 |
 | 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 2003Liz's Food recommendations
>> For about the umpteenth time Liz, please provide us with the >> commercial foods you think have fewer grains than the comparable >> Hill's product. I know I have asked you for this many times before and >> you always refuse to answer. The constant lack of an answer seems to >> prove you have an anti Hill's agenda, rather than a sincere concern >> about pet health. >Oh, I´m sorry, I´ve not seen that question before. How about Wellness, >Felidae, Flint River Ranch, Wysong, Innova and other super premium >brands? The carbohydrate content of a food gives you a precise idea of >the percentage of grains it has. Not exactly, but close, in fact the percentage of grains will likely be HIGHER than the percentage of carbs, since a portion of the protein and fat is derived from grains. >All you need to do is add up all the >percentages given (protein, fat, ash, moisture, etc.) and the >remaining is carbohydrates, that is, grains (unless the manufacturer >adds other plantstuff like carrots or apples). Plain and simple. And >don´t forget to check the lable for the *quality* of the animal >protein used (by-products or not) and the process by which the food >was manufactured (heating destroys many essencial components - baking >x extrusion, cold processing, etc.). Yes of course we wouldn't want to leave out the fact that chicken by product meal is MORE digestible than plain chicken and contains less ground up bone tissue good point. Of course the comment about heat destroying nutrients is silly scaremongering nonsense. Manufacturers have known the degradation rate of every vitamin for forty years, based upon time and temperature. It's a no brainer to add in sufficient vitamin X to accommodate loss. Further all competent manufacturers test the FINAL product to insure it has all the nutrients it is supposed to have at the right levels AFTER the manufacturing process. This old wives tale and scaremongering about heat destroying stuff is complete nonsense. In fact for many nutrients, heating is what makes them bio-available to the animal. >I have done two. If you´re interested, you can do the calculation for >the other brands I mentioned. Terrific Examples Thank-you now let's see what we've got. >Felidae Dry: 21% carbohydrates First of all your calculations were in error on this one, according to their web site they have: protein 32.0%, fat 20.0%, fiber 2.5%, moisture 9.0%, ash 5.5% Total 69% 100-69 = 31% carbohydrates, NOT 21% carbohydrates as you claimed above. Now we'll go beyond third grade ingredient nutrition and take a peek at the nutrients. Calcium - 1.2% to 1.33% - In excess of KNF maximum calcium levels. Phosphorus 1.0% to 1.1% - in excess of KNF maximums levels for an adult cat. >Wellness Dry: 23.22% carbohydrates Again your calculations were in error, according to their web site they have Protein 33.0%, fat 19.0%, fiber 5.0%, Moisture 10.0%, Ash 6.0% Total 73% 100-73 = 27% carbohydrates NOT 23.22% carbohydrates as you claimed above. Now we'll go beyond third grade ingredient nutrition and take a peek at the nutrients. Calcium 0.94% Phosphorus 1.33% In EXCESS of KNF maximums for an adult cat. WARNING this food has an inverse calcium phosphorus ratio. >Science Diet Nature´s Best: 34.5% carbohydrates carbs by adding up the guarantees, you cannot choose to measure carbs in Science Diet products by going to the web site and getting info you can't get from others. You must compare apples to apples. Guarantee levels: Protein 30%, fat 19%, fiber 2.0%, moisture 10%, ash 6.5% Total equals 67.5%. Carbs are therefore 32.5% NOT the 34.5% you noted above. Calcium 0.92% Phosphorus 0.74% Digestibility Protein 88% Fat 92% Carbs 94.9% >Science Diet Original: 34.3% carbohydrates Again you erred by not adding labels and not comparing apples to apples. Protein 30%, fat 20%, fiber 2%, Moisture 10%, ash 5.5% Total 67.5% Carbs are thus 32.5% not the 34.3% you claimed above. Calcium 0.76% Phosphorus 0.70% Digestibility Protein 87% Fat 91% Carbs 99.9% If you want to compare products you ought to compare products within the same category. Both Wellness and Felidae are "All Life Stage" foods, which means they have passed AFFCO testing for growth and are indeed "kitten" foods. Therefore the correct comparison would be to compare one growth food to another. Let's see how that works. Science Diet Feline Kitten Protein 33%, fat 23%, fiber 3%, moisture 10%, ash 7% Total = 76% thus this food is 24% carbs. Science Diet Nature's Best Feline Kitten Protein 35%, fat 22%, fiber 2%, moisture 10%, ash 6% Total = 75% thus this food is 25% carbs. The Science Diet products are 21-33% *LOWER* in carbs than Felidae and Wellness dry products. Guess you'll be off to buy some Science Diet won't you? Both are lower in carbs than your picks for a dry food based upon the third grade nutrition of lowering carbs and ignoring nutrients. The biggest irony of all is that if the Nature's Best kitten was repackaged as Brand X and had claims all over the bag as "holistic", "human grade", both of which terms could legally be applied to these foods, they would be the perfect foods according to your criteria. Oh never mind that won't work because you don't care about the digestibility of ingredients, only that they sound good. Since one food contains chicken by-products which are more digestible than plain chicken you would still ignore one of them because what goes on in the animals body isn't as important as an emotional judgment made about how good ingredients SOUND. >Purina Cat Chow: 37.5% carbohydrates Calcium 1.24% Phosphorus 1.25% >Whiskas: 40% carbohydrates Calcium 2.73% Phosphorus 1.82% >Canned: >Science Diet: 5.5% carbohydrates (all grains) Sigh, same errors actual by label is 5.7% carbs How in the world you can call this all grains is utterly beyond me. You claimed earlier that the carbohydrates were exactly the amount of grains in a food. Since this food is composed of 94.3% NON carbohydrates and only 5.7% carbohydrates how you could claim it is "(all grains)" defies logic. >Felidae: 0% carbohydrates (perfect for cats with diabetes or excess >weight) Calcium 1.32% - in excess of KNF maximum levels for an adult cat. Phosphorus 1.32% - in excess of the KNF maximum levels for an adult cat. >Wellness: less than 3% carbohydrates but no grains Calcium 1.52% Exceeds maximum KNF levels for adult cats. Phosphorus 0.96% Exceeds maximum KNF levels for adult cats. >Whiskas Ground Chicken Dinner: 0% carbohydrates No data available, But let's look at another ZERO carb grocery store food. Fancy Feast Turkey & Giblets canned = 0% carbohydrates Calcium 2.1% *Greatly* in excess of maximum KNF's for calcium for a healthy adult cat. Phosphorus 1.9% *Greatly* in excess of maximum KNF's for phosphorus for a healthy adult cat. I would expect the Whiskas product to fall into the same category. >So, as you can see for yourself, Science Diet is much closer to >grocery store brands than it is to the super premium brands above both >in low-quality ingredients and in percentage of carbs. And you have now been proven wrong. I'm sure you didn't purposefully distort the carb levels of the foods you offered. You're too smart to think you wouldn't be checked, so I'll assume there was some math error somewhere. Felidae dry carbs = 31% with *excessive* calcium and phosphorus Wellness Dry carbs = 27% with *excessive* levels of calcium and phosphorus Science Diet Original carbs = 32.5% within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels Nature's Best Chicken carbs = 32.5% within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels. Science Diet Kitten carbs = 24% within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels. Nature's Best Kitten carbs = 25% carbs within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels. Purina Cat Chow carbs 37.7% with *excessive* calcium and phosphorus. Fancy Feast carbs 0% but with calcium double maximum KNF levels, and phos more than double maximum levels. So what you have proven is that Science Diet is anything but a "grocery store" quality food as it was the only example which kept calcium and phos levels down in the proper area. The clear message here is that some manufacturers are using much less expensive meat meals with very high percentages of ground up bone tissue in the meat meals, whereas Science Diet has chosen to use more expensive low "ash" (bone) meat meals. The only other thing "proven" is that some people still cling to third grade math levels of nutrition by basing their judgment on ingredients and have yet to take the next step to high school math level nutrition and carefully look at the nutrients. > If you want to compare products you ought to compare products within > the same category. Both Wellness and Felidae are "All Life Stage" > foods, which means they have passed AFFCO testing for growth and are > indeed "kitten" foods. Therefore the correct comparison would be to > compare one growth food to another. Steve, Chris and I went around and around on this topic recently. What requirements are there for a product to pass the AAFCO (I assume that's what you mean) feed trial for growth, other than having 8 kittens consume the food for 10 weeks and show no significant nutritional deficiency or stunting of growth? Theoretically speaking, if one were to submit Science Diet Adult Maintenance to an AAFCO growth trial, would it have any chance of passing? -Alison in OH > Steve, > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > -Alison in OH LOL! That´s all it takes? I bet bread and butter would be approved since the deficiency would have to be *significant*. >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >LOL! That´s all it takes? I bet bread and butter would be approved >since the deficiency would have to be *significant*. You've responded to Alison, how about responding to Steve's post refuting just about everything you previously said? Or are you just going to ignore that too, since it proves you wrong AGAIN? > > If you want to compare products you ought to compare products within > > the same category. Both Wellness and Felidae are "All Life Stage" [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > -Alison in OH Alison, AAFCO has two methods of approving a food. For many years there was only one method and that involved an actual feeding trial. A few years ago AAFCO got weak (my personal opinion) and permitted a manufacturer to show that one food was similar to something else they already run through feeding trials and therefore it wasn't necessary to actually run a feeding trial. (Similar formulas expected to provide similar results philosophy) You can tell the difference because the legal AAFCO statement either uses the word "feeding" in the language of the statement or doesn't. There are essentially two forms of actual feeding trials. One is for growth and the other is for adult maintenance. There is no feeding trial for "All Life Stages". It is presumed that if a food can satisfactorily pass the more strenuous growth test than it will provide sufficient nutrition for adult maintenance. Feeding trial are not deigned ot look for long term effects of excessive levels of anything. The growth trial requires that puppies in the trial be fed the food and that blood tests be taken every week during the trial. PCV, RBC, WBC, and typical serum chemistries must remain within normal ranges during the entire trial period or the food fails. Puppies and kittens are growing at an enormous rate during this time and need vastly greater quantities of calcium, phosphorus, fat, protein etc than an adult dog or cat which isn't growing at such a prodigious rate. And no, it's not as simple as the *amount* of food needed. The ratio of protein to total energy intake is vastly different when you are doubling in size during the trial period. In contrast the adult trial requires the same blood test each week and must deliver the same consequences at the end of the trial, but the animals involved are not doubling their weight during the trial and thus need far fewer amounts of many nutrients. Science Diet adult products are designed and developed for adult animals, not puppies or kittens and thus would not be subjected to the growth trial. It would be purely a guess on my part, but I would guess some might pass and others might not. Science Diet puppy and kitten products could be labelled for "All Life Stages", however Hill's feels this may mislead a pet owner into feeding a growth product to an adult. Hill's has a tradition and history of treating disease with the Prescription Diet products. As a consequence the level so fnutrients like calcium and phosphorus that are so critical in renal failrue and other diseases get particular attention. As a consequence dietary development is always looking at the disease we see and trying to avoid them. 50 years ago we saw pets in veterinary clinics with examples of deficiencies in the diets, today we see only the results of excesses in the veterinary clinic. (Outside of the occasional animals dumped on the road and suffering from mal nutrition) > > > If you want to compare products you ought to compare products within > > > the same category. Both Wellness and Felidae are "All Life Stage" > > > foods, which means they have passed AFFCO testing for growth and are > > > indeed "kitten" foods. Therefore the correct comparison would be to > > > compare one growth food to another. > Science Diet adult products are designed and developed for adult > animals, not puppies or kittens and thus would not be subjected to the [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > of excesses in the veterinary clinic. (Outside of the occasional > animals dumped on the road and suffering from mal nutrition) So there would be nothing precluding Science Diet Adult from participating in a feed trial for growth, and no reason it wouldn't pass except for nutrient levels that cause nutritional deficiency in young growing animals. Even the most bargain-basement Walmart and grocery store foods around here have the AAFCO feed trial label for all life stages. Either Science Diet is less nutritious than Dad's Original Cat Food, or it's hypocritical for you to criticize a boutique brand because it plays to the marketing hype and shoots for the "All Life Stages" label that appeals to consumers. Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess, other than obesity. -Alison in OH In news:ask.me-F7361A.09115008102003@eeyore.ins.cwru.edu, Alison Perera <ask.me@cwru.edu.invalid> being of bellicose mind posted: .snip< > Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess, > other than obesity. > > -Alison in OH Indirectly, being obese leads to diabetes in people. How about cats? For that matter, obesity is a gateway condition to numerous other diseases. Not in cats? -- ~~Philip "Never let school interfere with your education - Mark Twain" > In news:ask.me-F7361A.09115008102003@eeyore.ins.cwru.edu, > Alison Perera <ask.me@cwru.edu.invalid> being of bellicose mind [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > For that matter, obesity is a gateway condition to numerous other > diseases. Not in cats? Obesity in cats is generally caused by the consumption of too many calories for the lifestyle of the cat. Since the owner of an indoor cat has complete control over the cat's intake, I don't consider this to be a failing in whatever complete commercial diet or other foodstuff that the cat is consuming. I'm more interested in the justification for restricting nutrients, including minerals, protein etc., in order to stave off some disease that is directly caused by excess. Yes, from what I understand obesity leads to diabetes in cats. Obesity is not a light-weight matter 8-O, it's just not the kind of thing I am looking for. -Alison in OH In news:ask.me-16E9F6.12262108102003@eeyore.ins.cwru.edu, Alison Perera <ask.me@cwru.edu.invalid> being of bellicose mind posted: > > Indirectly, being obese leads to diabetes in people. How about > > cats? For that matter, obesity is a gateway condition to > > numerous other diseases. Not in cats? > > Obesity in cats is generally caused by the consumption of too many > calories for the lifestyle of the cat. Oooo.... just like peoples! ;-) > Since the owner of an > indoor cat has complete control over the cat's intake, I don't > consider this to be a failing in whatever complete commercial diet > or other foodstuff that the cat is consuming. Such a pain having to dole out just enough food so the cat does not balloon out to twice its proper weight. Again, apparently I've been lucky all along. I can leave out 3 days worth of dry food and the cats have never attempted to inhale everything in sight the first day. BUT... there is a neighbor lady who does have a cat who is a roaming garbage disposal and then regurgitates what it has eaten if there is more fresh to be had. Weird. > I'm