 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Health and Behavior / November 2003Hill's Feline S/D, Hill's Feline CD-S
This food was prescribed for my cat who just had a urinary blockage removed. Does anyone know if my other cat (who is in perfect health) will develop problems if he also starts to eat the Hill's S/D and Hill's CD-S food as well ? Thanks. >From: albertpike248@hotmail.com (Albert Pike) >Date: 10/18/03 10:14 PM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >will develop problems if he also starts to eat the Hill's S/D and >Hill's CD-S food as well ? DO NOT feed a healthy cat s/d. s/d will acidify the urine Ph and you shouldn't risk your healthy cat developing a problem when one didn't exist previously. Keep your healthy cat on a wellness food and your "sick" cat on the theraputic diet prescribed. Did the vet send the stone or crystal to a lab to know what it was? > Did the vet send the stone or crystal to a lab to know what it was? It was crystals .I believe it was a struvite - hence the struvite- dissolution diet ? I agree that it doesn't seem right to give a healthy cat S/D. Neither seems to fancy the dry S/D that is left out, anyway. The only thing the vet said was that it was OK for the healthy cat to eat S/D as long as he did not have heart or kidney problems (which he doesn't). > > Did the vet send the stone or crystal to a lab to know what it was? > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > the vet said was that it was OK for the healthy cat to eat S/D as long > as he did not have heart or kidney problems (which he doesn't). This very is interesting. Science Diet´s main marketing strategy is to scare people about the level of phosphorus in other foods because the cat may be in the early stages of kidney disease and this "excess phosphorus," according to them, will add to kidney damage. So how come is it ok to feed S/D if S/D should not be fed to a cat with kidney problems? What if the cat *is* in the early stages of kidney disease? How contradictory! I think you are better off getting him on a canned diet of whatever brand you feel is best for him than any dry food. An acidified dry diet may result in calcium oxalate stones down the road and this would be harder to deal with. If he is made to ingest sufficient amounts of water, that will better prevent uroliths of any kind. >This very is interesting. Science Diet´s main marketing strategy is to >scare people about the level of phosphorus in other foods because the >cat may be in the early stages of kidney disease and this "excess >phosphorus," according to them, will add to kidney damage. It's not a marketing strategy, it's science and research--something you apparently don't know anything about. >So how come >is it ok to feed S/D if S/D should not be fed to a cat with kidney >problems? s/d should NOT be fed to healthy cats that don't have any urinary problems. Period. Don't go trying to put words in people's mouths.... > > > Did the vet send the stone or crystal to a lab to know what it was? > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > This very is interesting. Science Diet?s main marketing strategy is to > scare people Not too hypocritical are you? Since scare tactics, rumors and innuendoes are your specialty.... about the level of phosphorus in other foods because the > cat may be in the early stages of kidney disease ..and rightly so. What is the benefit of excess phosphorus, huh. "Wiz Liz? and this "excess > phosphorus," according to them, will add to kidney damage. So how come > is it ok to feed S/D if S/D should not be fed to a cat with kidney > problems? What if the cat *is* in the early stages of kidney disease? > How contradictory! Its not contradictory, "Wiz Liz"... Do you understand the concept of "risk vs benefit"? s/d is formulated to dissolve *existing* struvite crystals and uroliths that can obstruct the urethra resulting in acute renal failure and *death* in a very short time... which is tad more serious and immediate than early stage chronic renal failure. > I think you are better off getting him on a canned diet of whatever > brand you feel is best for him than any dry food. This is *another* example of your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice! Did you not read: "This food was prescribed for my cat who just had a urinary blockage"? You **should not**, nor are you qualified to advise a person to take his cat off of a prescription diet - *especially* a cat that just had a urethral obstruction removed and probably still has crystals! I seriously hope Albert *ignores* your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice. An acidified dry > diet may result in calcium oxalate stones down the road ..and a struvite urethral obstruction can kill the cat *now* - and almost did. s/d is a *short-term* therapy -- You should at least know something about the food you're bad-mouthing.... > s/d is formulated to dissolve *existing* struvite crystals and uroliths > that can obstruct the urethra resulting in acute renal failure and *death* > in a very short time... which is tad more serious and immediate than early > stage chronic renal failure. In renal failure, every nephron should be treasured. Every nephron lost will never be replaced. > "This food was prescribed for my cat who just had a urinary blockage"? > > You **should not**, nor are you qualified to advise a person to take his > cat off of a prescription diet - *especially* a cat that just had a urethral > obstruction removed and probably still has crystals! Oh, and you have never seen veterinary mistakes? I´ve seen them way too often, even in this group. It´s not because a person has a diploma in whatever field that they know what they are doing. If doctors kill 250 thousand people every year only in the USA because of incompetence, I don´t even want to think about the numbers regarding animals. > I seriously hope Albert *ignores* your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice. Really? I often see you give the exact same advice about more water in the diet (feed canned) to avoid uroliths. Besides, I know for a fact that canned diet fixed my cats´problem as it has fixed other cats here. > s/d is a *short-term* therapy -- You should at least know something about > the food you're bad-mouthing.... I know that. But in that one or two month short term use, how many nephrons could be lost huh? Before you get me wrong, this is about hypocrisy and not about actual loss of nephrons. You should go study veterinary medicine and get some more background. What´s keeping you from it? > In renal failure, Why are you mentioning renal failure? Albert did not say his cat was in renal failure...Are you trying to convolute the issue again to divert attention away from your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice? every nephron should be treasured. Every nephron > lost will never be replaced. ...and *life* should be treasured. *Life* once lost can never be replaced. You've made it abundantly clear that you have no practical experience in treating cats and you know only what you read about different species, so I'll enlighten you about *real life*. Male cats, "Wiz Liz", can *die*, in a short time, from a pathophysiologic state equivalent to oliguric *acute renal failure* and/or severe damage to the urinary bladder, or they can sustain *permanent* damage to the urethra that makes normal urination impossible - all from a urethral obstruction. Cats that already experienced an episode of urethral obstruction are at *increased* risk of experiencing another episode in a relatively short time. You obviously didn't know that. But now you do! . > > "This food was prescribed for my cat who just had a urinary blockage"? > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Oh, and you have never seen veterinary mistakes? What mistake??? The cat *just had* a urethral obstruction removed! The mistake would be taking the cat off a diet that's specially formulated to dissolve *already existing* struvite that can easily obstruct his urethra again! *Many* cats reblock shortly after the initial obstruction has been resolved.... but obviously you didn't know that, either. But now you do! You should stay the hell out of matters that you know nothing about before your dangerous and deadly advice gets a cat killed... if your advice hasn't caused the death of a cat(s) already. > > I seriously hope Albert *ignores* your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice. > > Really? I often see you give the exact same advice about more water in > the diet (feed canned) to avoid uroliths. You *truly* are a deceitful manipulator! That's *not* the advice I suggested that Albert ignore. I suggested that Albert ignore your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice about taking his cat off a prescription diet after his cat *just had* a urethral obstruction removed. Once *again* you've *deliberately* *manipulated* and *misinterpreted* a statement by taking it out of context to suit your purpose... *This* is the context in which the phase you *manipulated* was used: "You **should not**, nor are you qualified to advise a person to take his cat off of a prescription diet - *especially* a cat