttal for the benefit of other > >readers, or ignore the trolling. It's a tough decision. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > that > be a lie? I didn't call you a troll, I said that repeating the same inflammatory comments over and over is a tactic known as "trolling" for responses. I respect your arguments but I don't admire your bullheaded insistence on repeating the same crap, next verse same as the first, without actually engaging in dialogue. Sure, it's reasonable that you feel defensive when you're upholding an unpopular position. But sooner or later it gets very tiresome. -Alison in OH >> Another of your tactics is to label people you don't agree with a troll. >> Megan [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >I didn't call you a troll, I said that repeating the same inflammatory >comments over and over is a tactic known as "trolling" for responses. Well, if that's the case--I'm not the only one engaging in it. I am not a troll..I realize my points of view don't jive w/ the politically correct views of some on this ng, but I'm not going to turn tail and run away if I'm right. I thought you were insinuating that I was a troll from your statement above, so I'm sorry if I misunderstood you. >I respect your arguments but I don't admire your bullheaded insistence >on repeating the same crap, next verse same as the first, without >actually engaging in dialogue. Sure, it's reasonable that you feel >defensive when you're upholding an unpopular position. But sooner or >later it gets very tiresome. Well thank you. Alison, you and I don't agree very often, but I at least respect you in that you don't resort to the nastiness that some on this ng engage in on a daily basis. I can respect differing opinions and I try not to get bogged down w/ the name calling that others commonly resort to. However, I do know what I'm talking about on certain topics and I will continue to share what I've learned even if it flies in the face of politically correct opinions. Gaubster2 wrote: >Megan supposedly killfiled me several >weeks ago, but she's back. Hmm, >wouldn't that be a lie? Yes, it is a lie. YOUR lie. I NEVER claimed to killfile you and I dare you to prove it (you can't because it never happned.) Here's another newsflash for you. WebTV doesn't have a killfile. 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 >What part of "I don't know of a study" didn't you understand? I know >you're desperately grasping at straws at this point, but you don't need [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Instead of grasping at straws it might serve you well to try grasping a >few concepts instead. Megan, don't be so gullible. Cats aren't the same as other species. You can't point to anything that states that healthy cats need probiotics. Using your logic, probiotics are fillers in cat food since they are unneccessary. >You have no idea what you are talking about. The definition of libel is >as follows: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >whether you committed libel. By definition, and for all intents and >purposes, you did. Try using the legal definition of libel. What I was doing was merely using free-speech. Just because you don't agree with it, you want to paint me negatively. I know how you play your game. Gaubster2 wrote: <snip drivel> When you offer intelligent discourse, or have something useful to say, let me know. Arguing solely for the sake of arguing (trolling), which is exactly what you have reduced yourself to is a waste of my time. Frankly, you're doing a fine job of making yourself look bad. You don't need my help. :-) 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 >When you offer intelligent discourse, or have something useful to say, >let me know. Arguing solely for the sake of arguing (trolling), which is >exactly what you have reduced yourself to is a waste of my time. >Frankly, you're doing a fine job of making yourself look bad. You don't >need my help. :-) I have provided useful information (to people who are interested). Just because you seem to have this hatred for anything I put down reflects back on you. You're way off topic anyhow (as am I). You have a habit of "leaving" when you can't get your way--so be it! If you can't argue your points w/o throwing out insults and hatred, then you need not waste your time or mine or anyone else's. Grow up. >Gaubster2 wrote: ><snip drivel> See? I will give you this--this is one of my all time favorite quotes: >"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do >nothing." I'm supposed I'll get harassed now for trying to agree w/ you on "something". Oops, almost missed this one: Gaubster2 wrote: >Try using the legal definition of libel. >What I was doing was merely using >free-speech. No, you weren't. A simple search shows you to be, once again, WRONG. (I'm starting to think you have extreme masochistic tendencies...) From the findlaw.com legal dictionary: libel- a defamatory statement or representation esp. in the form of written or printed words specif: a false published statement that injures an individual's reputation (as in business) or otherwise exposes him or her to public contempt 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 Apparently we didn't know that "faecium" is an alternative spelling for "feces"... ;) > Gaubster2 Wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 68 lines] > > - W.H. Murray >From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com >> Gaubster2 Wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 43 lines] >> I would suggest you stop