more interested > in the justification for restricting nutrients, including [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > -Alison in OH You've got a conclusion and are looking for supporting evidence. Not a good research discipline. -- ~~Philip "Never let school interfere with your education - Mark Twain" > > I'm more interested > > in the justification for restricting nutrients, including [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > You've got a conclusion and are looking for supporting evidence. Not > a good research discipline. You're right, I should rephrase. :) Steve says: > Hill's has a tradition and history of treating disease with the > Prescription Diet products. As a consequence the level so fnutrients [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > examples of deficiencies in the diets, today we see only the results > of excesses in the veterinary clinic. Ie, Hill's Science Diet is formulated to prevent nutritional excess. This is apparently a strong motivator for Hill's R & D for the pet market, and it's been repeated by folks such as Phil and Chris who believe strongly that Hill's research represents the pinnacle of dietary development. I ask Steve what an example of disease caused by nutritional excess is, because "dietary development is always looking at the disease we see and trying to avoid them [sic]". I am not expecting an answer that "obesity is a problem caused by nutritional excess" because then Hill's would be developing and marketing an educational campaign to get people to feed their cats less food--including Hill's food, of course. -Alison in OH >I ask Steve what an example of disease caused by nutritional excess is, >because "dietary development is always looking at the disease we see and >trying to avoid them [sic]". I'll take a stab at it...how about excess sodium causing hypertension and heart disease (among other things)? >I am not expecting an answer that "obesity is a problem caused by >nutritional excess" because then Hill's would be developing and >marketing an educational campaign to get people to feed their cats less >food--including Hill's food, of course. Actually there was some sort of campaign to educate consumers about the dangers of obesity sponsored by Hill's and the University of Chicago earlier this year?? > >I ask Steve what an example of disease caused by nutritional excess is, > >because "dietary development is always looking at the disease we see and [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > heart > disease (among other things)? Excellent example, thanks. So we can guess that Hill's Science Diet products are formulated with low sodium. And perhaps when Steve described his experience of seeing more dogs with diseases of nutritional excess in vet clinics today as opposed to the diseases of nutritional deficiency of yesteryear, he was talking about heart disease. What other examples are there that would drive home that contrast between the deficiency of previous poor-quality dog foods and the excesses of current poor-quality (or not-Hills-quality) dog foods? > >I am not expecting an answer that "obesity is a problem caused by > >nutritional excess" because then Hill's would be developing and [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > of obesity sponsored by Hill's and the University of Chicago earlier this > year?? Then why bother limiting nutrients in Hill's food if the main problem is excess calories--a problem that can be dealt with by such a campaign to convince owners to feed less food? -Alison in OH >Excellent example, thanks. So we can guess that Hill's Science Diet >products are formulated with low sodium. And perhaps when Steve >described his experience of seeing more dogs with diseases of >nutritional excess in vet clinics today as opposed to the diseases of >nutritional deficiency of yesteryear, he was talking about heart disease. ...or maybe he wasn't? ;) We'd have to ask him! >> Actually there was some sort of campaign to educate consumers about the >> dangers [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >excess calories--a problem that can be dealt with by such a campaign to >convince owners to feed less food? I'm out here on the West Coast, so I'm not as familiar w/ the U. of Chicago program. I heard about it, that's all. In terms of limiting nutrient excesses, what's wrong with shooting for the precise amount of nutrients, neither excessive nor deficient? I believe that Hill's does just that based on current research available. You may disagree. Excess fat can be a problem, excess sodium can be a problem, excess phosphorus can be a problem, excess calcium can be a problem, and so on..... Hill's isn't limiting nutrients, they strive to eliminate nutrient EXCESSES. > >Then why bother limiting nutrients in Hill's food if the main problem is > >excess calories--a problem that can be dealt with by such a campaign to [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Hill's isn't limiting nutrients, they strive to eliminate nutrient EXCESSES. ...In order to prevent disease caused by nutrient EXCESSES. I'd like to know what diseases those are. -Alison in OH >> Hill's isn't limiting nutrients, they strive to eliminate nutrient >EXCESSES. > >...In order to prevent disease caused by nutrient EXCESSES. I'd like to >know what diseases those are. I think we've been over this before and even in this particular thread. Why do all the other foods out there have higher levels of nutrients than Hill's foods?? Is it because "more is better", or is it because "we just make a food w/ certain ingredients that <sound> good and screw the nutrition"? > Why do all the other foods out there have higher levels of nutrients than > Hill's foods?? They don't. HTH, Steve. >> Why do all the other foods out there have higher levels of nutrients than >> Hill's foods?? > >They don't. Yes, they do. I've checked many, many different foods for their nutrient levels on a dry matter basis and they all come back significantly higher than Hill's products (some manufacturers don't even seem to know what a dry matter basis is). > So there would be nothing precluding Science Diet Adult from > participating in a feed trial for growth, and no reason it wouldn't pass > except for nutrient levels that cause nutritional deficiency in young > growing animals. > Even the most bargain-basement Walmart and grocery store foods around > here have the AAFCO feed trial label for all life stages. I think I need to explain something that should be obvious but clearly isn't. It is not the least bit difficult to *add* anything to a diet you would like to add. I could add Vitamin E at toxic levels for pennies. What is difficult to do is to keep unecessary and possibly harmful things OUT of a diet. It's *cheap* to add things, very expensive to keep them out. > Either Science Diet is less nutritious than Dad's Original Cat Food, or > it's hypocritical for you to criticize a boutique brand because it plays [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess, other > than obesity. Let's take CRF, as it is one of the most common causes of death in cats. Phosphorus, calcium, sodium excess will speed the animals death. That has been proven is dozens of studies going back many years. While nobody can say that excess of these minerals CAUSE renal failure, there is no questions that excesses of these minerals speed a cat to death much quicker. Since the disease is almost NEVER detected until it is considerably advanced and greater than 70% of the kidney is permanently destroyed, and can not be treated, you have to be willing to gamble that your kitty isn't the one that will come down with renal failure while you are feeding it a high phos, calcium, sodium, diet. Let us know when you have your crystal ball set up and can definitively screen out all kitties who will succumb to renal failure. This is called risk factor management. It's a simple medical tool where one looks at the REAL disease risks and modifies behavior, diet, and other paramenters to reduce the risk. Renal death is a HUGE risk, well known, well documented, and very common. Considering the frequency of this risk, perhaps you would care to tell us the advantages of having excess calcium, phosphorus and sodium in the diet? Explain to us the benefit of these excesses? > It is not the least bit difficult to *add* anything to a diet > you would like to add. Not difficult but expensive, depending on what you´re adding. > I could add Vitamin E at toxic levels for pennies. What is the toxic level of vitamin E? And what are the effects of vitamin E toxicity? > What is difficult to do is to keep unecessary and possibly > harmful things OUT of a diet. It's *cheap* to add things, very > expensive to keep them out. Excuse me. What are you keeping out? Phosphorus? Tell me something, which of the following diets has more phosphorus: 1) a diet composed of 25% meat and 35% corn 2) a diet composed of 25% corn and 35% meat Which ingredient is cheaper, corn or meat? > > Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess, other > > than obesity. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > there is no questions that excesses of these minerals speed a cat to > death much quicker. Give me *one* reference of what you stated above. > This is called risk factor management. It's a simple medical tool > where one looks at the REAL disease risks and modifies behavior, diet, > and other paramenters to reduce the risk. This is called scare tactics towards fools. I want that reference. You repeat that same old balony again and again and I have yet to see that anywhere in literature. I want the reference. > Excuse me. What are you keeping out? Phosphorus? Tell me something, > which of the following diets has more phosphorus: [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Which ingredient is cheaper, corn or meat? I found a local store that carries the Innova line of dry foods. Hey, this stuff smells and tastes pretty good! Better than my old standby (Purina Cat Chow). Innova starts off with turkey, chicken meal, chicken, potatoes, eggs, and more veggies. Purina Cat Chow with poultry byproducts (something I've always avoided in canned food), corn, wheat, soy, rice, etc. I hope the cat likes it. A bit more money. ;-) -- ~~Philip "Never let school interfere with your education - Mark Twain" > I found a local store that carries the Innova line of dry foods. > Hey, this stuff smells and tastes pretty good! Better than my old [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > food), corn, wheat, soy, rice, etc. I hope the cat likes it. A bit > more money. ;-) That´s another brand that I like! :) Hope your kitty likes it. > Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess, other > than obesity. Ricketts - Caused by excessive calcium in the diet. The excessive calcium binds the vitamin D and the aniaml succumbs to ricketts. Although a vitamin D *deficiency* can cause this, there hasn't been a case of vitmain D deficient foods in 40 years. magnesium - excessive magnesium can trigger struvite stone uroliths. calcium - Excessd ietary calcium should be avoided to prevent recrurrence of CaOx crystals. Vitamin A - cervical spondylosis Vitamin D - Hypercalcemia, calcinosis, anorexia, lameness Vitmain E - increased clotting time, Vitamin B1 - Decreased blood pressure, bradycardia, Cobalamin B12 - Altered reflexes, reduction inn vascular reflexes, > Ricketts - Caused by excessive calcium in the diet. The excessive > calcium binds the vitamin D and the aniaml succumbs to ricketts. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Cobalamin B12 - Altered reflexes, reduction inn vascular reflexes, Leaving aside vitamins A and D, please give me references for the rest. Regarding struvites, I want a study *proving* that magnesium is the culprit, not urinary pH. Do you have a study showing that struvites precipitated in acidic urine? Regarding calcium, I want a study *proving* that calcium is the culprit, that is, an oxalate-free (i.e.,plant-free) diet. I also want a study showing that excess calcium *without* excess vitamin D causes rickets. > Yes of course we wouldn't want to leave out the fact that chicken by > product meal is MORE digestible than plain chicken and contains less > ground up bone tissue ? good point. Excellent point. Lets all free feed our cats Science Diet for two weeks and Wellness or Felidae for two weeks and weigh their stools daily. Both Wellness and Felidae produce much less stools than Science Diet. That´s how digestible they are. And this is something anyone here can try at home and see for themselves. > Of course the comment about heat > destroying nutrients is silly scaremongering nonsense. Manufacturers > have known the degradation rate of every vitamin for forty years, > based upon time and temperature. Nonsense is your argumentation. Can you please explain this recent hype of adding linoleic and linolenic acids (omega 6 and 3) to pet foods? Both are easily destroyed by heat and both are essential. If manufacturers had known degradation temperature of every vitamin for forty years, why is this omega thing such a recent hype? Food manufacturers know very little. Look at Hill´s launching an Atkin´s type diet for cats with *15%* carbohydrates in it. That´s how much Hill´s knows biochemistry: nothing at all. I bet they don´t have the slightest understanding of what the Atkins does to the body and why carbs have to be so reduced. Your nutrition researchers should all go back to college. > It's a no brainer to add in > sufficient vitamin X to accommodate loss. Further all competent > manufacturers test the FINAL product to insure it has all the > nutrients it is supposed to have at the right levels AFTER the > manufacturing process. Yes, they can do that for the *known* nutrients. How about the nutrients we still do not know about? How do they test for those? Or do you think we already know all there is to know about nutrition? Biochemistry is only the most underdeveloped science of all sciences simply because it is so complex. > This old wives tale and scaremongering about > heat destroying stuff is complete nonsense. Yeah, about the entire world knows that and Mr. Know-it-all stating differently. > In fact for many > nutrients, heating is what makes them bio-available to the animal. Oh goodness. Now this is wild bs. Please state one. And let me remind you that cellulose or starch are *not* necessary at all in a cat´s diet. > >Felidae Dry: 21% carbohydrates > First of all your calculations were in error on this one, according to > their web site they have: protein 32.0%, fat 20.0%, fiber 2.5%, > moisture 9.0%, ash 5.5% Total 69% 100-69 = 31% carbohydrates How about the other ingredients you did not add up? Omega-6 fatty acids - 3.5% Digestive Enzymes - 1.5 % Omega-3 fatty acids - 0.75% Linoleic acid - 3,70% Magnesium and taurine - ~0.3% Or are those things carbohydrates in your concept? I won´t bother looking at the rest of your manipulated numbers. Now if you are going to say something like "those things are included in proteins, fats and ash," I say we write them and ask. Why is it that you posted levels of calcium and phosphorus? Is it the old scare tactics and innuendoes relating them to kidney damage? If you have ONE study showing either of them to be toxic to kidneys please post. And don´t give me that old crap of the early stages of kidney disease. Phosphorus is only harmful to kidneys if it is in excess in *blood*, not in diet. Excess phosphorus in blood (hyperphosphataemia) can be detected at any time, all it takes is a blood panel. This philosophy of Hill´s (and some other companies) treating consumers as morons infuriates me. It shows how much the company respects their customer - nothing at all. They (customers) are all a bunch of easily-manipulated imbeciles. So let´s go ahead and launch the 15% carbs Atkin´s type diet even knowing it doesn´t work. Who cares? We are making money and that´s all that matters. That?s how much > Hill?s knows biochemistry: nothing at all. . LOL! Your delusions of grandeur are showing again! Of course a backwoods au naturel fanatic like you with no veterinary training whatsoever knows more about feline nutrition than board-certified Diplomates of the American College of Veterinary Nutrition and Diplomates of the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine! ROTFL! ...and you wonder why vets who read your asinine theories and probably most people other than other deluded au naturel fanatics) think you're a "nut case"! LOL! >>Yes of course we wouldn't want to leave out the fact that chicken by >>product meal is MORE digestible than plain chicken and contains less [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Diet. That´s how digestible they are. And this is something anyone > here can try at home and see for themselves. What a task! do we pick off the litter that clings to the stool or just include