that just had a urethral obstruction removed and probably still has crystals! I seriously hope Albert *ignores* your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice." Lets see you try to slither out of getting caught red-handed in yet *another* *deliberate* misrepresentation and manipulation! Its no wonder you're not "in research" any more! You can't seem to cite or quote a statement without manipulating it! > > s/d is a *short-term* therapy -- You should at least know something about > > the food you're bad-mouthing.... > > I know that. I don't think so. But in that one or two month short term use, how many > nephrons could be lost huh? Do you understand the concept of "risk vs. benefit"? Apparently not. It doesn't matter how many nephrons are "saved" if the cat *dies* of acute renal failure and/or severe damage to the urinary bladder caused by a urethral obstruction, now does it? What are you going to do, pat yourself on the back for "saving" some nephrons... at the cat's funeral? What's wrong with you? Before you get me wrong, this is about > hypocrisy and not about actual loss of nephrons. No it isn't Its about *life and death* and your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice. .There was no hypocrisy in my statement before you *deliberately* manipulated and misinterpreted it. That's really what you're best at. > You should go study veterinary medicine and get some more background. LOL! You *truly* have lost touch with reality. I knew something was seriously wrong with from when you began posting here... You've just reconfirmed my suspicions... I have *more* practical experience and *much* more background in veterinary matters and treating cats than you'll *ever* have ... and that's what I think *really* bothers you, "Wiz Liz" LOL! You should go learn something about cats and *feline* diseases and treatments before you give anymore utterly asinine and *dangerous* and *deadly* advice. > What?s keeping you from it? Correcting your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice... How many of my posts does this make that you replied to after saying over and over you weren't going to respond to my posts? Do you understand the concept of poor impulse control? You are either too dumb or you deliberately misinterpret everything you read. Why waste time with you? >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >Date: 10/21/03 7:56 AM Pacific Daylight Time >Message-id: <12c83831.0310210656.49f58a35@posting.google.com> > >You are either too dumb or you deliberately misinterpret everything >you read. Why waste time with you? Ooh, good one Liz. <dripping w/ sarcasm> Why when you've been backed into the corner by your lack of substance or logic you have to respond w/ name calling? Another reply! ROFL! Don't you feel like a fool for responding to my posts after stating several times you would not? Oh, that's right, you'd need a conscience for that and impulse control - both of which you're fresh out of... > You are either too dumb Could be... But that's still saying even less about you're mentality since I'm constantly catching you in deliberate manipulations, misrepresentations and misinterpretations... If they aren't deliberate, then your problems are much more serious than I thought.... > or you deliberately misinterpret everything You're *still* trying to sleaze out getting caught red-handed in a deliberate manipulation and deliberate misinterpretation of my statement! Here, I'll draw you a picture... may be you'll see your manipulation a bit clearer.. although I really doubt it... I said: "You **should not**, nor are you qualified to advise a person to take his cat off of a prescription diet - *especially* a cat that just had a urethral obstruction removed and probably still has crystals! I seriously hope Albert *ignores* your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice." (I was *clearly* referring to your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice of taking the cat off of the prescription diet after his cat just had a urethral obstruction removed) To which you replied: > > I seriously hope Albert *ignores* your *dangerous* and *deadly* advice. > > Really? I often see you give the exact same advice about more water in > the diet (feed canned) to avoid uroliths It is *not* "the exact same advice". Although I always recommend canned diets, I have *never* advised *anyone* to take their cat off of a prescription diet without consulting a vet as *you did*. Do you see your deliberate misinterpretation, misrepresentation and manipulation, now? I'll spell it out for you: You *deliberately* misrepresented my *routine* advice of feeding a *maintenance* canned food to reduce the risks of urolithiasis, into taking a cat off of a prescription diet that's designed to dissolve *existing* crystals/uroliths. Do you get the picture now, or do you need color slides? I can certainly understand why you're no longer "in research"... You can't cite or quote a statement without manipulating it to suit your purpose and putting your own spin on them... like you did with my post... and studies... and the survey... > Why waste time with you? ...because you have nothing else better to do.... At least you're learning something from someone with a lot more actual experience than you... Although I don't think your narcissism would allow you to admit that... After all you do think you know better than ACVIM and ACVN Diplomates and vets....who after reading a few of your theories think you're a "nut case"... Come on, let me see that poor impulse control again! LOL! > This food was prescribed for my cat who just had a urinary blockage > removed. Does anyone know if my other cat (who is in perfect health) > will develop problems if he also starts to eat the Hill's S/D and > Hill's CD-S food as well ? > > Thanks. Your other cat shouldn't develop any problems from eating c/d-s because its formulated to produce a normal urine pH. However, s/d is more acidic and formulated to dissolve struvite and produces a much lower urine pH that can, and most likely will, cause serious problems (e.g., calcium oxalate and possibly acidosis) in a normal cat. Phil > This food was prescribed for my cat who just had a urinary blockage > removed. Does anyone know if my other cat (who is in perfect health) > will develop problems if he also starts to eat the Hill's S/D and > Hill's CD-S food as well ? > > Thanks. Albert, Prescription Diet s/d is designed for SHORT term feeding only, never more than a couple months. It's purpose is to remove all traces of any left over "sand" (crystals). Prescription Diet c/d-s (which will shortly change names to just plain c/d) is designed for long term maintenance of a cat. There is no risk in feeding c/d to normal healthy cats, unless they have some other disease issue which would contraindicate the food. I would suggest you keep the normal kitty away from the s/d, but not worry at all about the c/d. By the way is Albert Pike your real name or did you simply adopt it from Morals and Dogma (33°)? > Prescription Diet c/d-s (which will > shortly change names to just plain c/d) It seems like just yesterday that they added the 's'. What are they doing with c/d-o? Or are they following the lead of IVD and Waltham's and creating a combination urinary diet? -Alison in OH >> Prescription Diet c/d-s (which will >> shortly change names to just plain c/d) > >It seems like just yesterday that they added the 's'. What are they >doing with c/d-o? Or are they following the lead of IVD and Waltham's >and creating a combination urinary diet? My friend (the vet) tells me that c/d-oxl is going to be renamed x/d. Supposed to be less confusion that way?? As for IVD and Waltham....it's really not possible to have a "one size fits all" approach to effectively manage FLUTD. BTW, Hill's is the leader and everybody else follows THEM. When they can't compete, they try a different tactic such as claiming to manage both types of stones (struvite and calcium oxalate) w/ one diet. > >> Prescription Diet c/d-s (which will > >> shortly change names to just plain c/d) [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > compete, they try a different tactic such as claiming to manage both types of > stones (struvite and calcium oxalate) w/ one diet. Not possible, huh? That's fascinating considering that my cat forms both struvite crystals (sometimes in acid urine) and oxalate crystals (sometimes in alkaline urine). Should I be taking a daily urine sample and determining what Hill's Prescription Diet to feed him based on presence of crystals? Oddly enough he's asymptomatic these days with no c/d or x/d or s/d or any /d...How is that possible? It's NOT! AUUGH! What, exactly, is the mechanism of formation of urinary crystals, and what predisposes a cat to form them? -Alison in OH >Not possible, huh? That's fascinating considering that my cat forms both >struvite crystals (sometimes in acid urine) and oxalate crystals >(sometimes in alkaline urine). Should I be taking a daily urine sample >and determining what Hill's Prescription Diet to feed him based on >presence of crystals? How is one of those foods supposed to "know" which type of crystal your cat has and then "fix" it? Unless those