 |
 | 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 / September 2005Which food for a fat cat?
The cat is 23 pounds and really should be about 20 pounds. Let's suppose the only two food choices available are Science Diet Light canned or Hills R/D dry. Which of *those two* would you choose? (and why?) > The cat is 23 pounds and really should be about 20 pounds. > > Let's suppose the only two food choices available are Science Diet Light > canned or Hills R/D dry. Which of *those two* would you choose? (and why?) It's a no-brainer. I would choose the R/D because it's for reducing weight. And going from 23 to 20 is a reduction in weight. The Light is maintenance and is more difficult to reduce weight with it. The R/D has twice the fiber and probably a higher percentage of nutrient density for safety. But it's not to be used for a long time hence it's only by prescription. The higher fiber might be useful in tricking the feline into thinking, aha, I'm full so it's a little easier from the behavioral point of view, using the R/D. It's a hassle because now someone has to visit the vet and the food is supposedly sold only by prescription. So it's more effort and more expense but I am not having much luck with the Light so I will be seeing a vet for R/D. And possibly W/D later if this should be an ongoing problem. R/D is only for short-term I believe. By the way, what I just told you is not just my opinion. It's what at least 1 vet told me. And for that matter, Royal Canin's vet told me the same in regards to prescription diets versus "Light" diets, in general. > The cat is 23 pounds and really should be about 20 pounds. > Let's suppose the only two food choices available are Science > Diet Light canned or Hills R/D dry. Which of *those two* would > you choose? (and why?) Have you tried putting dry food some place where the cat has to get a tiny amount of exercise with each nibble? A carpet covered 2x4 is good for that. >> The cat is 23 pounds and really should be about 20 pounds. >> Let's suppose the only two food choices available are Science [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > get a tiny amount of exercise with each nibble? A carpet covered > 2x4 is good for that. That sounds interesting, as George (the plump one) has been on dry R/D for a while now and hasn't lost much (if any) weight recently. He quickly went down from 24 to 23, but has stabilised at 23. He's the big orange tabby type that seems to be prone to laziness & overweight. I also have a cat who needs to be on a kidney diet and 3 who are in very good shape and can eat just about anything. Anyway, I'm not clear on how you'd set up the 2x4 and food. Are you talking about standing it on end? Or up off the floor, but lengthwise like a gymnastics balance beam? > That sounds interesting, as George (the plump one) has been on dry R/D > for a while now and hasn't lost much (if any) weight recently. He quickly > went down from 24 to 23, but has stabilised at 23. He's the big orange > tabby type that seems to be prone to laziness & overweight. Are you controlling his portions? If he's not losing weight, cut back some.  SignatureWeb site: http://www.slywy.com/ Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/ Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/ > Are you controlling his portions? If he's not losing weight, cut back > some. It's difficult to measure what he's eating because the other cats snack freely out of his bowl. Hence the thinking about adding or switching to wet food, as then they'd be more willing to eat in a few defined meals rather than wanting to snack on dry all the time. >It's difficult to measure what he's eating because the other cats snack >freely out of his bowl. Hence the thinking about adding or switching to wet >food, as then they'd be more willing to eat in a few defined meals rather >than wanting to snack on dry all the time. Then switch to RD canned. No need for SD Light to be the only other choice. -mhd >>> The cat is 23 pounds and really should be about 20 pounds. >> Have you tried putting dry food some place where the cat has to >> get a tiny amount of exercise with each nibble? A carpet >> covered 2x4 is good for that. > Anyway, I'm not clear on how you'd set up the 2x4 and food. Are > you talking about standing it on end? Or up off the floor, but > lengthwise like a gymnastics balance beam? Just find some place to put dry food high up off of the floor. Then lean your carpeted 2x4 up against that structure so the cat(s) can get up there whenever he is hungry. (People who have disabled their cat by removing its claws might be able to do the same with a ladder/stair structure.) I find that especially useful when your cat runs to the food bowl every time you move or turnaround. That way, instead of putting their head in the food bowl, they (hopefully) just run to the bottom of the 2x4 and look longing at you from there. At least they will get more exercise and gain strength. Making your cat get a tiny amount of exercise for each bite makes sense, considering how well your cat is able to climb and whether it is eating enough. >>>> The cat is 23 pounds and really should be about 20 pounds. > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > sense, considering how well your cat is able to climb and whether > it is eating enough. I'll have to think about what I could rig up. George eats in the kitchen. I've always told the cats that they aren't allowed up on the kitchen table or counter so I'd need to find some other small table or cabinet. > That sounds interesting, as George (the plump one) has been on dry R/D > for a while now and hasn't lost much (if any) weight recently. He quickly > went down from 24 to 23, but has stabilised at 23. That's a common problem with all these weight loss diets (other than Purina DM and Hill's m/d). Cats compensate for the diluted calories and either plateau or start gaining again.. Use a regular maintenance diet and reduce his caloric intake by 25% and you shouldn't have any problems See my previous post. > Use a regular maintenance diet and reduce his caloric intake by 25% and you > shouldn't have any problems I have to disagree with this idea. Pet foods are set to distribute required nutrients based on caloric intake. If the cat is to have an intake of X Vitamin A per day at X weight, reducing the portions by 25% also reduces all nutrients involved along with the reduction in calories. Foods designed for weight loss compensate for nutrients by insuring sufficent levels of all the various nutrients at a reduced caloric intake. Certainly it is true that most - but not all - pet foods contain sufficent overages of all the vitamins etc, but using just and regular maintenance food does not insure sufficent levels of all the various nurients needed. It is best to use a dedicated weight loss diet for weight loss. > > Use a regular maintenance diet and reduce his caloric intake by 25% and you > > shouldn't have any problems [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > also reduces all nutrients involved along with the reduction in > calories. My vet just suggested that I reduce my cat's regular maintencance canned food by 25% so he can loose weight. > > > Use a regular maintenance diet and reduce his caloric intake by 25% and > you [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > food by > 25% so he can loose weight. If a cat is overeating, this makes sense. If he's getting too much in the first place, he's not going to lose needed nutrients by getting less. I think if you keep an eye on his coat, his activity level, his muscle tone, etc., you'll be able to tell that he's thriving. SignatureWeb site: http://www.slywy.com/ Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/ Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/ > > Use a regular maintenance diet and reduce his caloric intake by 25% and you > > shouldn't have any problems [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > insuring sufficent levels of all the various nutrients at a reduced > caloric intake. Thank you, Steve. I'm familiar with Hill's marketing gimmicks. > Certainly it is true that most - but not all - pet foods contain > sufficient overages of all the vitamins etc, but using just and regular > maintenance food does not insure sufficient levels of all the various > nurients needed. It is best to use a dedicated weight loss diet for > weight loss. First of all, many cats won't eat r/d, w/d or Science Diet Lite because the increased fiber decreases palatability. It doesn't matter how perfectly formulated a diet is if the cat won't eat it. Obviously, only cats that would actually eat r/d were selected for the study. Second, most "pet foods contain sufficient overages of all the vitamins etc," to more than offset the reduction in caloric intake. Third, the cat 'grows into' the weight loss diet as she loses weight. IOW, an 23# cat fed a DER for 20# cat will have a DER of a 20# in a relatively short time. This method also significantly reduces the number of times that the portion must be reduced. This is also an excellent program for grossly obese cats that must lose weight in stages. See the weight loss chart designed by Tony Buffington. http://www.maxshouse.com/nutrition/weight_loss_chart.pdf : > Use a regular maintenance diet and reduce his caloric intake by 25% and : > you shouldn't have any problems [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] : insuring sufficent levels of all the various nutrients at a reduced : caloric intake. Frankly this makes no sense to me. The cat has been overeating for his activity level, which is why he is overweight, and thus should get less food. He will get all the nutrients that come with that amount of food. I mean, if he is eating too much, why play a juggling act in which some nutrients are cut and others kept at the present level, why not just cut the food a little? > Frankly this makes no sense to me. The cat has been overeating for his > activity level, which is why he is overweight, and thus should get less [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > nutrients are cut and others kept at the present level, why not just > cut the food a little? Let's see if I can explain it in simple terms. Cat A - named Chubby - weighs 20 pounds Lets simplify and say that each pound of Chubby is made up of 1,000 cells. Times 20 pounds means Chubby is composed of 20,000 cells each needing some nutrient. Let's use vitamin X and assume each cell requires 1 molecule of vitamin X per day (this isn't correct - just an example to illustrate the problem) You feed a food designed to provide 1 molecule of vitamin X for Chubbys 20 pounds worth of 1,000 cells each. So the food designed to feed a 20 pound cat contains 20,000 molecules of Vitamin X PLUS a 10% margin of error. So the food will provide 22,000 molecules of vitamin X for Chubby who is 20 pounds. Now you reduce the food by 25% and begin feeding only 75% of the total calories needed to maintain that 20 pounds of Chubby. Instead you are feeding the cat for 15 pounds of Chubby and providing only enough vitamin X for a 15 pound cat with 15,000 cells each needing a single molecule of vitamin X. You're now feeding 15,000 molecules of vitamin plus the 10% margin of safety or a total of 16,500 molecules of vitamin X. Chubby still weighs 20 pounds and now is only receiving enough vitamin X for a 15 pound cat and is now short by 3,500 molecules of Vitamin X. If you are reducing a food by 25%, you need to be sure that the food contains 125% of all needed nutrients. I doubt there are many foods on the market that do so. To Phil's point if the cat is only on a reducing diet for a short period of time then there's probably little real damage. Taking a very obese cat down from 25 pounds to 12 pounds takes months of work and then the possibility of damage due to a nutrient deficiency becomes real. : Let's see if I can explain it in simple terms. Steve, thank you for your explanation. I understand what you are saying, but I am not sure if it is applicable. My concern boils down to this: If I am eating twice as much as I should of a well-balanced diet, then I am getting twice as many calories and also twice as many nutrients. It should be sufficient to cut the diet in 1/2. If the cat needs 10 oz of food but has been eating 15, then 10 oz of a nutritionally balanced diet should provide all the needed nutrition. Of course, I would cut gradually, say 1 oz per week so as not to shock the body (or psychology), but unless there is a special medical problem, I don't see the need for extra juggling you suggested. Put in your language, why should I feed all the cells when I want many of them to die and get flushed out? :-) : Cat A - named Chubby - weighs 20 pounds : [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] : months of work and then the possibility of damage due to a nutrient : deficiency becomes real. > My concern boils down to this: If I am eating twice as much as I should > of a well-balanced diet, then I am getting twice as many calories and > also twice as many nutrients. It should be sufficient to cut the diet > in 1/2. Yes, I agree. If the cat is overeating, there's no harm in cutting back appropriately and gradually. SignatureWeb site: http://www.slywy.com/ Message board: http://www.slywy.com/phpBB2/ Journal: http://slywy.diaryland.com/ > > Frankly this makes no sense to me. The cat has been overeating for his > > activity level, which is why he is overweight, and thus should get less [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > nutrients are cut and others kept at the present level, why not just > > cut the food a little? > Let's see if I can explain it in simple terms. Seems like you overcomplicated a simple explanation. > Now you reduce the food by 25% and begin feeding only 75% of the total > calories needed to maintain that 20 pounds of Chubby. Instead you are > feeding the cat for 15 pounds of Chubby and providing only enough > vitamin X for a 15 pound cat And that's precisely the object of a weight loss plan. The energy needs of obese adult cats are about 40 kcal/kg/day of desired lean body mass. Ergo, a 5-kg cat about 40% overweight has a lean body mass of about 3 kg, and a basal energy requirement of about 120 kcal/day -- not 200 kcal- as 200 kcal/day will only maintain the cat at her excessive weight. As you said- feline diets are formulated to deliver the required amount of nutrients based on caloric intake. Egro, 120 kcals/day would supply all the nutrients in sufficient amounts to meet the needs of the cat's lean body mass -- without feeding the fat. This will result in less lean body mass loss -to- fat loss. I hate to burst your bubble, but of all the vets and cats I've worked with, none have had success with r/d, w/d, Science Diet Lite, or any other weight loss plan without portion control. Many cats may lose a little weight initially, then either plateau or begin to gain back the weight they've lost. Portion control is absolutely essential in any weight loss plan. In most cases, life-time portion control is essential for long-term weight maintenance. That about sums it up in simple terms. : And that's precisely the object of a weight loss plan. : [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] : : That about sums it up in simple terms. Thank you---again, as I have learned so much from your remarks. I cannot imagine anything more obvious than the overeating-overweight correlation. People avoid obvious answers staring at them and search for painless high-tech fixes in their own lives, and bring the same thinking to their pets. > : I hate to burst your bubble, but of all the vets and cats I've worked with, > : none have had success with r/d, w/d, Science Diet Lite, or any other weight [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > for painless high-tech fixes in their own lives, and bring the same > thinking to their pets. Amen. > : And that's precisely the object of a weight loss plan. > : [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > for painless high-tech fixes in their own lives, and bring the same > thinking to their pets. I think these weight-loss diets are designed primarily for owner convenience- so they can fill the bowl as usual without having to bother measuring portions. The theory is that the cat will reach satiety before she can consume too many calories. Looks good on paper and might work under controlled clinical conditions, but in real life with pet cats the only thing that works is portion control. The pet food manufacturers don't make weight control any easier since the labels are very misleading and very, very