it in the weight totals? ;-) Ok, I've been feeding my cat California Natural... food that claims to be all natural and has chicken as the first and second ingredients. By golly this stuff sounds good enough for me to eat. My cat eats it... never been particulary crazy about it but she doesn't turn it down either. Then I started feeding her a 75% California Natural & 25% Science Diet Nature's Best. Everything changed around mealtime... she now meows for me to fill up the dish. She now seems to try to ferret out the Science Diet chunks from the California Natural. If I have no treats on hand, she will happily consider the pure Science Diet Nature's Best chunks as a treat. The Science Diet Nature's Best has better calcium/phosphorus levels as compared to California Natural. If this Science Diet makes my cat happy around mealtime and is a reasonable food as it does appear to be... I see no reason not to feed it. Not only that but this food is available everywhere... and I mean everywhere. I live in northern Canada and my choices are very limited... but Science Diet is the best of those choices... without having to resort to mail ordering food. Are the stools increased in volume... don't know yet. She will have to be on 100% Science Diet before I can tell for sure.  Signature"Its the bugs that keep it running." -Joe Canuck > Then I started feeding her a 75% California Natural & 25% Science Diet > Nature's Best. Everything changed around mealtime... she now meows for > me to fill up the dish. She now seems to try to ferret out the Science > Diet chunks from the California Natural. If I have no treats on hand, > she will happily consider the pure Science Diet Nature's Best chunks as > a treat. Do you have kids? Get a bowl of icecream or some chocolate chip cookies and a bowl of steak and put both in front of the child. Most children will go for the icecream or cookies. Does that mean this is the best for them? ;) >>Then I started feeding her a 75% California Natural & 25% Science Diet >>Nature's Best. Everything changed around mealtime... she now meows for [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > children will go for the icecream or cookies. Does that mean this is > the best for them? ;) Then I guess I was a weird kid... because I used to eat everything... steak, ice cream, cookies and anything else that got in the way. ;-) Signature"Its the bugs that keep it running." -Joe Canuck > Then I guess I was a weird kid... because I used to eat everything... > steak, ice cream, cookies and anything else that got in the way. > > ;-) I was a weird kid myself probably because of my low blood pressure. I was never fond of sweets. Nothing would beat a steak. But what I observe in children today is that they eat too much crap and prefer crap to real food. Obesity has become a very serious problem among children too. > > Then I started feeding her a 75% California Natural & 25% > > Science Diet Nature's Best. Everything changed around [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Most children will go for the icecream or cookies. Does that mean > this is the best for them? ;) Hahahhaha. Both our kids (35 yrs ago) would have asked for a soda or milk and eaten everything in sight! -- ~~Philip "Never let school interfere with your education - Mark Twain" >> Then I started feeding her a 75% California Natural & 25% Science Diet >> Nature's Best. Everything changed around mealtime... she now meows for [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >children will go for the icecream or cookies. Does that mean this is >the best for them? ;) Not an accurate analogy. Please try again. > Do you have kids? Get a bowl of icecream or some chocolate chip > cookies and a bowl of steak and put both in front of the child. Most > children will go for the icecream or cookies. Does that mean this is > the best for them? ;) I don't think that is a very accurate analogy. A better one would be to offer a child macaroni and cheese made from scratch or from a boxed mix (like Kraft macaroni and cheese). As a child, I personally would have eaten the former, but not the latter (and to this day, I hate KD) and the former would have been more healthful than the latter. I would guess that most children *not previously exposed to either* would do the same. rona Signature***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!*** > I don't think that is a very accurate analogy. A better one would be to > offer a child macaroni and cheese made from scratch or from a boxed mix > (like Kraft macaroni and cheese). As a child, I personally would have eaten > the former, but not the latter (and to this day, I hate KD) and the former > would have been more healthful than the latter. I would guess that most > children *not previously exposed to either* would do the same. Hey, some of us LOVE the Kraft WAY better than "homemade". :) /addicted to mac & cheese ------------------------------------------------- ~kaeli~ Jesus saves, Allah protects, and Cthulhu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace ------------------------------------------------- In news:MPG.19f06371cefb5fdd9898b8@nntp.lucent.com, kaeli <infinite.possibilities@NOSPAMatt.net> being of bellicose mind posted: > > I don't think that is a very accurate analogy. A better one > > would be to offer a child macaroni and cheese made from scratch [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > /addicted to mac & cheese And there are people who crumble up crackers in the clam chowder served at Emeril Lagassi's Sea Food Restaurant. -- ~~Philip "Never let school interfere with your education - Mark Twain" > Hey, some of us LOVE the Kraft WAY better than "homemade". :) > > /addicted to mac & cheese Yes, but which were you exposed to first and/or most often :-)? Most of the people I know who love KD ate that type of mac and cheese exclusively or near exclusively as children. Of course, that constitutes pretty much all of my childhood and high school friends, since they all ate KD regularly. I think someone needs to do a social psychological study on people's attraction to and affection for KD. Given that it's practically Canada's national food, I'm sure some Canadian with too much money would pay for it :-). Did I mention the KD Party of Ontario that ran in the last election? rona Signature***For e-mail, replace .com with .ca Sorry for the inconvenience!*** > Yes, but which were you exposed to first and/or most often :-)? Homemade. Which I never liked. Or the other, cheaper boxed mac & cheese, which I also don't like. I like ONLY kraft mac & cheese. It was a rare treat growing up. Like ice cream and cookies. Actually, I prefer all manner of junk food. I got mostly healthy crap growing up and sometimes I think I still resent it. The only reason I eat healthy is so I don't weight 500 pounds. Now you've gone and given me a taste for mac & cheese for dinner. ------------------------------------------------- ~kaeli~ Jesus saves, Allah protects, and Cthulhu thinks you'd make a nice sandwich. http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace ------------------------------------------------- This is NOT off topic because my cats will get some... ;-) >Now you've gone and given me a taste >for mac & cheese for dinner. Does anyone have a really good "grandma's best ever ever ever" type recipe for homemade macaroni and "real" cheese? (pre-velveeta) This is one thing I've never made but for some strange reason I suddenly have a craving for it <vbeg> 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 >This is NOT off topic because my cats will get some... ;-) > [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > >- W.H. Murray I make no pretense of being a good cook -- my mother never taught me . One day when I was home alone (about 15 years old - a long time ago) I decided to surprise her and make macaroni and cheese for dinner. This is what I did: I dumped the mac into a pan and grated cheddar cheese (a lot) and mixed it in. I poured milk over it and crushed soda crackers on top. Then I popped it into a 350 deg oven and let it cook. It worked. Mom was really surprised -- did you precook the macaroni? NO. Did you cover it? NO. But it worked anyway. Maybe I'll try it again! MLB If you add in some other (grated) cheeses along w/ the cheddar - like Parmesan & or Romano, even better. Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon > >This is NOT off topic because my cats will get some... ;-) > > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > Maybe I'll try it again! MLB > > Yes, but which were you exposed to first and/or most often :-)? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Now you've gone and given me a taste for mac & cheese for dinner. Heheh. Kraft Mac n Cheese was a huge treat for me, too. I hated anything with cheese, especially fake cheese...except Kraft M&C. I now buy the health store brand with real cheddar that still tastes a whole lot like Kraft, to make myself feel better about eating it, and it's a special treat. You wanna talk resentment about healthy eating? I wasn't allowed to have milk as a child. I had juice or water over my breakfast cereal. At Halloween, we went trick-or-treating, then came home and exchanged all the candy for sugar free candy from our Mom. Whole grain bread and honey in place of white bread and sugar. Only butter, never margarine. Adams peanut butter. Sugar free jam. My favorite indulgence as a youngster was going to a friend's house and having Jif and Smucker's on Wonder Bread; or toasted white bread with margarine and cinnamon-sugar. Drooool... Even now I simply adore toast with margarine, even though it's whole-grain bread again. :) Worst part? I'm probably going to raise my kids the same way! -Alison in OH >>>Yes, but which were you exposed to first and/or most often :-)? >> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > -Alison in OH Ok, but please tell me you're going to let them put soy milk on their cereal!! Water or juice? Yech!! lol! > > > Yes, but which were you exposed to first and/or most often :-)? > > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > in place of white bread and sugar. Only butter, never margarine. Adams > peanut butter. Sugar free jam. Oh, sounds like your Mother needed a good spanking!! My sister did this with my nieces and they are now obese adults. So I guess it backfired, big time.... > My favorite indulgence as a youngster was going to a friend's house and > having Jif and Smucker's on Wonder Bread; or toasted white bread with [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Worst part? I'm probably going to raise my kids the same way! My philosophy is "everything in moderation". I won't buy total junk food like Dortios and Oreos, but every once in a while if the kids want it as a special treat, I don't think it's necessarily heinous. I am planning to make my own baby food though, so we'll see... -L. >From: kaeli infinite.possibilities@NOSPAMatt.net >Now you've gone and given me a taste for mac & cheese for dinner. I liked Kraft too growing up. But if you want a somewhat healthier version, Annie's Organic Shells & White Cheddar is really good. They also have unorganic varieties as well: http://www.annies.com/products/orgmaccheese.html 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: kaeli infinite.possibilities@NOSPAMatt.net > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > http://www.annies.com/products/orgmaccheese.html Annie's White Cheddar is the best mac & cheese ever. I used to love Kraft but I can't eat it anymore. I've been spoiled. >From: "Jon C" jon@jonnythan.com >> >From: kaeli infinite.possibilities@NOSPAMatt.net >> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >Annie's White Cheddar is the best mac & cheese ever. I used to love Kraft >but I can't eat it anymore. I've been spoiled. I know what you mean. I remember the first time I tried it, I thought it can't even compare to Kraft. 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: "Jon C" jon@jonnythan.com > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > I know what you mean. I remember the first time I tried it, I thought it can't > even compare to Kraft. I've never had it (Annie's) - or even seen it before, but what about Stouffer's? Cathy -- "Staccato signals of constant information..." ("The Boy in the Bubble") Paul Simon >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >This philosophy of Hill´s (and some other companies) >treating consumers as morons infuriates me. It shows how much the >company respects their customer - nothing at all. They (customers) are >all a bunch of easily-manipulated imbeciles. So let´s go ahead and >launch the 15% carbs Atkin´s type diet even knowing it doesn´t work. >Who cares? We are making money and that´s all that matters. Have you checked out Hill's newest "formula" called Advanced Protection? Ingredients: Brewers rice, chicken by-product meal, corn gluten meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), dried egg product, chicken liver flavor, fish oil (preserved with mixed tocopherols and ascorbic acid), DL-methionine, L-lysine, natural flavor, taurine, L-cysteine, L-carnitine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, calcium carbonate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta-carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin E supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of Vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). Again, it looks like another grain based diet, cooked to death, and then they throw some vitamins in. I still haven't figured out exacftly what dried egg product is, and once again, they add chicken liver "flavor" but no chicken liver. Animal fat could be from any source, who knows? Ah wait, I just found this website: http://www.hillssciencediet.info/DEFINITION.htm 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 In news:20031007190851.15525.00000451@mb-m28.aol.com, PawsForThought <darnit7@aol.comnolitter> being of bellicose mind posted: > > From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) > [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > Lauren > ________ The only thing I look for on a can of cat food is the ABSENCE of "meat byproducts." -- ~~Philip "Never let school interfere with your education - Mark Twain" >From: "Philip ®" 1chip-state1@earthlink.net.invalid >The only thing I look for on a can of cat food is the ABSENCE of >"meat byproducts." >-- By-products, if listed as chicken by-products, for example, are not a bad thing if they contain things like liver, kidney, heart, etc., but not so good if they contain things like feathers or beaks. If a food lists by-products as "animal" by-products, well then, that could be anything. Cats need offal in their diet in the form of kidney, heart and other internal organs. But if the by-products as listed on the can are questionable, as in "animal" by-products, then you're right to avoid it. 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 > Animal fat could be from any source, who knows? Ah wait, I just found > this website: http://www.hillssciencediet.info/DEFINITION.htm > > Lauren Lauren, I'm begining to think you are purposefully being deceitful. You have "just found" that same website for months. Never mind that proof of the effectiveness of the very high levels of antioxidants matching those in AP have been published in peer reviewed journals. It should give a logically thinking grown-up some pause to wonder why 99.99% of all practicing veterinarians, EVERY board certified diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Nutrition, and every Board certified diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine refuses to endorse the BARF philosophy. You have to wonder what causes people to get so wrapped up in emotional judgements that they refuse to accept what hard scientific proof and every recognized expert suggests. >From: rosebrook@sbcglobal.net (Steve Crane) >> Animal fat could be from any source, who knows? Ah wait, I just found >> this website: http://www.hillssciencediet.info/DEFINITION.htm [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >that they refuse to accept what hard scientific proof and every >recognized expert suggests. I was simply showing this new Hill's food that I saw advertised. As to the link, I "just found" it in my bookmarks is what I meant. Sorry I didn't make that more clear to you. But I'm still curious, what exactly is Hill's using for its "animal fat"? Why do they use Brewer's Rice and not Whole Rice? Steve, why are you bring up BARF diet? My post never mentioned a raw diet. There are many, many vets who support a raw diet, just as there are those who don't. I go by my cats' health, and I won't lie about it. They are much healthier than they were on commercial catfood. We all have to decide what is the best to feed our animals. I never try to convince anyone to switch their cats to a raw diet because I know it involves lots of hard work, dedication and research to be done correctly. However, if the person really does want to switch their cats to a raw diet, I will help them if they ask. I got tired of the chronic diseases I was seeing in my cats and so I decided to do something about it in the only way I could, which was to feed them a fresh food diet. I realize that not everyone wants to do this and I will recommend a good quality commercial pet food. I think it really bothers you that I tell the truth about my experiences with Hill's Science Diet, which was that none of my cats ever did well on it. There was more volume of feces in the cat box, dry coats, some had diahrrea or vomited from it. Once I switched them to a different food, these things went away. I'm sorry, but Hill's just did not work for me, and I have family and friends who had similar experiences. 