foods are causing the problem to begin with? If your cat has a struvite or oxalate problem then you would want a food that either alkanized (sp?) or acidified the urinary Ph. No? > >Not possible, huh? That's fascinating considering that my cat forms both > >struvite crystals (sometimes in acid urine) and oxalate crystals [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > If your cat has a struvite or oxalate problem then you would want a food that > either alkanized (sp?) or acidified the urinary Ph. No? This is pretty much the most confusing, tangential post I've ever read from you, Chris, and that's saying a lot. My Cat Forms Both Struvite Crystals And Oxalate Crystals. If I feed him an acidifying, magnesium-restricted, high-sodium diet...ie c/d-s...I will promote the formation of oxalate crystals. If I feed him an alkalinizing diet...ie c/d-oxl...I will promote the formation of struvite crystals without really limiting the formation of oxalate crystals since my cat has had urinalyses showing oxalate crystals in alkaline urine. *Is* a urinalysis the end-all be-all of FLUTD diagnosis? What about post-prandial alkaline tides, post-collection pH drift, non-diagnostic crystal formations in cooling urine, contamination from outside the body, contamination from the collection method... How on earth do you propose to manage all those variables enough to base a treatment protocol on the results? Why are you talking about Hill's Prescription Diet (an inanimate object in case you weren't aware) "knowing" things; and causing my cat's urinary problems when, as I've stated, my cat does not use Hill's Prescription Diet? If "Hill's is the leader", what does Hill's Prescription Diet have to offer my cat? My ASYMPTOMATIC cat with NO CURRENT SYMPTOMS of clinical disease? You said: > As for IVD and Waltham....it's really not > possible to have a "one size fits all" approach to effectively manage FLUTD. And I still inquire, since you know about FLUTD management, > What, exactly, is the mechanism of formation of urinary crystals, and > what predisposes a cat to form them? In particular, what say you to the presence of crystalluria in a clinically normal cat? Incidental finding or cause for concern and therapeutic nutrition? -Alison in OH >This is pretty much the most confusing, tangential post I've ever read >from you, Chris, and that's saying a lot. Perhaps because FLUTD is one of the most confusing disease conditions there is? >My Cat Forms Both Struvite Crystals And Oxalate Crystals. If I feed him >an acidifying, magnesium-restricted, high-sodium diet...ie c/d-s...I [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >crystals since my cat has had urinalyses showing oxalate crystals in >alkaline urine. But how is a Waltham or an IVD product going to help your particular cat? >*Is* a urinalysis the end-all be-all of FLUTD diagnosis? What about >post-prandial alkaline tides, post-collection pH drift, non-diagnostic >crystal formations in cooling urine, contamination from outside the >body, contamination from the collection method... Certainly you have to take all of those things (and probably more) into account! >How on earth do you propose to manage all those variables enough to base >a treatment protocol on the results? I'm not proposing a treatment protocol for any individual cat. I'm simply questioning the reasoning used by Waltham and IVD that a "one size fits all" food can succesfully manage FLUTD. Simple as that. >Why are you talking about Hill's Prescription Diet (an inanimate object >in case you weren't aware) "knowing" things; and causing my cat's >urinary problems when, as I've stated, my cat does not use Hill's >Prescription Diet? My statement was actually questioning the "one size fits all" diets that are supposed to effectively manage FLUTD: >> How is one of those foods supposed to "know" which type of crystal your cat > >> has >> and then "fix" it? Unless those foods are causing the problem to begin >with? __________ >If "Hill's is the leader", what does Hill's Prescription Diet have to >offer my cat? My ASYMPTOMATIC cat with NO CURRENT SYMPTOMS of clinical >disease? Which company was the first to come out w/ a struvite diet? Hill's. Which company was the first to come out w/ an oxalate diet? Hill's. Which company was the first to come out w/ a diet that dissolves struvite stones? Hill's. That should effectively back up my statement that "hill's is the leader...". Hill's isn't the panacea for ALL cats and dogs. But they aren't the evil satan of theraputic (or wellness) diets either.... >> What, exactly, is the mechanism of formation of urinary crystals, and >> what predisposes a cat to form them? > >In particular, what say you to the presence of crystalluria in a >clinically normal cat? Incidental finding or cause for concern and >therapeutic nutrition? What does your vet say about it? I'm not a veternarian and I wouldn't try to "solve" a problem over the internet even if I was. That wouldn't be responsible. FLUTD is an extremely complex disease category, as you know. >> If your cat has a struvite or oxalate problem then you would want a food >that >> either alkanized (sp?) or acidified the urinary Ph. No? I didn't get a response from you on this. Certainly diet is one component to try to effectively manage FLUTD, not the only component. > Perhaps because FLUTD is one of the most confusing disease > conditions there is? For you it must be totally uncomprehensible. > I didn't get a response from you on this. Certainly diet is one component to > try to effectively manage FLUTD, not the only component. WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER WATER Mess with pH and ignore the need for water and you get more uroliths. Sticking to the common uroliths: Alkaline concentrated urine = struvites Acidic concentrated urine = calcium oxalate Dilute urine = NO UROLITHS Simple, isn´t it? >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >Date: 10/22/03 7:55 PM Pacific Daylight Time [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >For you it must be totally uncomprehensible. ...and you promised never to respone to any of my posts again (and this one wasn't even directed at you). Goes to show how much of what you say can be trusted! > I didn't get a response from you on this. Certainly diet is one component to > try to effectively manage FLUTD, not the only component. You want to understand uroliths? Here´s a little exercise for you. Go to your kitchen, get a cup and put one inch of water in it. Add a little bit of salt and stir. You will see the salt disappear. Add more salt and stir. Repeat until you start seeing some crystals of salt on the bottom of the cup. This is when you reached the SATURATION POINT of salt in water. Add just a little more salt just so that you see those crystals clearly on the bottom. Now add a little bit of water and stir. Keep adding water in very small amounts and keep stirring. You will see those crystals disappear. That´s how simple managing uroliths is. The amount of any salt (uroliths are salts) you can dissolve in a given amount of water will vary greatly but the principle is true for nearly all salts. > >> If your cat has a struvite or oxalate problem then you would want a food > >that > >> either alkanized (sp?) or acidified the urinary Ph. No? > > I didn't get a response from you on this. Certainly diet is one component to > try to effectively manage FLUTD, not the only component. I believe the term is <boggle>. I responded thoroughly and in-depth to this comment. Let me reiterate. My Cat Has BOTH a Struvite AND Oxalate Problem. I want a food that NEITHER excessively alkalinizes OR acidifies the urinary pH. Is that clear? > I'm not proposing a treatment protocol for any individual cat. I'm simply > questioning the reasoning used by Waltham and IVD that a "one size fits all" > food can succesfully manage FLUTD. Simple as that. My cat's dietary therapy is a "one size fits all" food, though not a prescription diet. Per your argument, this is impossible. Fortunately it only takes one counterexample to disprove a theory. Therefore you are WRONG and it IS possible to effectively manage several faces of FLUTD with one dietary approach. Whether Waltham's and IVD are as effective as what my cat eats now, I don't know, because it ain't broke and I don't plan to fix it. -Alison in OH > My cat's dietary therapy is a "one size fits all" food, though not a > prescription diet. Per your argument, this is impossible. Fortunately it [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > what my cat eats now, I don't know, because it ain't broke and I don't > plan to fix it. Actually it's a bit more complicated than just the urine pH. Lots more complicated. Prescription Diet Feline cd-oxl (which will soon change it's name to Feline x/d, same product, just less confusion in the name) canned version can be used for both struvite and CaOx stone formers. To determine if a food will work for more than one form of crystal it is necessary to do what is called Activity Product Ratio studies. APR's take a look at *all* the biological processes that contribute to the formation of crystals. In a simplified explanation it works this way. A group of cats are