few list the caloric content. You'd be surprised about how many people actually believe dry food contains more protein than canned when in fact its the exact opposite. The first step to healthier cats are labels that the average cat owner can understand without a manual. Phil. ... > I think these weight-loss diets are designed primarily for owner > convenience- so they can fill the bowl as usual without having > to bother measuring portions. And a motive for you to shy away from a high fiber diet is because you don't like the extra litter maintenance. > The theory is that the cat will reach satiety before > she can consume too many calories. Looks good on paper and > might work under controlled clinical conditions, but in real > life with pet cats the only thing that works is portion control. In real life, increasing exercise works too. But you might not want to put the extra space and effort into providing that. > Phil. > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 > Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com rec.pets.cats.health+behav:391341 > ... > > I think these weight-loss diets are designed primarily for owner [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > And a motive for you to shy away from a high fiber diet is because > you don't like the extra litter maintenance. Portion control takes more effort than mindlessly filling a bowl with high-fiber food- which is about all defective brain is capable of. > > The theory is that the cat will reach satiety before > > she can consume too many calories. Looks good on paper and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > In real life, increasing exercise works too. But you might not > want to put the extra space and effort into providing that. I design cat habitats and environmental enrichment programs, you pathetic moron. > "John Doe" <jdoe usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message >> ... >> > I think these weight-loss diets are designed primarily for >> > owner convenience- so they can fill the bowl as usual without >> > having to bother measuring portions. >> And a motive for you to shy away from a high fiber diet is >> because you don't like the extra litter maintenance. > Portion control takes more effort than mindlessly filling a bowl > with high-fiber food- which is about all defective brain is > capable of. Babbling troll. >> > The theory is that the cat will reach satiety before >> > she can consume too many calories. Looks good on paper and [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >> In real life, increasing exercise works too. But you might not >> want to put the extra space and effort into providing that. > I design cat habitats and environmental enrichment programs, For what company? Sold where? Searching the usenet archives under your identity for "cat habitats" or "environmental enrichment programs" produces zero results. In other words, more wanna-be bullshit. > you pathetic moron. If your mother hadn't been desperately seeking her next trick, maybe she could have taught you some manners before she abandoned your a.s. > Path: newsdbm06.news.prodigy.com!newsdst02.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail > NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 15:18:31 -0500 [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 > Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com rec.pets.cats.health+behav:391374 > If your mother hadn't been desperately seeking her next trick, > maybe she could have taught you some manners before she abandoned > your a.s. I can just picture the veins in your neck and low forehead budging! ROTFL! Instead of resenting people that are much smarter than you, you should try to learn from us- although I really don't think there's much hope for you. You'll need several years of therapy just to advance to imbecile. Btw, is "John Doe" an acronym for your real name? "John Dolt". Don't feel bad; you might not always be a moron- you don't have very far to go to reach imbecile. Seriously, John, you sure are one dumb bastard! LOL! I think you're the dumbest bastard on Usenet. See? Now at least you can say you're something. You're the only person I know who had child aspirations to someday become a moron- and fulfilled them! LOL! >> That sounds interesting, as George (the plump one) has been on dry >> R/D for a while now and hasn't lost much (if any) weight recently. He [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Purina DM and Hill's m/d). Cats compensate for the diluted calories > and either plateau or start gaining again.. I looked up the info on m/d on the Hill's site and I think I'm going to ask the vet about trying it for George. I hadn't heard of it before, so thanks for mentioning it. > >> That sounds interesting, as George (the plump one) has been on dry > >> R/D for a while now and hasn't lost much (if any) weight recently. He [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > ask the vet about trying it for George. I hadn't heard of it before, so > thanks for mentioning it. At least m/d resembles a cat's natural diet (high protein/low carbohydrate) more than any of the other weight loss diets (except Purina DM). Just be patient! Best of luck, Phil >> That sounds interesting, as George (the plump one) has been on dry R/D >> for a while now and hasn't lost much (if any) weight recently. He quickly [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > See my previous post. That's what finally worked with my Tigger. We just cut back on how much of the 'regular' food she got and she finally got down to her target weight. I'm in the process of doing the same thing with my Isabelle (she was fat when we adopted her) and she has lost 1/2 lb. so far. W > >> That sounds interesting, as George (the plump one) has been on dry R/D > >> for a while now and hasn't lost much (if any) weight recently. He quickly [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > I'm in the process of doing the same thing with my Isabelle (she was fat > when we adopted her) and she has lost 1/2 lb. so far. This weight loss method is not only more effective, its also much safer than changing an overweight or obese cat's food- especially to a less palatable high fiber food. If the cat won't eat it and suddenly stops eating, she can get very sick. Overweight and obese cats are at an increased risk of hepatic lipidosis. Continued good luck with Isabelle's diet. Phil > The cat is 23 pounds and really should be about 20 pounds. > > Let's suppose the only two food choices available are Science Diet Light > canned or Hills R/D dry. Which of *those two* would you choose? (and why?) Neither. Although both diets have a lower caloric density, both diets condition the cat to eat to a larger volume of food. Neither diet is particularly effective without portion control because cats compensate for caloric dilution after a few weeks to a few months. Science Diet Light is a preventative weight control diet (and not a particularly effective one at that)- its *not* a weight loss diet. R/d is a high-fiber diet that carries additional risks of its own. Cats eating high-fiber diets *must* be *well* hydrated to prevent the fiber from impacting in the colon which can result in intractable constipation. The *only* weight loss program that has been *proven* to be effective over the long term is caloric reduction coupled portion control. Portion control is *essential* for weight loss and proper long-term weight maintenance. A safe and effective weight loss program for your cat would be an initial 25% reduction in caloric intake. A 23# (10.5 kg) neutered cat has a daily energy requirement (DER) of about 420 kcals (calories). Reducing your cat's caloric intake to about 315 kcals/day should result in 15% weight loss in about 18 weeks. More rapid weight loss increases the risk of serious liver disease (hepatic lipidosis) and also results a higher lean body mass loss-to fat loss ratio. You can use a regular maintenance diet such as SD Turkey & Giblets for this weight loss program. Two cans a day minus 2 teaspoons divided into two feedings should be just about right. If you have other cats, you *must* feed the cats separately. You can feed the easy-keepers together but must make sure your overweight cat can't get at their food otherwise your program will fail. Phil > "5cats" <CatFan invalid.com> wrote in message >> The cat is 23 pounds and really should be about 20 pounds. >> Let's suppose the only two food choices available are Science >> Diet Light canned or Hills R/D dry. Which of *those two* would >> you choose? (and why?) > Neither... > Science Diet Light is a preventative weight control diet (and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > hydrated to prevent the fiber from impacting in the colon which > can result in intractable constipation. I've always heard that fiber does exactly the opposite of that. Some people misconceive that liquids relieve constipation. Methinks Phil is a troll giving bad medical advice. > Phil > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 > Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com rec.pets.cats.health+behav:390790 > > "5cats" <CatFan invalid.