scaremongering and misleading people, and you >> might want to stop the libel as well. >Apparently we didn't know that "faecium" is an alternative spelling for >"feces"... ;) Bwhahahahahahaha!!!!! ;) ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com >Date: 9/14/03 11:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time >Message-id: <vmal0l8pc32def@corp.supernews.com> > >Apparently we didn't know that "faecium" is an alternative spelling for >"feces"... ;) Tell me you don't think that is really the case. > >From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com > >Date: 9/14/03 11:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Tell me you don't think that is really the case. My God you're dense. Did your mother drop you on your head? >From: misskittymcgill71@yahoo.com (Karen M.) >> >From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com >> >Date: 9/14/03 11:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >My God you're dense. Did your mother drop you on your head? Bahahahaha!!!!!!! Probably from a 20 story building! ________ 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.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm >Bahahahaha!!!!!!! Probably from a 20 story building! Lauren, I can always count on you to join in on the insults! ;) Too bad that's all you have to offer. >> >Apparently we didn't know that "faecium" is an alternative spelling for >> >"feces"... ;) >> >> Tell me you don't think that is really the case. > >My God you're dense. Did your mother drop you on your head? I got your attempt at humor. Apparently you didn't get mine. >Wellness certainly does do feeding trials. And I quote: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >This would have been quite easy to check up on before making false >statements. They don't do it on ALL of their products. The problem w/ what you quote above is the "all life stages" part. You are feeding your adult and senior cats KITTEN FOOD. That isn't the best nutrient profile you can feed to non-kittens. Managing risk factors is what nutrition is all about. >> Here we go again. Colgate doesn't do animal testing on their products. >Why >> slander them? > >Bullshit. Yes they do. Call the company and ask them yourself. Prove it. I maintain that they don't, because that's the truth. PETA even begrudingly admits that Colgate is okay. >>Wellness certainly does do feeding trials. And I quote: >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > KITTEN FOOD. That isn't the best nutrient profile you can feed to non-kittens. > Managing risk factors is what nutrition is all about. *All* their products? They don't make that many! LOL! Every product of theirs I've boughten has that same statement. If did trials on a different formulation, say their senior vs. their regular, they wouldn't be able to put the above statement on the bag. I am not feeding my cats *kitten* food. I'm feeding them *cat* food. If you choose not to feed your cats Wellness, that's fine by me. But don't denigrate a product you know nothing about. End of story. >>>Here we go again. Colgate doesn't do animal testing on their products. >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Prove it. I maintain that they don't, because that's the truth. PETA even > begrudingly admits that Colgate is okay. No, they don't. Check their website, Einstein. They keep their lists very up to date. >Every product of >theirs I've boughten has that same statement. If did trials on a >different formulation, say their senior vs. their regular, they wouldn't >be able to put the above statement on the bag. ?? >I am not feeding my cats >*kitten* food. I'm feeding them *cat* food. If you are feeding a cat food that says "all life stages" you are in essence feeding a kitten formulation. What's so hard to understand about that? That is a fact. You don't have to believe it, but it is the truth. >If you choose not to feed >your cats Wellness, that's fine by me. But don't denigrate a product you > know nothing about. End of story. From the sounds of things, I know more about them than you do. >No, they don't. Check their website, Einstein. They keep their lists >very up to date. >From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com Perhaps some proof would be in order here. >>Every product of >>theirs I've boughten has that same statement. If did trials on a >>different formulation, say their senior vs. their regular, they wouldn't >>be able to put the above statement on the bag. > > ?? AAFCO regs. >>I am not feeding my cats >>*kitten* food. I'm feeding them *cat* food. > > If you are feeding a cat food that says "all life stages" you are in essence > feeding a kitten formulation. What's so hard to understand about that? That > is a fact. You don't have to believe it, but it is the truth. Wrong. Kitten formulations have higher protein level. Nothing hard to understand about that at all... >>If you choose not to feed >>your cats Wellness, that's fine by me. But don't denigrate a product you >> know nothing about. End of story. > > From the sounds of things, I know more about them than you do. What have you told me that's true? Certainly nothing you've given me any *proof* on, you know that things *you* keep demanding? >>No, they don't. Check their website, Einstein. They keep their lists >>very up to date. > >>From: "Karen M." mskitty@NOSPAMeasystreet.com > > Perhaps some proof would be in order here. Are you that lazy? Go to Peta's site, go to their list of companys that test and voila! it's right there. |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message