fed the test food over a period of time. The urine is taken and placed in an incubator with a 1 gm crystal of the type (struvite, CaOx, brushite, urate, cystine etc) being tested suspended in the urine. So if you are testing for stuvite you suspend a 1 gm crystal of struvite in the urine. Incubate and then measure the crystal size. If the crystal has lost weight you have created a urine with all the biological factors considered that will not support the growth of a struvite. Prescription Diet Feline c/d-oxl canned can indeed be fed to both CaOx formers and struvite formers. APR studies are substantially different than Relative Super Saturationwhich does not measure all possible biological outcomes. As a general rule the things you need to do to reduce one type, are in opposition to what you need to do to keep another stone out. Stuvites - lower urine pH to 6.2-6.4, reduce magnesium, phosphorus, In contrast for CaOx stones we need to increase magnesium increase urine pH slightly to a still acidic 6.6-6.8 and reduce calcium intake. In most case you cannot do these opposing things at the same time. Thus what we understand about srystal formation is not yet complete. There are definitely other biological factors involved that we don't yet understand. For this reason the APR studies are very beneficial. Thanks, Steve for the clarification. >Actually it's a bit more complicated than just the urine pH. Lots more >complicated. Prescription Diet Feline cd-oxl (which will soon change [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] >definitely other biological factors involved that we don't yet >understand. For this reason the APR studies are very beneficial. > Thanks, Steve for the clarification. Want to see how it works by growing your own crystal? Try this: http://rockhoundingar.com/pebblepups/growcryst.html The explanation behind this experiment is that the solubility of alum increases with temperature. When you mix alum in hot water and let the water cool, you have created a supersaturated solution. Then you add a crystal (seed) and just watch it grow until the solution is no longer supersaturated. The growth stops when the solution has reached its saturation point for that temperature. You can make a very big crystal by repeating the experiment many times using the same crystal. This is how stones grow in your kidneys. > To determine if a food will work for more than one form of crystal it > is necessary to do what is called Activity Product Ratio studies. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > growth of a struvite. Prescription Diet Feline c/d-oxl canned can > indeed be fed to both CaOx formers and struvite formers. There´s absolutely nothing complicated in that. What you are doing is testing the degree of saturation of the urine to a specific crystal. If the urine is supersaturated, the crystal will grow. If it is undersaturated, the crystal will become smaller. Some salts have a too low solubility so you actually need ions in urine that will inhibit their formation, such as magnesium inhibiting calcium oxalates. You add water to the urine and that alone will decrease the concentration of any given ion, therefore, when you add water, you are going from supersaturated to saturated to undersaturated. Most canned foods will be successful in preventing any kind of urolith. Let me add that temperature influences saturation point. The solubility of some salts increase with higher temperatures while others decrease. So, if you want to do the APRs correctly, you must keep the urine sample at the same temperature it is inside the body and correct for evaporation. > APR studies are substantially different than Relative Super > Saturationwhich does not measure all possible biological outcomes. As [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > definitely other biological factors involved that we don't yet > understand. For this reason the APR studies are very beneficial. Companies pretend they don´t understand because they make no money telling people to make sure their cats get plenty of water (liquids in general). Wanna solve the problem? Water is the solution. But don´t expect a company to say this openly. They want to make money with their miracle diets. >Companies pretend they don´t understand because they make no money >telling people to make sure their cats get plenty of water (liquids in >general). Wanna solve the problem? Water is the solution. But don´t >expect a company to say this openly. They want to make money with >their miracle diets. Liz, you are sure full of yourself aren't you? You think you know everything there is to know about FLUTD? Wow. As for the "no money" in canned foods, that's just ridiculous. There is more profit in a case of canned food being sold than there is in a bag of food being sold. Not to mention that you have to buy more cases of cans more often to last as a long as a large bag of food would. You're not as smart as you think. BTW, is this the "water dissolves all uroliths" argument that you are ridiculed for? > Liz, you are sure full of yourself aren't you? You think you know everything > there is to know about FLUTD? I studied crystals for a long time mr. > Wow. As for the "no money" in canned foods, > that's just ridiculous. There is more profit in a case of canned food being > sold than there is in a bag of food being sold. First, what is cheaper, a maintenance canned food or a prescription dry diet? I don´t know the prices there but here, to feed a cat for one month with a maintenance canned diet is cheaper than with a prescription diet. Second, how many competitors does Hill´s prescription diet have? Three? IVD, Purina and Waltham? Any others? How many competitors does Hill´s maintenance canned diet have? One hundred? One hundred fifty? If the owner is convinced to use a prescription diet, he will have 4 diets to choose from, therefore, the chance of any of them being picked is 25%. If the owner is told that any canned food will do, and there are 100 brands out there, what is the chance that any is picked? Only 1%. So, if you own a company, would you rather have a 25% chance of being chosen by a customer or a 1% chance of being chosen? You should think a bit more before you jump to your conclusions. > You're not as smart as you think. It´s not a matter of being smart, it´s a matter of reading. If you don´t know something, go read about it. Don´t blame me if you are too lazy to read or simply don´t care to learn more. IMO, the best defense anyone has in any situation is INFORMATION. So it´s your choice: be an idiot that anyone can fool or make yourself smart. Reading will not kill you but it may save your life. > BTW, is this the "water dissolves all uroliths" argument that you are > ridiculed for? By who? By someone who only plagiarizes text because he can´t even understand something enough to use his own words? By someone who will ridicule and namecall anyone he does not agree with? By someone who will alter the wording of a study to prove his point? By someone who is deliberately rude to the point of pushing people away from this ng? Do you really believe I´m affected at all by what this caveman thinks of me? Oh, please! > > BTW, is this the "water dissolves all uroliths" argument that you are > > ridiculed for? > > > By someone who > will alter the wording of a study to prove his point? ROTFLMAO! How many manipulations and *deliberate* misintpretations and misrepresentations of studies, surveys and articles have I *already* caught you in *red-handed*??? I lost count! I posted at least *10* links to veterinary universities that *all* said calcium oxalate cannot be dissolved in cats and dogs! Do you remember your narcissistic, egomanical, delusional response? "Those references need to be updated".! LMAO! Imagine that, a backwoods, stump-jumping au naturel fanatic is going to "update" veterinary universities and board certified urologists! Every vet who read your utteerly *stupid* and assinine theories said you were a "nut case" and "dangerous". By someone who > is deliberately rude to the point of pushing people away from this ng? Naa, just to lying manipulators like you who are a clear and present danger to cats and their owners. > Do you really believe I?m affected at all by what this caveman thinks > of me? Oh, please! My only concern is other people and their cats - I couldn't care less about what affects a narcissistic manipulator like you.... except a speeding freight train... The world for cats would be a better place without you in it. So you recognized yourself, huh? That´s good. Recognizing your faults is the first step towards improvement. Yet *another* reply! You *really* do have poor impulse control! In addition to being obsessed fanatic, you're also an egomanaic, I see! LOL! What a mess! > So you recognized yourself, huh? That?s good. Recognizing your faults > is the first step towards improvement. Not really, Liz the wanna be wiz.... Those were all things you usually accuse me of when you can't refute what I say and can't slither out being caught red-handed in a manipulation or deliberate misinterpretation of a study. LOL! Come on - let me see that poor impulse control again! I love it! > First, what is