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 should give a logically thinking grown-up some pause to wonder > why 99.99% of all practicing veterinarians, EVERY board certified > diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Nutrition, and every > Board certified diplomate of the American College of Veterinary > Internal Medicine refuses to endorse the BARF philosophy. I would say they are being responsible. Heck, people can´t even take care of themselves when it comes to eating and you expect them to do a good job with their pets? How many people would have the time and money to prepare a balanced raw diet? And how many of these would handle meat safely, both for them and for their pets? How many people are in fact hygienic? How many people wash their hands before they handle meat? How many lawsuits would they be against the veterinary community if they acquired toxo by handling meat for their pets? If I were a vet, I would definitively be hesitant to advocate raw without first giving a lecture about feeding raw. Afterall, a vet simply does not know what kind of a person (or pig) they´re dealing with. The fact that they don´t advocate raw does not necessarily mean raw is not the best for the animal. > > It should give a logically thinking grown-up some pause to > > wonder why 99.99% of all practicing veterinarians, EVERY board [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > advocate raw does not necessarily mean raw is not the best for the > animal. Hey.... there are two kinds of people: Those who wash there hands before having an elimination and those who wash their hands after. ;-) -- ~~Philip "Never let school interfere with your education - Mark Twain" >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >> It should give a logically thinking grown-up some pause to wonder >> why 99.99% of all practicing veterinarians, EVERY board certified [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] >that they don´t advocate raw does not necessarily mean raw is not the >best for the animal. Exactly. My vet believes in a raw diet but he will be the first to say it's not for everyone, and I totally agree. ________ 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 >How many people would have the time and >money to prepare a balanced raw diet? I don't know of anybody who eats raw meat. >How many lawsuits would they be against the veterinary >community if they acquired toxo by handling meat for their pets? Why would vets be responsible for people's actions? Oh that's right--in your wacko socialist world, people don't have to take responsibility for their actions--they can sue someone else! > >How many people would have the time and > >money to prepare a balanced raw diet? > > I don't know of anybody who eats raw meat. Er - how exactly does the above sentence fit with the question? (...) > Why would vets be responsible for people's actions? Oh that's right--in your > wacko socialist world, people don't have to take responsibility for their > actions--they can sue someone else! You have a very odd view of socialism. Some irony in your opinion here, too, considering the most 'sue happy' nation is the USA, which ain't exactly socialism central! Steve. > You have a very odd view of socialism. Some irony in your opinion > here, too, considering the most 'sue happy' nation is the USA, which > ain't exactly socialism central! > > Steve. And the one with the highest number of lawyers per person too. > Lauren, > I'm begining to think you are purposefully being deceitful. Do ya think? Took you long enough! LOL! In all your years dealing with hundreds of vets, have you ever heard of any *10* cats *combined* experiencing *half* the adverse reactions to SD or *any* diet as "Me Too" Lauren claims her cats did to SD?? LOL! If 1/10 of her stories were true, her cats would have been dead years ago! If she's not an obsessed pathological liar, then she must be a complete idiot... Most rational people would have changed their cats' diets after their cats experienced one or two adverse reactions to a particular food, instead of after a *dozen* or so adverse reactions! LOL! But then again, she can't be too bright if she thinks people actually believe her built-to-suit "me too" stories! LOL! She'd blame the extinction of the dinosaurs in SD if she though for a second she could get away with it! Here's an idea: Her and the other two au naturel fanatics should start their own newsgroup and call it "Hills' Hags"! LOL! This way they can swap "horror" stories about SD all day so the rest of us don't have to read their nonsense. I'd killfile her, but she's too dangerous to leave unchecked.... Who are the other two, phil? >>darnit7@aol.comnolitter (PawsForThought) wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > "horror" stories about SD all day so the rest of us don't have to read their > nonsense. I'd killfile her, but she's too dangerous to leave unchecked.... > Who are the other two, phil? Haven't figure it out, yet? I gave you more credit than that. Don't worry, you don't qualify as an au naturel cult fanatic because you feed your cats a commercial food. > >>darnit7@aol.comnolitter (PawsForThought) wrote in message > > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > "horror" stories about SD all day so the rest of us don't have to read their > > nonsense. I'd killfile her, but she's too dangerous to leave unchecked.... Not to mention all the sulfate salts. Sulfates consume (destroy) vitamin E. What grade should we give them for their new formula? LOL >Have you checked out Hill's newest "formula" called Advanced Protection? >Again, it looks like another grain based diet, cooked to death, and then they >throw some vitamins in. Have you even SEEN the product? Pardon me, but....YOU CAN'T JUDGE THE EFFICACY OR NUTRITIONAL CONTENT OF A FOOD BY LOOKING AT THE INGREDIENT'S LABEL!!!!! Lauren, you have an anti-Hill's agenda and I still don't know why. All I can come up with is you just aren't very bright. For months (and probably longer) it's been shown here to one and all that reading the list on a bag of food means absolutely ZERO. Yet you cling to the ingredient's list as if you life depends on it. Why? Do you even know what the difference between this product and others is? >I still haven't figured out exacftly what dried egg >product is, and once again, they add chicken liver "flavor" but no chicken >liver. Because it would upset the nutrient balance. Again, avoiding nutrient excesses that are risk factors for disease conditions is a goal of Hill's and you can't get out of your grade school mentality about ingredient lists. <SHRUG> You well know that the website you listed is an anti-Hill's site. Not an accurate source of information, btw. I suppose you can list the websites of people who think the earth is flat to "prove" that point, too? > > Yes of course we wouldn't want to leave out the fact that chicken by > > product meal is MORE digestible than plain chicken and contains less [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > manufacturers had known degradation temperature of every vitamin for > forty years, why is this omega thing such a recent hype? I guess I will break these up a bit. Yes the word is nonsense. Who do you think pioneered adding high levels of Omega 3 and 6 fatty acids to diets? in *1962* - Hill's. But you're right that was only 41 years ago, not 50. There isn't a diet out there with more N3,6's than products made by Hill's. The only "hype" around fatty acids is that some manufacturers decided it would work to fool consumers. They realized