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > I've always heard that fiber does exactly the opposite of that. Fiber absorbs water in the colon. If the cat doesn't drink enough water the fiber will become impacted in the colon. But that's way over your head. > Methinks Phil is a troll giving bad medical advice. That's because you're a know-nothing moron and can't tell the difference between a hairball and a turd without tasting it. Now post your usual "troll" message that you post every time someone says something you don't like. "Phil P." <phil maxshouse.com> wrote: > "John Doe" <jdoe usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message >> "Phil P." <phil maxshouse.com> wrote: >> > "5cats" <CatFan invalid.com> wrote in message >> >> The cat is 23 pounds and really should be about 20 pounds. >> >> Let's suppose the only two food choices available are >> >> Science Diet Light canned or Hills R/D dry. Which of *those >> >> two* would you choose? (and why?) >> > Neither... Science Diet Light is a preventative weight >> > control diet (and not a particularly effective one at that)- [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >> > impacting in the colon which can result in intractable >> > constipation. >> I've always heard that fiber does exactly the opposite of that. > Fiber absorbs water in the colon. If the cat doesn't drink > enough water Always drink enough. Always do enough. Never do too little. Yada yada yada. > the fiber will become impacted in the colon. But that's way > over your head. It is beyond my reasoning. I would think fiber absorbs a lot of water before it gets to the colon. If what Phil says is true, does that apply to humans as well? I have never before heard anything like that. >> Methinks Phil is a troll giving bad medical advice. > That's because you're a know-nothing moron and can't tell the > difference between a hairball and a turd without tasting it. That is an example of Phil's usual knee-jerk, tough guy wanna-be, hysterically laughing at his own remarks (typical), reaction to correction. So don't correct him and expect civilized conversation. > Path: newssvr33.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm03.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail > NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 13:29:27 -0500 [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 > Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com rec.pets.cats.health+behav:390813 alt.med.veterinary:125197 > "Phil P." <phil maxshouse.com> wrote: > > "John Doe" <jdoe usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >> > impacting in the colon which can result in intractable > >> > constipation. Hello, We once had a cat that was really fat. I advise you to visit a store that has lots of different types of cat food. Check the labels and buy cat foods that have a low amount of fat. The secret is to only feed the cat the proper amount of food regardless of how many times the cat begs you for food. It's even worse with dogs because they beg even more than cats even if they are really fat. Just ignor the cat when it begs for food. Jason SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. > Hello, > We once had a cat that was really fat. I advise you to visit a store that [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > even if they are really fat. Just ignor the cat when it begs for food. > Jason Just ignore him? Have you ever had a 23 pound cat determined to wake you for breakfast at 5 A.M.? If only it were that easy. Anyway, he's only had Science Diet or Hill's foods ever since his first urinary tract problems years ago. Even a small portion of regular Friskies or Cat Chow and he starts to have problems. I will be talking to our vet about this too, the next time one of the cats needs to go in for a check up. > Just ignore him? Have you ever had a 23 pound cat determined to wake you > for breakfast at 5 A.M.? If only it were that easy. Even 18 lbs (2 of mine) can hit tender spots. But fat cats don't die if you limit their access to food to only 30 min twice a day. They manage to eat enough to look pretty good. In the intervening times, they're quite affectionate. ;). And of course, always have fresh water available, food or not. Close the bedroom door. The average vet will tell you that no cat that has had a urinary problem should ever be given anything other than wet food, ever (for the increased water content). But you can still limit it to twice a day. Even (gasp) once a day, if twice fails. SBH >> Just ignore him? Have you ever had a 23 pound cat determined to wake you >> for breakfast at 5 A.M.? If only it were that easy. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > intervening times, they're quite affectionate. ;). And of course, > always have fresh water available, food or not. Another issue I have to deal with is his tendancy to wolf down food too fast and then barf. > Close the bedroom door. I'm not sure I could sleep without at least a couple of cats piled up around me. And I don't want to lock the other 4 cats and a litter box in with me either. It ends up being easier just to deal with George. If I'm not too groggy I can grab him and hold him in my arms for a while, that seems to calm hinm down for a while. > The average vet will tell you that no cat that has had a urinary > problem should ever be given anything other than wet food, ever (for > the increased water content). But you can still limit it to twice a > day. Even (gasp) once a day, if twice fails. When this first started, years ago, the vet had me switch him from Cat Chow to SD dry and he's done well on the different types of SD we've used over the years. He doesn't do well on Friskies canned (except the Special Diet varieties). It seems he does drink enough -- except he's too lazy to drink like a normal cat, instead he lounges next to the water bowl and dips his paw in and licks the water off his paw. "5cats" <CatFan@invalid.com> wrote in message > Another issue I have to deal with is his tendancy to wolf down food too > fast and then barf. Try putting small amounts of food in different locations so he must walk a few feet between mouthfuls. Little Chinese and Japanese ceramic sauce dishes work perfectly. They hold about 1 1/2 tbsp of cat food and have low rims so they don't touch the cat's whiskers when they eat -- also good for treats. The sauce dishes cost about a dollar apiece. http://www.maxshouse.com/misc/sm_food_bowls.jpg Phil But you can still limit it to twice a > day. Even (gasp) once a day, if twice fails. ............Once a day? You'd be better off giving food 3 times a day. That midnight snack will stop the 5 AM stomping. buglady take out the dog before replying > But you can still limit it to twice a > > day. Even (gasp) once a day, if twice fails. > > ............Once a day? You'd be better off giving food 3 times a day. > That midnight snack will stop the 5 AM stomping. COMMENT: Yeah, but on the other hand, giving the day's ration at midnight (or just before you hit the sack) will do that, too. Feeding three times a day is killing your little carnivore with kindness. I used to work in a lab where we fed mice (a FAR faster metabolism than a cat) only every other day. And the whole weekend worth on Friday (which was entirely eaten within 24 hours). Not only did the mice do fine, they were healthier than mice with free access. That's a general truism. In fact, it's such a remarkable effect that there's a HUGE scientific literature on it. SBH > > But you can still limit it to twice a > > > day. Even (gasp) once a day, if twice fails. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > > SBH SGH, That reminds me of a story that I saw on TV about a lady that had a dog. The dog would not eat any food except for steaks. The dog refused to eat any other food and the lady was afraid the dog would starve to death if she did not give it steaks. In other words, the dog had trained the owner instead of the owner training the dog. If the owner of a pet is not willing to "be strong" and deny the pet food--any suggestions that you give to the owner of the pet will not be implemented. I once lived on a farm and we controlled the animals instead of allowing the animals to control us. Jason SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. : That reminds me of a story that I saw on TV about a lady that had a dog. : The dog would not eat any food except for steaks. The dog refused to eat [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] : farm and we controlled the animals instead of allowing the animals to : control us. You could say my cat and I control each other. :-) Anyway, all extremes are harmful. I control what I deem meanigful but that's about it. A pet is a part of our life and shared life should be mutually enjoyable, not a competition for control. About food, I control her total caloric intake and my expenditure (so certain brands are in, others out). Within her 24-hour ration, she can decide if she wants to eat one meal a day or two or three. Among the dozens of brands I can afford, she can pick whichever or any number (ie, if I do notice a preference on her part I'd let her "control" me). Lately I discovered she is happier if instead of putting three spoonfuls of one kind of food, I serve a smorgosboard of one spoonful each of three different kinds. My budget, effort, her caloric intake are the same as before, and she is happier, so fine by me! > : That reminds me of a story that I saw on TV about a lady that had a dog. > : The dog would not eat any food except for steaks. The dog refused to eat [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > each of three different kinds. My budget, effort, her caloric intake > are the same as before, and she is happier, so fine by me! It's very obvious that you love your cat. However, if you have a fat cat--you can actually show more love by having total control of the cat's diet than by allowing the cat to eat as much as the cat wants to eat. It appears that you are doing a great job controlling the cat's diet--Keep up the great work. I hate it when I see really fat cats and dogs but I don't ever offer advice to the owners unless they ask me for my advice. Pets are great at training their owners to feed them as much as they want to eat. Pets don't know about the dangers of eating to much food. There is a local restaurant called the Fat Cat Cafe. They have pictures of really fat cats all over the restaurant. They may people laugh but make me sad. Jason SignatureNEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice. We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people. : Feeding three times a day is killing your little carnivore with : kindness. I find my cat is happier and healthier when I am able to feed her 3 times a day rather than 2. The catch is to control the total calories per day. (In other words, to be overly clear, I am not talking about free feeding.) I think many people have an idea of how much to feed per *meal* (so many spoons, or 1/3 can, etc). Then of course more meals would lead to overeating. (Cats eat so little by human scale, and 2 or 3 spoonfuls can seem the same to us although the latter is 50% more, so it is easy to overfeed themif we are not careful.) What works best for me is to seperate her entire 24-hour ration in a (tightly closed) container. Then I don't have to calculate and remember what she ate when, and it doesn't matter if she eats it in three meals or five. I just feed her out of this container, even try to spread it around, but when it is gone it is gone. Sometimes if I make coffee for myself she gets excited too. Then I would give her 1/2 a spoon from her own jar and she is happy. In any event, her total caloric intake is the same. A cat is a conscious emotional being, not a machine. Beyond energy requirements is also the question of happiness. Although I am careful about my total calories, I often have a little snack (even if it is just one graoe) or a beverage. I have to conclude that my cat has similar desires, especially if she sees others eating and drinking around her. We can ignore her, but since it is possible to take care of her feelings and happiness without overfeeding her, why not do so? : I used to work in a lab where we fed mice (a FAR faster : metabolism than a cat) only every other day. And the whole weekend : worth on Friday (which was entirely eaten within 24 hours). I think of my cat as a family member in every possible way. I suppose that *is* different from mice in a lab. I am not citicising your perspective, just pointing out mine is different. = > > ............Once a day? You'd be better off giving food 3 times a day. > > That midnight snack will stop the 5 AM stomping. > > Yeah, but on the other hand, giving the day's ration at midnight (or > just before you hit the sack) will do that, too. ..........what are you talking about? > Feeding three times a day is killing your little carnivore with > kindness. .......hogwash. You don't feed 3 cans 3 times a day. You divide the amount of food into 3 portions. I feed my 19 yr old 4 times a day. I used to work in a lab where we fed mice (a FAR faster > metabolism than a cat) only every other day. And the whole weekend > worth on Friday (which was entirely eaten within 24 hours). ...........Last I checked cats weren't mice. You can't compare a grain eater to a carnivore. Well, maybe you can, but I wouldn't. buglady take out the dog before replying > > But you can still limit it to twice a > > > day. Even (gasp) once a day, if twice fails. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Feeding three times a day is killing your little carnivore with > kindness. I'm sure 'buglady' meant dividing the cat's total daily energy requirement into three feedings- I don't think she meant overfeeding the cat. Smaller, multiple feedings are sometimes necessary for cats that won't eat 1/2 of their daily caloric intake in one feeding, and geriatric cats. I used to work in a lab where we fed mice (a FAR faster > metabolism than a cat) only every other day. And the whole weekend > worth on Friday (which was entirely eaten within 24 hours). Cats evolved to eat small frequent (meat) meals. Consequently, they developed a relatively smaller stomach that isn't as efficient as a storage reservoir. They also have a shorter intestine to body length ratio because they evolved to digest a highly concentrated meat diet. > Not only did the mice do fine, they were healthier than mice with free > access. Mice are not cats. Studies in mice and rats don't always apply to cats. The infamously erroneous protein restriction theory for slowing the progression of CRF in cats was also based on studies in rats. Its now known that mechanisms that can alter the progression of CRF in the rat don't have the same effect in the cat and that protein restriction can actually be deleterious for cats with early-to-midstage CRF. You must be very careful when you try to extrapolate data from one species to another. Phil. > > > "Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in > message [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > Phil. Phil, if I may call you that, let me jump into here because this touches on a favorite but unpopular part of science involving life extension. And you may find this interesting. Originally I was told by the vet school, the same over-rated institution you referred to previously, that the rats were dropping dead before the drug trials were over. So they fed the rats every other day and doubled their life spans. Not a noble reason to discover maybe one of the most important aspects of life extension. Now the research is being extended into other species, at the moment, primates. The popularizer of this was Roy Walford, the biosphere guy, a