cheaper, a maintenance canned food or a prescription > dry diet? Unquestionably a DRY Prescription Diet, no if's and's or butt's about it. Canned foods are ALWAYS substantially more expensive than dry foods. > Second, how many competitors does Hill´s prescription diet have? > Three? IVD, Purina and Waltham? Any others? Purina, Waltham, Cadillac, Leo, Triumph, Royal Canin V-Diets, Eukanuba all sell an Rx diet of some kind. > > BTW, is this the "water dissolves all uroliths" argument that you are > > ridiculed for? > > By who? By someone who only plagiarizes text because he can´t even > understand something enough to use his own words? Come off it Liz, you're just digging your own grave deeper and deeper. You were unquestionably proven wrong on the dissolution of CaOx stones. Why not show us a bit more mature attitude and admit it. Well hello Steve! I thought you were ignoring me. Where are all the references I requested of you? > Well hello Steve! I thought you were ignoring me. Where are all the > references I requested of you? References for what? Renal failure? I figured after Phil posted half a dozen or more and made you look pretty silly you might prefer to leave it alone. > > Well hello Steve! I thought you were ignoring me. Where are all the > > references I requested of you? > > References for what? Renal failure? I figured after Phil posted half a > dozen or more and made you look pretty silly you might prefer to leave > it alone. No, absolutely not. I don´t waste my time with Phil´s limited understanding, the most I try to do is open his eyes but I guess you pulled them out already. I asked you a whole lot of questions and requested a whole lot of references to all the statements you always make to sell your junk food and you still haven´t given me one reference that I requested. You have no idea of how much it bothers me to see people buying into your crap and see their animals sick because of that food. What drives me is the animal´s health. What drives you is money. And this bothers me way too much. >> References for what? Renal failure? I figured after Phil posted half a >> dozen or more and made you look pretty silly you might prefer to leave >> it alone. > >No, absolutely not. Don't let the facts get in the way of a good lie, huh, Liz? LOL >I don´t waste my time with Phil´s limited >understanding, the most I try to do is open his eyes but I guess you >pulled them out already. Why do you respond to him then? >you always >make to sell your junk food Hill's products are hardly junk food, but I suppose you think if you repeat this over and over, someone will actually believe it? >You have no idea of how much it bothers me >to see people buying into your crap and see their animals sick because >of that food. Oh, give it up, Liz. Hill's producst have saved more animals lives than you'll ever admit. Why are you so crazy? Get dropped on your head as a child? Do too many drugs? >What drives me is the animal´s health. What drives you >is money. And this bothers me way too much. Steve Crane seems to know way more than you do when it comes to nutrition judging by his posts vs. yours. > Hill's products are hardly junk food, but I suppose you think if you repeat > this over and over, someone will actually believe it? I´m sure you see nothing wrong with a *cat food* listing plant protein as second ingredient, animal protein as fourth ingredient and more than 35% carbohydrate content. I´m sure you see nothing wrong with plant protein, that is, poor quality protein, being at least 38% of total protein. I´m sure you see nothing wrong with malnourishment. And I´m also sure you see absolutely no link between most chronic diseases and diet. > Steve Crane seems to know way more than you do when it comes to nutrition > judging by his posts vs. yours. He´s selling a product and you bit his bait. If only you read more, you´d know better. Try reading Dr. Zoran´s article 100 times and you might understand something. >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >> Hill's products are hardly junk food, but I suppose you think if you repeat >> this over and over, someone will actually believe it? [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >I´m also sure you see absolutely no link between most chronic diseases >and diet. Gaubster will never get that "you are what you eat" and that a proper diet is very important to a cat's health and well-being. >> Steve Crane seems to know way more than you do when it comes to nutrition >> judging by his posts vs. yours. > >He´s selling a product and you bit his bait. If only you read more, >you´d know better. Try reading Dr. Zoran´s article 100 times and you >might understand something. He could read Dr. Zoran's article a million times but still fail to comprehend it. His defense of Hill's is pathological. It makes no sense for someone who "supposedly" has no vested interest in the company. 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 > He could read Dr. Zoran's article a million times but still fail to > comprehend it. His defense of Hill's is pathological. It makes no > sense for someone who "supposedly" has no vested interest in the company. > > Lauren I heard that he works for Petsmart or something like that. I wonder if he gets extra comission selling SD foods. >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >Date: 10/27/03 3:12 PM Pacific Standard Time [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >I heard that he works for Petsmart or something like that. I wonder if >he gets extra comission selling SD foods. Boy, you really need to come into the 21st Century! My association w/ Petsmart ended back in 1997! Your (and your minions) bashing of Hill's is sociopathic. > Boy, you really need to come into the 21st Century! My association w/ > Petsmart ended back in 1997! Your (and your minions) bashing of Hill's is > sociopathic. So now you work for Hills? > > Boy, you really need to come into the 21st Century! My association w/ > > Petsmart ended back in 1997! Your (and your minions) bashing of Hill's is > > sociopathic. > > So now you work for Hills? Remember, you accused me of working for Hill's, too....LOL! Then you accused me of being "paid off " by Hill's....LOL! ...and you don't think there's something seriously wrong with you? ROTFL! >From: c864320@yahoo.com (Liz) >Date: 10/27/03 8:04 PM Pacific Standard Time [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > >So now you work for Hills? NO, how many times do I have to answer this question? Just because I use their products and defend them against the bs allegations of Hill's bashers does not mean I work for them. What part of that is so hard for you Hill's haters to understand? > Try reading Dr. Zoran´s article 100 times and you > might understand something. Try understanding Zoran's work is HYPOTHESIS - and absolutely NOT proven facts. Try understanding the difference between HYPOTHESIS and THEORY and proven FACTS - you never know you might learn something. Oh never mind that would require abandonment of many unsubstantiated and emotionally held judgments in favor of facts - that would never do. > Try understanding Zoran's work is HYPOTHESIS - and absolutely NOT > proven facts. I don´t think you have *ever* had a biochemistry book in your hands. What she says about nutrients, enzymes, metabolic pathways, etc., are FACTS. The digestive system of a cat is that of a carnivore. That is a FACT. The inability of the cat´s pancreas to produce elevated amounts of amylase and other enzymes involved in the breakdown of carbs is a FACT. Come on, who are you trying to fool? Who are you going to try to convince that feeding a plant-rich diet to a cat is adequate? If plants are adequate, why don´t zoos feed rice and corn to their cats? Both rice and corn are *much cheaper* than meats. You are a joke. The company you work for is a joke. Metabolic ketosis with 15% carbs huh? And *you* said that that food didn´t work, don´t forget it. And you still owe me lots of references. > > Try understanding Zoran's work is HYPOTHESIS - and absolutely NOT > > proven facts. > > I don?t think you have *ever* had a biochemistry book in your hands. Look what it did for you... It taught you how to lie and manipulate studies with a scientific flair.... > company you work for is a joke. ..at least he's working. To make almost a billion dollars a year, Hill's sure has a *lot* of satisfied customers... Actually, your pathological hatred for Hill's is a joke. > And you still owe me lots of references. Why bother? You deny and refuse to accept anything that challenges or opposes your asinine theories and fanatical cult doctrine... Example: You *still* refuse to admit that calcium oxalate cannot be dissolved in cats... even after I produced at least 10 references from veterinary universities that all confirmed calcium oxalate cannot be dissolved in cats. So why should Steve waste his time? > > Try understanding Zoran's work is HYPOTHESIS - and absolutely NOT > > proven facts. > > I don´t think you have *ever* had a biochemistry book in your hands. > What she says about nutrients, enzymes, metabolic pathways, etc., are > FACTS. And what you said about CaOx stone dissolution was FACT right? You must learn that what you did in Junior High chemistry class does NOT necessarily apply to in vivo activity. >> Hill's products are hardly junk food, but I suppose you think if you repeat >> this over and over, someone will actually believe it? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >plant protein, that is, poor quality protein, being at least 38% of >total protein. It's the nutrients, Liz. Not the ingredient label. Nutrition is more important than just print on a bag. >From: gaubster2@aol.com (GAUBSTER2) >>> Hill's products are hardly junk food, but I suppose you think if you >repeat [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >It's the nutrients, Liz. Not the ingredient label. Nutrition is more >important than just print on a bag. Carnivores don't get proper nutrition from a plant or grain based diet. That's the point. ________ 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 >Carnivores don't get proper nutrition from a plant or grain based diet. >That's >the point. That wasn't Liz's point. And why must you take up for her? Wait, you're the one that got her to start posting here, aren't you? Are you guys friends or something--that would explain a lot! There are plenty of cats thriving on Science Diet and other dry commercial cat foods, so your point doesn't stick! >From: gaubster2@aol.com (GAUBSTER2) >>Carnivores don't get proper nutrition from a plant or grain based diet. >>That's [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >one that got her to start posting here, aren't you? Are you guys friends or >something--that would explain a lot! You wouldn't know a point if it was stuck up your a.s, LOL. >There are plenty of cats thriving on Science Diet and other dry commercial >cat >foods, so your point doesn't stick! You still don't get it, do you? ________ See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm > >Carnivores don't get proper nutrition from a plant or grain based diet. > >That's [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > There are plenty of cats thriving on Science Diet and other dry commercial cat > foods, so your point doesn't stick! Define thriving. Suffering from oral disease? Developing renal failure and hyperthyroidism? Obese, diabetic cats, or those that vomit their food every third meal or so? Cats with dandruff? Copious wet stools? Cats getting decrepit at age 10? Cats without the energy to do zoomies on a daily basis? A lot of people think that's just normal. They'll say, "My cat has such shiny fur! He's really thriving on his diet!" And I'll beg to differ. -Alison in OH > > There are plenty of cats thriving on Science Diet and other dry commercial cat > > foods, so your point doesn't stick! > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Developing renal failure and hyperthyroidism? You're not going to disappoint me and blame all the world's feline diseases on Hill's, now are you? I'd expect that kind of nonsense from Lauren and Liz because they're amoral, but I gave you much more credit than that and thought you were in a much higher echlon than they are.... > > > There are plenty of cats thriving on Science Diet and other dry > commercial cat [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Liz because they're amoral, but I gave you much more credit than that and > thought you were in a much higher echlon than they are.... Step in to my echelon, said the spider to the fly... My fanciful portrayal of ill cats that are still described by their owners as "thriving" was generic and broad. In other words, owners are unlikely to create a connection between chronic illness and diet, so the idea that "plenty of cats are thriving on...dry commercial cat food" doesn't hold a lot of water with me. Sci Die or no. ;) I do have to admit that the connection between chronic oral inflammation and infection, and chronic degenerative disease, is compelling and has me pretty convinced of a causal relationship. -Alison in OH > > > > There are plenty of cats thriving on Science Diet and other dry > > commercial cat [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > idea that "plenty of cats are thriving on...dry commercial cat food" > doesn't hold a lot of water with me. Sci Die or no. ;) Its a well known fact that I'm no proponent of *any* dry food. But the fact remains that many cats do thrive (objectively) on dry food.... which makes my argument for canned food very difficult with some of the people I meet in pet stores. > I do have to admit that the connection between chronic oral inflammation > and infection, and chronic degenerative disease, is compelling and has > me pretty convinced of a causal relationship. The problem with making accurate comparisons of disease and raw vs commercial food is multifaceted. First, most raw fanatics don't subscribe to the mainstream veterinary community and thus have no central medical database that stores cases for reference. You can't make medical comparisons if there're no records. Second, most raw fanatics are notoriously obsessed fanatical liars and manipulators - at least that's been my experience with most of them for the last several years - so even if their cat or dog had punctured intestines and died from peritonitis or sepsis or overwhelming parasitemia or bacteremia from the boat-load of pathogens present in raw meat, they'd never admit it. So how can any real comparisons be made when one side alters or conjures up data at will? Phil > >I´m sure you see nothing wrong with a *cat food* listing plant protein > >as second ingredient, animal protein as fourth ingredient and more [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > It's the nutrients, Liz. Not the ingredient label. Nutrition is more > important than just print on a bag. Here´s another flashcard for you: ingredients are made up of nutrients. Nutrients in meat are much more adequate to a cat than nutrients in a plant. Meats contain nutrients that are not present in plants. Protein of meats is of a much higher quality than protein of plants. Protein is made up of amino acids. The distribution of amino acids in meats is adequate for cats, while in plants it isn´t. Meats are much easier to digest, especially raw meats. That´s why cats (and carnivores in general) have a short intestine compared to the dog´s or to ours. They are made to eat meat and nothing but meat (animals). Polysaccharides (a class of carbohydrates including starch, cellulose, amylose, etc.) are much harder to digest, that´s why omnivores and herbivores have a longer intestine. We omnivores can hardly digest starch if we don´t cook (pre-digest) it first. Carbohydrates only stress their system. > > Hill's products are hardly junk food, but I suppose you think if you repeat > > this over and over, someone will actually believe it? > > I?m sure you see nothing wrong with a *cat food* listing plant protein > as second ingredient, animal protein as fourth ingredient and more > than 35% carbohydrate content. Why didn't you state that you were referring to *dry* food? Another selective omission? You tout Wellness as being so much "better" yet it contains 27% carbohydrate.... big difference.... not. And it probably contains *more* than 27% because many ingredients can be listed as either protein or carbohydrate...especially with the "salad" - "fruit basket" that Wellness contains... As far as some of the ingredients in Wellness go, Ground Brown Rice, Ground Whole Oats, Cranberries, Blueberries, Flax Seed, peas, Alfalfa Leaf, Spirulina, Whole Apples, Zucchini, Sweet Potatoes.... (sounds like a salad not a *cat food*) aren't exactly parts of a cat's natural diet, either... Can't remember the last time I heard of a swarm of cats raiding an apple orchard or seen a cat picking blueberries! Wellness contains *more* plant products than Hill's... You can't denigrate the plant material in Hill's diets unless you're prepared to denigrate the plant material in Wellness .... It works both ways.... Three of the first four ingredients in most of Hill's canned food are *animal* source protein - the first is water. The CHO is 5.8% AF. Wellness CHO is 4.5% AF....another big difference.... not. Wellness protein content is 40% DMB, Hill's is 42%.... Forget the vets - Hill's out sells Wellness in the *stores* by more than 500 to 1! So give us a break with your manipulated bullsh!t. Btw, where's all the science behind Wellness diets....? Can't find any - other than their "human grade" marketing gimmick.... which isn't supported in the veterinary literature..... Cat's don't eat "human grade" food as their natural diet.... So you can't have it both ways.... Where's all the science behind raw feeding??? Most of the veterinary literature opposes raw feeding.... I didn't see Zoran recommend raw food in her article that you rely on so heavily and keep posting ad nauseam... Remember, *you* came to us with your scare tactics and manipulations trying to push your raw diet as nauseam... You haven't built *any* case for raw feeding . All you've done is try to build your case by trying to prove how "bad" commercial food is... That's a good strategy for winning.... not. No wonder you're a loser... The overwhelming vast majority of the veterinary community opposes raw food. You're