consumers wouldn't know if the food had N3,6's before or not. So let's launch a great madison avenue marketing plan and tell everybody we've added N3,6's to the diet. > Food > manufacturers know very little. Look at Hill´s launching an Atkin´s [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > carbs have to be so reduced. Your nutrition researchers should all go > back to college. What you fail to recognize, primarily becauaue you have followed down the path of totally UNPROVEN carbophobia is that once the state of metabolic acidosis is reached, it doesn't mater what the level of carbs are - not one bit. It doesn't matter for treating weight loss or for diabetes. > > It's a no brainer to add in > > sufficient vitamin X to accommodate loss. Further all competent [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Biochemistry is only the most underdeveloped science of all sciences > simply because it is so complex. That's always the fall back isn't it. Play Chicken little and claim the sky *might* be falling. I would suggest that you need to look at a number of possible nutrients that are ONLY available when cooked. Be sure to tell me how you are planning for these unknown nutrients that are ONLY available in cooked foods. > Oh goodness. Now this is wild bs. Please state one. And let me remind > you that cellulose or starch are *not* necessary at all in a cat´s > diet. Can you spell lycopene? trypsin in native states? and of course the dreaded and evil carbohydrates, despite the myths and unsubstantiated hypothesis of the carbophobics. > I guess I will break these up a bit. Yes the word is nonsense. Who do > you think pioneered adding high levels of Omega 3 and 6 fatty acids to > diets? in *1962* - Hill's. But you're right that was only 41 years > ago, not 50. There isn't a diet out there with more N3,6's than > products made by Hill's. What is the percentage of omega 3 and omega 6 in Science Diet Adult Maintenance? > What you fail to recognize, primarily becauaue you have followed down > the path of totally UNPROVEN carbophobia is that once the state of > metabolic acidosis is reached, it doesn't mater what the level of > carbs are - not one bit. It doesn't matter for treating weight loss or > for diabetes. Who said anything about metabolic acidosis? I´m talking about the Atkin´s diet. How did you go from the Atkin´s diet to metabolic acidosis? > That's always the fall back isn't it. Play Chicken little and claim > the sky *might* be falling. I would suggest that you need to look at a > number of possible nutrients that are ONLY available when cooked. Be > sure to tell me how you are planning for these unknown nutrients that > are ONLY available in cooked foods. Oh dear, someone really needs to be a genious to figure this one out. For how long have cats (or humans) existed? And for how long have we been cooking our food? For how long have cats been cooking their food? If any essential nutrient were only available after cooking, we wouldn´t be here, don´t you think? > > Oh goodness. Now this is wild bs. Please state one. And let me remind > > you that cellulose or starch are *not* necessary at all in a cat´s [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > dreaded and evil carbohydrates, despite the myths and unsubstantiated > hypothesis of the carbophobics. Lycopene. Red pigment only present in certain plants. Cats do not eat plants. Should we assume lycopene is essential to cats? Does cooking actually affect lycopene or does it rupture the cell wall of plants making its contents available to us or cats, both uncapable of breaking through the cell wall of plants? And a correction: lycopene is more available in cooked plants than raw plants, it´s not *only* available in cooked plants. Trypsin is an enzyme and all enzymes are proteins. Proteins are denatured by heat and the more denatured they are, the harder they become to digest until they become completely undigestible. Please give me the source of your information as I will *definitively* check this one. > > I guess I will break these up a bit. Yes the word is nonsense. Who do > > you think pioneered adding high levels of Omega 3 and 6 fatty acids to [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > What is the percentage of omega 3 and omega 6 in Science Diet Adult > Maintenance? Levels of such nutrients are proprietary. While I can not share a specific foods value I will give you some ranges N3's range from 0.57% to 7.29%, N6's range from 2.5% to 5.10% > > What you fail to recognize, primarily becauaue you have followed down > > the path of totally UNPROVEN carbophobia is that once the state of [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Atkin´s diet. How did you go from the Atkin´s diet to metabolic > acidosis? My mistake, that should have been metaboic *ketosis*, not acidosis. Once the state of metabolic ketosis is acheived, there is absolutely no value is taking carbs any lower. Lots of people make this same mistake, They think if 1,000 IU of vitamin e is good then 10,000 IU's must be better, which is not true. The same applies to reducing carbs below the amount needed to establish metabolic ketosis. > > What is the percentage of omega 3 and omega 6 in Science Diet Adult > > Maintenance? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > N3's range from 0.57% to 7.29%, > N6's range from 2.5% to 5.10% If they are proprietary, how can you claim that Hill´s has more than any other food? And this proprietary thing is bs. A chemist could analyze the food at any moment and tell you exactly how much N3 or N6 is in there with an error margin below 0.005%. > My mistake, that should have been metaboic *ketosis*, not acidosis. > Once the state of metabolic ketosis is acheived, there is absolutely > no value is taking carbs any lower. You are *not* going to reach metabolic ketosis with a 15% carb diet. You won´t get anywhere near it. >From: rosebrook@sbcglobal.net (Steve Crane) >There isn't a diet out there with more N3,6's than >products made by Hill's. The only "hype" around fatty acids is that >some manufacturers decided it would work to fool consumers. They >realized consumers wouldn't know if the food had N3,6's before or not. >So let's launch a great madison avenue marketing plan and tell >everybody we've added N3,6's to the diet. Ah so that's why Hill's just launched that new food, huh? Trying to fool consumers again? 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 >>There isn't a diet out there with more N3,6's than >>products made by Hill's. The only "hype" around fatty acids is that [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >Ah so that's why Hill's just launched that new food, huh? Trying to fool >consumers again? LOL Lauren, you've missed the point again! That reading comprehension thing you rail about??.......try it for yourself! Part Two > > >Felidae Dry: 21% carbohydrates > > First of all your calculations were in error on this one, according to [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Linoleic acid - 3,70% > Magnesium and taurine - ~0.3% You don't add those up because they are a) part of the greater nurient or b)inconsequential. Omega fatty acids, linoleic acid are counted in the total fats. Magnesium is counted within the "ash". Digestive enzymes are counted in the proteins. > Or are those things carbohydrates in your concept? I won´t bother > looking at the rest of your manipulated numbers. No I suppose not since they proved you completely wrong and hey, who wants to know that little bit of information AGAIN? Now if you are going > to say something like "those things are included in proteins, fats and > ash," I say we write them and ask. Go for it, you determind the method of measuring carbs, and I followed your method, adding up the five primary nutrients in cats and the four primary nutrients in dogs. Something I have been teaching vets and staff members to do for over 20 years. > Why is it that you posted levels of calcium and phosphorus? Is it the > old scare tactics and innuendoes relating them to kidney damage? If > you have ONE study showing either of them to be toxic to kidneys > please post. Give me a break, you had such studies posted here so many times it is ridiculous. Nobody has EVER claimed on this NG that protein, phosphorus, sodium or calcium CAUSE renal failure. But since renal failure is the second most common REAL cause of death in cats, not some |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message