pathologist from UCLA who passed away recently owing to amylateral sclerosis or Lou Gehrig's disease. You can find stuff on www.walford.com Fascinating. Free software to rack up all the amino acids, vitamins, minerals and so on to balance your diet. The latest version, less user friendly is on the USDA as SR-17, even including, WHOA, the various chains of the fatty acids! WONDERFUL WONDERFUL data from the government, USDA. Fabulous and completely free and really not available easily anyplace else. So what are we finding? Why are the Okinawans living longer than the Japanese with more over 100? Well, it's also nutrient density, that is, lots of veggies for calories instead of steaks, and seafood. They are smaller than the Japanese but that's a "small" price to pay for living longer. It's adequate nutrition with caloric restriction. And it does work with other species. It's the opposite of obesity. The killer is adequate nutrition so you don't starve someone. Have you heard of this research? Walford's partner is Weindruch. And some others are looking into this. It's interesting. Be interesting to match it up with the telomeres? I would be very very very surprised if CRAN or Caloric Restriction with Adequate Nutrition does not cut across all living creatures. Where it seems to fail are studies that don't constrain underweight alcoholics, for example. I guess I'm rambling but I think it's so for cats. The healthiest cat I have seen in recent years for 20+ was going on to many more years, 4+ pounds and some, ate little, but fine, went up and down steps using both legs, but then she is tiny and a bit old. Some jerk I told this to starting feeding his dogs every other day instead of measuring out the food. The dogs are fabulous, approached their middle teen years and not the usual problems found in shepherds and dobermans. > > > > "Sbharris[atsign]ix.netcom.com" <sbharris@ix.netcom.com> wrote in > > message [quoted text clipped - 95 lines] > their middle teen years and not the usual problems found in shepherds > and dobermans. Dogs have relatively larger stomachs that serves as an efficient food reservoir so they can store food- cats can't. Second, cats don't have the capability to conserve nitrogen from the body's general nitrogen pool. The only way cats ensure an adequate conservation of body protein stores is the consistent consumption of a diet containing high levels of protein. I seriously hope you're not suggesting feeding cats every other day. > Dogs have relatively larger stomachs that serves as an efficient food > reservoir so they can store food- cats can't. > Second, cats don't have the capability to conserve nitrogen from the body's > general nitrogen pool. The only way cats ensure an adequate conservation > of body protein stores is the consistent consumption of a diet containing > high levels of protein. > I seriously hope you're not suggesting feeding cats every other day. Not for cats. Worked in rats BUT not as well as daily caloric restricted feedings, even then. What is more surprising was ad libitum exercise was counter-productive. So it's not a simple equation, unfortunately, not even in rats. I suspect it's due to the lower basal metabolism rate drastically alters the benefits of exercise. But I have not read up on that area of the research which was originally done by a Hungarian. No pun intended. But it makes sense. The longest lived in an epi-type study in Holland, done decades ago, were those who puttered around in their gardens. I always remembered that research article because it just made so much sense to me, even though very, very old. You know the type, easy going, three small meals a day, nice life, garden, paradise or hell or both. I feed my cat three or four times a day, little meals. But if they evolved from desert cats, should they not be able to go without food and also not have that fat problem if not enough food or other problems for a short fast? Or is this only for true feral, desert cats? Or do they have a mouse a day in the wild?? > I feed my cat three or four times a day, little meals. But if they > evolved from desert cats, should they not be able to go without food > and also not have that fat problem if not enough food or other problems > for a short fast? Yes, cats can go a short while without eating- but not drinking. If a cat doesn't get her daily protein requirement, she'll metabolize her body protein stores to meet her protein needs and in the process, lose lean body mass. She'll also metabolize body fat at a higher rate which results in lipid infiltration of the liver that can lead to hepatic lipidosis if the fast lasts too long. Other species don't have this problem. Hepatic lipidosis is unique to the cat. Or is this only for true feral, desert cats? Or do > they have a mouse a day in the wild?? Cats in the wild are adapted to feast or famine. They eat 6-10 mice a day and kill many more to prepare for times of famine. Many former ferals tend to initially overeat until they adapt to the constant feast of being fed daily as pets. : So they fed the rats every other day and doubled their life spans. I do not have references handy but my recollection is that some studies found that feeding drastically fewer caloies increased the lifespan, but also lowered life quality: no energy and no interest in doing anything, even pleasurable things. Basically you provide just enough energy to maintain body functions but not enough to do much else, and you avoid "wear and tear" by not doing anything that the body and life are meant for. : I'm sure 'buglady' meant dividing the cat's total daily energy requirement : into three feedings- I don't think she meant overfeeding the cat. Smaller, : multiple feedings are sometimes necessary for cats that won't eat 1/2 of : their daily caloric intake in one feeding, and geriatric cats. Few things we ever did improved our life quality as much as when we stumbled into the system of separating our cat's daily (24 hr) food and feeding her many small meals out of it. Before that I was trying to enforce a two meal discipline. She would often not finish her portion and then want something a few hours later. I could have remained firm, but I counted how many times a day I was snacking or drinking myself, and my conscience wouldn't allow me to be more strict with her than I am with myself. As we are lucky enough to have someone home and awake almost 20 hours a day, we decided to serve her many smaller meals. For a while, it was stressful keeping track of and communicating who fed her when and how much, you should have seen all the post-it notes on the refrigerator, but then we had our Eureka moment: just seperate her 24-hr ration in a designated container and feed her out of it! All portions are small, no food is wasted, she is much happier, we no longer have to throw any food away and ignore her pleading meows later. As far as food goes, we are in paradise. Brushing her teeth is another matter. :-) : Cats evolved to eat small frequent (meat) meals. Consequently, they : developed a relatively smaller stomach that isn't as efficient as a storage : reservoir. I have often wondered if there are any studies or any understanding of this: Forgetting our own convenience, how many times is it best for a cat to eat something? In their natural setting, how many times would cats find something to eat? > : Cats evolved to eat small frequent (meat) meals. Consequently, they > : developed a relatively smaller stomach that isn't as efficient as a storage [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > this: Forgetting our own convenience, how many times is it best for a > cat to eat something? If feeding canned food, the cat's total daily energy requirement can be divided into 2 or 3 feedings. In their natural setting, how many times would > cats find something to eat? Cats in their natural setting eat 6-10- or more times a day (depending on the size and availability of the mice). But in nature cats eat a highly concentrated diet of protein and fat from meat. The cat's digestive tract is too short to digest and absorb many of the nutrients in commercial dry cat foods and many are passed in the feces. In fact, the nutritional residue in a cat's feces is why dogs forage in cats' litter boxes. > I'm sure 'buglady' meant dividing the cat's total daily energy > requirement into three feedings- I don't think she meant overfeeding > the cat. Smaller, multiple feedings are sometimes necessary for cats > that won't eat 1/2 of their daily caloric intake in one feeding, and > geriatric cats. When does a cat hit the "geriatric" stage? I've been trying to get the gang eating meals instead of nibbling all day long. Giving them a canned meal right before I go to bed, today they didn't pounce on me until 6:30, when I was getting up anyway. > > I'm sure 'buglady' meant dividing the cat's total daily energy > > requirement into three feedings- I don't think she meant overfeeding [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > When does a cat hit the "geriatric" stage? You'll get a lot of different opinions on that question!. According to Geriatrics & Gerontology of the Dog & Cat, cats are considered geriatric at 11.88 years. I think their physiological and psychological age are more important than their chronological age. My 19 y/o still thinks and plays like a youngster- although she is getting a little hard of hearing. OTOH, I've seen 9 y/os that were 'old'- if you know what I mean. In this one respect, I think cats are a lot like people- each cat grows old in their own individual way. > I've been trying to get the gang eating meals instead of nibbling all day > long. Giving them a canned meal right before I go to bed, today they didn't > pounce on me until 6:30, when I was getting up anyway. Actually, cats are crepuscular. In the wild, they do most of their hunting at dawn and dusk- when prey is more plentiful. > > "John Doe" <jdoe usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message > >> > "5cats" <CatFan invalid.com> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > Always drink enough. Always do enough. Never do too little. Yada > yada yada. That's right, moron. > > the fiber will become impacted in the colon. But that's way > > over your head. > > It is beyond my reasoning. I know. Most things are beyond your reasoning. You're not the brightest bulb in the lamp. Most people who've been reading your posts for awhile probably realize that. Although putting your cat in a plastic bag and hanging it from a fish scale was your most memorable demonstration of your monumental stupidity. I would think fiber absorbs a lot of > water before it gets to the colon. Fiber absorbs water in the colon- that's why it also helps correct diarrhea. But if the cat isn't well hydrated fiber can cause constipation. Do some research so you don't make a fool of yourself every time you post- although I think its a little late to worry about that. > If what Phil says is true, does that apply to humans as well? I > have never before heard anything like that. Like I said, that because you're a know-nothing moron. Its quite obvious that you haven't heard of many things regarding cats. > >> Methinks Phil is a troll giving bad medical advice. > > > That's because you're a know-nothing moron and can't tell the > > difference between a hairball and a turd without tasting it. > > That is an example of Phil's usual knee-jerk, tough guy wanna-be, MeThinks your an insecure, paranoid, little wimp in RL because you find people more knowledgeable than you threatening. Your usual barrage of "toll" posts to everyone who says something you don't like shows you have a very fragile and shallow personality. > hysterically laughing at his own remarks (typical), reaction to > correction. What 'correction', moron? LOL! You've just been educated but you're too stupid to realize it. > So don't correct him and expect civilized conversation. I see you're too stupid to realize that you came at me first with your mindless "troll" remark. When you mess with a bull don't whine and complain when you get the horns. > Fiber absorbs water in the colon. If the cat doesn't drink enough water the > fiber will become impacted in the colon. But that's way over your head. An an asteroid will eventually destroy the earth. Both are "possible" but neither are very "probable". Of the thousands upon thousands of cats that have succesfully lost weight on dry r/d over the past 30 years, "impacted" colons isn't even on the list. > > Fiber absorbs water in the colon. If the cat doesn't drink enough water the > > fiber will become impacted in the colon. But that's way over your head. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > cats that have succesfully lost weight on dry r/d over the past 30 > years, "impacted" colons isn't even on the list. Could this be because the feline has a rather short colon? This is not the case for humans, as I mentioned before, who have a long colon, 30 feet all told? In any case, drinking water was for preventing urinary problems, I always thought with the feline. > > Fiber absorbs water in the colon. If the cat doesn't drink enough water the > > fiber will become impacted in the colon. But that's way over your head. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > cats that have succesfully lost weight on dry r/d over the past 30 > years, "impacted" colons isn't even on the list. Of course it wasn't! I'm sure Hill's made that very clear *before* the study even began. > Of course it wasn't! I'm sure Hill's made that very clear *before* the study > even began. Come on Phil. Just when have you seen a peer reviewed published clinical trial that excluded cats with impacted colons from a high fiber test diet? We field over 400 phone calls and nearly 100 emails every single day from veterinarians looking for advice on one thing or another. Every complaint of every kind is logged and detailed. We can go back over a decade and look for any comments of the type you are claiming. Before I made the original comment I looked - impacted colons from a high fiber diet just doesn't even exist. Given the hundreds of thousands of cats that have been on a high fiber diet for the last decade you ought to have some percentage of cats with this problem. And there isn't any. It's one thing to discuss "possibilities" and "probabilities", but some common sense says you need to discriminate betweeen the two. > > Of course it wasn't! I'm sure Hill's made that very clear *before* the study > > even began. > > Come on Phil. Just when have you seen a peer reviewed published > clinical trial that excluded cats with impacted colons from a high > fiber test diet? That's the point, Steve, I haven't. But I have seen cats develop constipation from too much fiber. Btw, I didn't say high fiber diets per se cause constipation. I said a high fiber diet can cause constipation if the cat isn't well hydrated. So, you can send the straw man home now. > "Steve Crane" <eodemolay cox.net> wrote in message >> > Of course it wasn't! I'm sure Hill's made that very clear >> > *before* the > study >> > even began. >> Come on Phil. Just when have you seen a peer reviewed published >> clinical trial that excluded cats with impacted colons from a >> high fiber test diet? > That's the point, Steve, I haven't. But I have seen cats > develop constipation from too much fiber. But in fact, too much nonsoluble fiber causes diarrhea. > Btw, I didn't say high fiber diets per se cause constipation. I > said a high fiber diet can cause constipation if the cat isn't > well hydrated. > Science Diet Light is a preventative weight control diet (and > not a particularly effective one at that)- its *not* a weight > loss diet. R/d is a high-fiber diet that carries additional > risks of its own. Cats eating high-fiber diets *must* be *well* > hydrated to prevent the fiber from impacting in the colon which > can result in intractable constipation. Phil's assertion was based on a misinterpretation of his recollection about an already constipated cat, as he wrote: Message-ID: <nIudnSNZ48qUJ4HeRVn-jA@giganews.com> Message-ID: <nIudnSNZ48qUJ4HeRVn-jA giganews.com> "... to minimize the impaction of fiber in the constipated colon." Phil's motive for the ludicrous assertion that a high fiber diet can cause constipation is easy enough to understand. He runs a cat shelter and does not want to cope with the extra litter maintenance. So he's in denial, but he really shouldn't be advising others to avoid a healthy, high fiber diet. > Path: newssvr17.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm02.