like a spoiled little kid who can't take "no" for an answer. You *really* do come off as an obsessed fanatic because you go on and on and on and on. How many more threads are you and your obsessed fanatical cult going to hijack? The *only* thing you and your cult of fanatics have succeeded at is disrupt the group and scare and confuse a lot of people *unnecessarily*. I'm sure, by now, most people realize you and cult are largely a bunch of liars and manipulators... which has been proven time after time... But that still leaves you free to prey on the uninformed newbies and people who just don't know any better... > Why didn't you state that you were referring to *dry* food? Another > selective omission? You tout Wellness as being so much "better" yet it > contains 27% carbohydrate.... big difference.... not. It is a huge difference. If all that makes it into the blood, it´s an extra 8 grams of glucose for every 100 grams of food. Why don´t you do a glucose curve and see for yourself? > And it probably contains *more* than 27% because many ingredients can be > listed as either protein or carbohydrate...especially with the "salad" > "fruit basket" that Wellness contains... Do you have any idea of how a guaranteed analysis is performed? > Wellness contains *more* plant products than Hill's... Lets prepare two dishes. One with a steak of 300g and 150g of a vegetable salad containing carrots, beets, cucumbers, tomatoes and cauliflower and another dish containing a steak of 100g, 200g of corn gluten and 150g of rice. Which one contains more *high quality* protein? Which one contains more carbs? (corn gluten is 40% carbs) In what order are the ingredients listed in SD and Wellness? > Three of the first four ingredients in most of Hill's canned food are > *animal* source protein - the first is water. The CHO is 5.8% AF. And how much is that on a DMB? That´s almost the same as 35% in dry. > Wellness CHO is 4.5% AF....another big difference.... not. Last I checked it was less than 3%. That´d be around 19% dmb. I also remember saying that I preferred canned foods without carbs. > Wellness protein content is 40% DMB, Hill's is 42%.... 40% of high quality protein versus 42% of a mix of low quality protein (corn gluten, 2nd ingredient) with high quality protein. > Forget the vets - Hill's out sells Wellness in the *stores* by more than 500 > to 1! Of course it does. People go to vets, see them recommending Hill´s and believe it´s a good product. Most of what you pay for a pack of Hill´s goes to marketing, gifts, and commissions to vets. Most of what you pay for a bag of Wellness goes to the ingredients. And that huge market share of low quality foods is also why so many chronic diseases have become epidemic. > Btw, where's all the science behind Wellness diets....? Have you heard of generics? A company does not have to engage in research to produce excellent quality products. They can use third party research. > Cat's don't eat "human grade" food as > their natural diet.... So you can't have it both ways.... True. They eat higher quality food, freshly killed, nutrients intact. But human grade is the best we can give them unless you want to give them live birds and mice. People feed live mice to their snakes and tarantulas, why not to their cats? > Where's all the science behind raw feeding??? Study biology and how organisms evolve to best adapt to their trophic niches. Why are cats´ teeth the way they are? Why is their digestive system the way it is? Why are their metabolic pathways the way they are? List all the differences between a cat and a rabbit. > Most of the veterinary literature opposes raw feeding.... I didn't see > Zoran recommend raw food in her article that you rely on so heavily and > keep posting ad nauseam... LOL. So that article really bothers you, huh? Because people can´t even take care of themselves when it comes to eating. I have mentioned this in a previous post. > Remember, *you* came to us with your scare tactics and manipulations trying > to push your raw diet as nauseam... I don´t push anything. I state that I believe that no animal can be healthy without raw food in its diet. I state that even a bit of raw daily or a "raw day" once a week can do wonders for their pets. I state that a raw diet is the best for a cat, followed by wet, and finally dry. What each person choses to do is in accordance with their possibilities and their beliefs. I have mentioned many times commercial foods that I judge good. Your comment about Wellness is proof. > I'm sure, by now, most people realize you and cult are largely a bunch of > liars and manipulators... Phil, most people are in contact with the real world. Cats are carnivores, cats eat meats. Zoos feed their cats meats. Cats eat meats in the wild. Cats have evolved eating meat. Cats are extremely well adapted to be meat eaters. At each pshychotic episode you are going to lose more and more contact with reality and as you age, these episodes become stronger. Go take your meds. > > Why didn't you state that you were referring to *dry* food? Another > > selective omission? You tout Wellness as being so much "better" yet it > > contains 27% carbohydrate.... big difference.... not. > > It is a huge difference. If You can't seem to answer a simple question without a verbose explaination to draw attention away from the original question. No wonder you're not :"in research" anymore! In addition to misinterpreting and manipulating studies, you probably spent half the day making mistakes and the other half making up excuses for your mistakes! <fodder snipped> > Of course it does. People go to vets, see them recommending Hill?s and > believe it?s a good product. If the cats didn't do well on the food, it wouldn't matter who recommended the food. Millions of people worldwide wouldn't continue to buy a food that made their pets sick or produced poor results.... You need to get out into the real world more often. Most of what you pay for a pack of Hill?s > goes to marketing, gifts, and commissions to vets. LOL! What is the source of this information? He said/she said from another obsessed Hill's hater or another au naturel cult fanatic? LOL! > > Btw, where's all the science behind Wellness diets....? > > Have you heard of generics? A company does not have to engage in > research to produce excellent quality products. They can use third > party research. IOW, there's no science behind their diets... There is nothing in the veterinary literature that has documented an advantage of feeding "human grade ingredients" to pets.... Its simply an advertizing gimmick based on anthropomorphism. What do you think you're getting for a few more cents per can? Prime rib? LOL! > > Cat's don't eat "human grade" food as > > their natural diet.... So you can't have it both ways.... > > True. > > Where's all the science behind raw feeding??? > > Study biology and how Lets try it again and see if you can answer the question.... Where's all the science behind raw feeding??? Controlled clinical studies that document an advantage of raw food.... > > Most of the veterinary literature opposes raw feeding.... I didn't see > > Zoran recommend raw food in her article that you rely on so heavily and > > keep posting ad nauseam... > > LOL. So that article really bothers you, huh? Why should it bother me? Actually, I'm flattered. My nutrition section says almost the *same thing* as hers and predates hers by >2 years! Its nice to have my nutrition section supported by an ACVIM Diplomate! Because of the striking similarities, she probably used my page as a reference like Pearson said she did... to which they're certainly welcome. > > Remember, *you* came to us with your scare tactics and manipulations trying > > to push your raw diet as nauseam... > > I don?t push anything. Bullsh!t. You came into this group in attack mode... and that's all you've doing ever since... attacking commercial food - especially Hill's, and trying to scare people with scare tactics, innuendoes, rumors and manipulated and misinterpreted information. > > I'm sure, by now, most people realize you and cult are largely a bunch of > > liars and manipulators... > > Phil, most people are in contact with the real world. Except you. I think your world consists of a computer screen and a chemistry set manual.... I work with real live cats and real live vets everyday and I see and talk with real live people in the pet stores every week - especially people who adopted their cats from us when they were kittens years ago. Nearly all of the kittens were weaned on Hill's and have been eating Hill's ever since. Not a *one* complaint and the cats are in excellent health. That's the *real world*. Where exactly does your "fountain of wisdom" come from? Other people's stories? Surely not from experience. > At each pshychotic episode "Psychotic episodes"? ROTFL! I think you should go back and read all yours and your appendage's psychotic rantings about Hill's! You'll see whose really psychotic... on second thought, you won't. I've seen a lot of people dislike various foods for various reasons, but I've *never* seen anyone with such an obsessive, venomous, malicious, vindictive, and actually pathological hatred for any