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail > NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2005 21:12:14 -0500 [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > X-Postfilter: 1.3.32 > Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com rec.pets.cats.health+behav:391449 alt.med.veterinary:125400 "John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message > Phil's motive for the ludicrous assertion that a high fiber diet > can cause constipation is easy enough to understand. He runs a cat > shelter and does not want to cope with the extra litter > maintenance. So he's in denial, but he really shouldn't be > advising others to avoid a healthy, high fiber diet. If anyone had any doubts that you're a complete moron with a massive personality disorder, this mindless dribble of yours certainly removed all doubts. Here go, moron, directly from Hill's website for Prescription Diet r/d: "If switching from a canned product, make sure your pet drinks an adequate quantity of water to avoid constipation." http://tinyurl.com/9nzkw You've been proven WRONG. Now shut the f.ck up and stop trying confuse people with your utter stupidity. On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 10:33:47 -0400, wrote: >"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >personality disorder, this mindless dribble of yours certainly removed all >doubts. How come, Isn't this group about cats? >Here go, moron, directly from Hill's website for Prescription Diet r/d: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >You've been proven WRONG. Now shut the f.ck up and stop trying confuse >people with your utter stupidity. > Phil's motive for the ludicrous assertion that a high fiber diet > can cause constipation is easy enough to understand. He runs a cat > shelter and does not want to cope with the extra litter > maintenance. So he's in denial, but he really shouldn't be > advising others to avoid a healthy, high fiber diet. Here go, moron, directly from Hill's website for Prescription Diet r/d: "Keep fresh water available at all times! If switching from a canned product, make sure your pet drinks an adequate quantity of water to avoid constipation." http://tinyurl.com/9nzkw You've been proven unequivocally WRONG. Now shut the f.ck up and stop trying confuse people with your utter stupidity. FOAD. This is the tough guy wanna-be troll's second (of three) flailing reply to the same post. See also: Message-ID: <eoGdnbfHJdf00b3eRVn-iQ giganews.com> Message-ID: <MpOdnZDIJJUnyr3eRVn-qQ giganews.com> > Path: newssvr23.news.prodigy.net!newsdbm03.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!newshosting.com!216.196.98.140.MISMATCH!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail > NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2005 09:36:36 -0500 [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > FOAD. On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 15:49:03 GMT, wrote: >This is the tough guy wanna-be troll's second (of three) flailing >reply to the same post. >See also: >Message-ID: <eoGdnbfHJdf00b3eRVn-iQ giganews.com> >Message-ID: <MpOdnZDIJJUnyr3eRVn-qQ giganews.com> What's your point? You really are one stupid twit. X-No-Archive nym shifting troll > Path: newssvr23.news.prodigy.net!newsdbm03.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!news.glorb.com!news.alt.net!usenet > From: Katz<katz yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] >> > What's your point? You really are one stupid twit. On Thu, 08 Sep 2005 16:20:51 GMT, wrote: >X-No-Archive nym shifting troll Does that bother you? > Here go, moron, directly from Hill's website for Prescription Diet r/d: > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > FOAD. Oh, don't be so hard on duh Doe. You need folks with utter stupidity around. Without them you wouldn't be able to tell who the smart ones are. They serve a function, like the U-curve in the drain pipe. See Doe, I'm sticking up for you! > > Here go, moron, directly from Hill's website for Prescription Diet r/d: > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > are. They serve a function, like the U-curve in the drain pipe. See > Doe, I'm sticking up for you! Actually, the dimwit has unwittingly served a useful purpose. At least people now know how important it is to make sure cats drink plenty of water if they're eating high-fiber diets. He's so stupid and oblivious that he doesn't even realize he helped me prove my point! LOL! troll "treeline12345 yahoo.com" <treeline12345 yahoo.com> wrote: > Path: newssvr17.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm02.news.prodigy.com!newsdst01.news.prodigy.com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newscon02.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail > From: "treeline12345 yahoo.com" <treeline12345 yahoo.com> [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > are. They serve a function, like the U-curve in the drain pipe. See > Doe, I'm sticking up for you! > troll trying out my new trolling motor? nope just being a bit too acerbic. you're a good sport. so i'll beach my boat under the bridge and chill out. "John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message > Phil's motive for the ludicrous assertion that a high fiber diet > can cause constipation is easy enough to understand. He runs a cat > shelter and does not want to cope with the extra litter > maintenance. So he's in denial, but he really shouldn't be > advising others to avoid a healthy, high fiber diet. If anyone had any doubts that you're a complete moron with a massive personality disorder, and fragile ego, this mindless dribble of yours certainly removed all doubts. To further prove you're an utter know-nothing moron, if your delusion was right, I should be delighted to feed a high fiber diet because they require LESS food to satiate a cat - I would save a ton of money. You know *nothing* about feline nutrition and even LESS about feline anatomy. In fact you're the dumbest bastard in the group. Here you go, moron, directly from Hill's website for Prescription Diet r/d: "If switching from a canned product, make sure your pet drinks an adequate quantity of water to avoid constipation." http://tinyurl.com/9nzkw Here's what Hill's advises for Science Diet Light, also, moron: "If switching from a canned product, make sure your pet drinks an adequate quantity of water to avoid constipation." http://tinyurl.com/92usy You've been proven WRONG. WRONG WRONG! Now shut the f.ck up and stop trying to confuse people with your utter stupidity. On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 11:22:04 -0400, wrote: >"John Doe" <jdoe@usenet.love.invalid> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >personality disorder, and fragile ego, this mindless dribble of yours >certainly removed all doubts. Name calling is a sure sign of defeat. > On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 11:22:04 -0400, wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > > Name calling is a sure sign of defeat. Not really, just frustration. Since I just read a good book on borderline personality disorders, I can assure you it's quite difficult to handle. But we really should not be nasty to each other. The way to truth is through this sort of adversarial process. I learn but in the end, well, I did learn a bit from Phil. And even learned something from Doe, namely the important tid-bits left out of the NCI site that was politically motivated. So take it easy. Our main goal here is truth and not to aggravate each other more than necessary! On 8 Sep 2005 10:23:06 -0700, wrote: >> On Thu, 8 Sep 2005 11:22:04 -0400, wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] >politically motivated. So take it easy. Our main goal here is truth and >not to aggravate each other more than necessary! Wow! You take this sh.t way to serious. > >Not really, just frustration. Since I just read a good book on > >borderline personality disorders, I can assure you it's quite difficult [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Wow! You take this sh.t way to serious. A lot of people have had apples fall on their heads. Only one of them came up with an explanation and even a fundamental law. After all the bumps on my heads, I think I may have been hit too hard too often but I'm trying, trying... |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message