food as you and your appendage have for Hill's.... You're detached from reality and totally oblivious to the *fact* that *millions* of cats worldwide have thrived on Hill's products for generations. Do you think a normal and rational person would accuse satisfied Hill's customers of "working for Hill's" and being "paid off by Hill's". That's clear evidence of paranoia, do you realize that? Silly question! Of course you don't! LOL! > > > Why didn't you state that you were referring to *dry* food? Another > > > selective omission? If you know that SD canned has meat as first 3 ingredients, and I´m criticizing a food that lists grains as first 2 ingredients, I would expect you to easily figure out what I was talking about. You have a real problem with thinking. > If the cats didn't do well on the food, it wouldn't matter who recommended > the food. Millions of people worldwide wouldn't continue to buy a food that > made their pets sick or produced poor results.... Worldwide? Where did you get that from? Just for the sake of *one* example, Hill´s market share here is below 1% and that´s very similar for every 3rd world country. There are people in this newsgroup from many different countries. I wonder if they agree with you. And definitively cats are *not* doing well at all. Chronic diseases have become epidemic, one can confirm that in nearly every veterinary site one visits. Don´t you read the newspapers about how the number of obese pets has become alarming? And that´s to mention only one disease. You must live in a little world inside your head. > IOW, there's no science behind their diets... So you´re stating that there´s no science behind a generic just because the company selling it has not done the research itself? > Where's all the science behind raw feeding??? Cats have thrived millions of years on raw food. What further evidence would anyone with at least five neurons need? Why don´t you write to the San Diego Zoo or any other big zoo and ask them why they feed raw to their cats if they have no science behind feeding raw? > Because of the striking similarities, she probably used my page as a > reference like Pearson said she did... to which they're certainly welcome. Talk about delusions of grandeur... > Bullsh!t. You came into this group in attack mode... and that's all you've > doing ever since... attacking commercial food - especially Hill's.. No. Criticizing poor quality foods and attacking Hill´s. If Hill´s pays someone to stay in this newsgroup to resort to the most absurd lies making other products look bad, why can´t someone do the same against Hill´s? There are many other foods out there I don´t like. Have I attacked them the way I attacked Hill´s? No. You know why? Cuz I don´t see any representative from those other companies here saying the outrageous crap Steve says. I don´t see other reps here treating their customers like complete morons. And if enough people start criticizing Hill´s and switching to other products, believe me, Hill´s will improve the quality of their food in the same way that they substituted eq for natural antioxidants. Who wins? The cats do. > Do you think a normal and rational person would accuse satisfied Hill's > customers of "working for Hill's" and being "paid off by Hill's". Satisfied customers? Would a satisfied customer send a competitor´s food for analysis like Gaubster said he did the other day? How stupid can you be? > > > > Why didn't you state that you were referring to *dry* food? Another > > > > selective omission? > > If you know that SD canned has meat as first 3 ingredients, and I?m > criticizing a food that lists grains as first 2 ingredients, I would > expect you to easily figure out what I was talking about. You really are a sleazy convoluting, manipulator, aren't you? I asked you "Why didn't you state that you were referring to *dry* food?", didn't I? So, obviously I *knew* you were referring to dry food. Why did you deliberately convolute my question? My question was for the benefit of others who may not have realized from your deceptive post that you were referring to dry food only... Unlike you, I don't think of only myself. You have a > real problem with thinking. I don't think so... but you sure have an obvious problem with basic human honesty... > > If the cats didn't do well on the food, it wouldn't matter who recommended > > the food. Millions of people worldwide wouldn't continue to buy a food that > > made their pets sick or produced poor results.... > > Worldwide? Where did you get that from? Try reading pet food industry magazines and supplements once in awhile instead of your chemistry set handbook and au naturel fanatical cult websites. You might learn what's actually going on in the real world outside of your psychosis ... And > definitively cats are *not* doing well at all. Chronic diseases have > become epidemic, Ahh, I see... So in your psychotic hatred for Hill's, you blame the world's feline diseases on Hill's... Okey dokey.... > You must live in a little world inside your head. ROTFL! No, I don't think so... But its quite obvious that you do! You really need to get out into the real world more often - or are you afraid you'll be arrested and committed? .... I'm in constant contact with cats, vets and the pet owning public... So I can say with absolute certainty, reality is very different from your perception of "reality"... > > IOW, there's no science behind their diets... > > So you?re stating that there?s no science behind a generic just > because the company selling it has not done the research itself? Here, let me spell it out for you: Where's the science behind any advantage or benefit of using "human grade" ingredients in pet foods? Is that a simple enough question for you? Do you think you can answer a question without manipulating it? > > Where's all the science behind raw feeding??? > > Cats have thrived millions of years on raw food. Answer the question without a verbose convoluted dissertation on the evolution of the cat.. *Where's the science behind feeding raw food?* "A benefit to feeding raw meat to cats has not been documented, and the disadvantages far outweigh any advantages." P Jane Armstrong,, DVM, MS, Diplomate, American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine (Internal Medicine) Professor, Internal Medicine/Clinical Nutrition, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Minnesota > > Because of the striking similarities, she probably used my page as a > > reference like Pearson said she did... to which they're certainly welcome. > > Talk about delusions of grandeur... ROTFL! I don't think so... My nutrition section predates theirs by >2 years... Compare the pages.... that's if you can manage to read what is *actually* written without manipulating and deliberately misinterpreting the data to suit your purpose, like you've been caught red-handed, before, deliberately misinterpreting and manipulating studies and surveys to suit your purpose... > > Bullsh!t. You came into this group in attack mode... and that's all you've > > doing ever since... attacking commercial food - especially Hill's.. > > No. Criticizing poor quality foods and attacking Hill?s. All you've done since you crawled out from under some rock is attack... not only Hill's but commercial pet foods in general. You just seem to have an obsessive, and apparently psychotic, hatred for Hill's in particular.. and Hill's is far from poor quality food - whether you want to accept that fact or not. If Hill?s > pays someone to stay in this newsgroup You actually think Hill's is paying Steve to push Hill's products in newsgroups? ROTFL! Your psychosis is much more serious than I thought! You're obviously incapable of understanding that Steve has a genuine love for cats and dogs as *species* and not just his own. <more psychotic ranting snipped> > > Do you think a normal and rational person would accuse satisfied Hill's > > customers of "working for Hill's" and being "paid off by Hill's". > > Satisfied customers? Would a satisfied customer Didn't you understand the question, or are convolution and manipulation integral parts of your thought process? I was referring to *your* psychotic accusations that I "worked for Hill's" and I was "paid off" by Hill's. How about your other psychotic remark that I "don't care" about my cats and I "don't care" what I feed them simply because I don't feed them a diet that *you* think I should? With that single, psychotic remark you indirectly offended and accused nearly *everyone* in this group, if not *everyone* who has cats of not caring about their cats simply because they don't agree with you! Go ahead, convolute, manipulate, and deliberately misinterpret this post to suit your purpose, too. That's really what you're the best at. >> Bullsh!t. You came into this group in attack mode... and that's all you've >> doing ever since... attacking commercial food - especially Hill's.. > If Hill´s >pays someone to stay in this newsgroup to resort to the most absurd >lies making other products look bad, why can´t someone do the same >against Hill´s? Who is Hill's paying to post here? Nobody to my knowledge. >Have I attac |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message