PDA

View Full Version : Pro-Plan versus Fancy Feast


cindys
June 24th 07, 06:40 PM
Alex was recently off his food for a couple of days, so my vet suggested
that I try (canned) Pro-Plan (for the sake of its ostensible palatability),
which I did. He seemed to like a few of the flavors. However, in looking at
the labels, it lists by-products amongst the first four ingredients of mosty
of its flavors (at least the ones I checked), and it's made by the Purina
company just like Fancy Feast, which I buy for my cats (in addition to the
Wellness), but I do consider the Fancy Feast to be "junk food" for cats. To
my mind, I can't see much difference between Pro-Plan and Fancy Feast. I
didn't mind buying the Pro-Plan because Alex did like it, and it was on sale
this week at Petco, which brought it down to the same price as the Fancy
Feast at the supermarket, but does anyone here think there is any real
difference in quality between the two?
Thanks in advance.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

cybercat
June 24th 07, 07:34 PM
"cindys" > wrote
> Wellness), but I do consider the Fancy Feast to be "junk food" for cats.

Based upon what ingredients?

Matthew
June 24th 07, 07:34 PM
"cindys" > wrote in message
...
> Alex was recently off his food for a couple of days, so my vet suggested
> that I try (canned) Pro-Plan (for the sake of its ostensible
> palatability), which I did. He seemed to like a few of the flavors.
> However, in looking at the labels, it lists by-products amongst the first
> four ingredients of mosty of its flavors (at least the ones I checked),
> and it's made by the Purina company just like Fancy Feast, which I buy for
> my cats (in addition to the Wellness), but I do consider the Fancy Feast
> to be "junk food" for cats. To my mind, I can't see much difference
> between Pro-Plan and Fancy Feast. I didn't mind buying the Pro-Plan
> because Alex did like it, and it was on sale this week at Petco, which
> brought it down to the same price as the Fancy Feast at the supermarket,
> but does anyone here think there is any real difference in quality between
> the two?
> Thanks in advance.
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.
I have Rumble on a Fancy feast diet to control his diabetes. I have had
several vets including mine and also several members of this group recommend
me to use Fancy Feast to help his diabetes. Rumble has had a positive
result and been on insulin for over a year being on this diet. I use any of
the varieties that have gravy in them that are not roasted, grilled or
minced

cybercat
June 24th 07, 07:42 PM
"Matthew" > wrote
> I have Rumble on a Fancy feast diet to control his diabetes. I have had
> several vets including mine and also several members of this group
> recommend me to use Fancy Feast to help his diabetes. Rumble has had a
> positive result and been on insulin for over a year being on this diet. I
> use any of the varieties that have gravy in them that are not roasted,
> grilled or minced
>
*scratching my head* What does that leave?

(I cannot use the kind with gravy because they almost always have some
wheat gluten, and I am pretty sure wheat is what Gracie is allergic to.)

cindys
June 24th 07, 08:10 PM
"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "cindys" > wrote
>> Wellness), but I do consider the Fancy Feast to be "junk food" for cats.
>
> Based upon what ingredients?
----------
I am troubled by the byproducts as opposed to 100% organ meats. But you make
a good point...When I say FF is "junk food for cats," I am in fact parroting
what other people have said. Why do people call it "junk food?" The
expression "junk food" implies that a product contains a lot of tasty albeit
non-nutritious fillers. I don't know that I would actually classify FF that
way. I do believe that Wellness is a much better quality product, but that
doesn't mean that FF is a "junk food." FTR, my cats prefer FF to Wellness.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

Matthew
June 24th 07, 08:11 PM
"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Matthew" > wrote
>> I have Rumble on a Fancy feast diet to control his diabetes. I have had
>> several vets including mine and also several members of this group
>> recommend me to use Fancy Feast to help his diabetes. Rumble has had a
>> positive result and been on insulin for over a year being on this diet.
>> I use any of the varieties that have gravy in them that are not roasted,
>> grilled or minced
>>
> *scratching my head* What does that leave?
>
> (I cannot use the kind with gravy because they almost always have some
> wheat gluten, and I am pretty sure wheat is what Gracie is allergic to.)
I have no choice for Rumble he will not eat anything that does not have
gravy in it. I can't use roasted, minced, or grilled since it has higher
levels in it

cindys
June 24th 07, 08:23 PM
"Matthew" > wrote in message
...
>
> "cindys" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Alex was recently off his food for a couple of days, so my vet suggested
>> that I try (canned) Pro-Plan (for the sake of its ostensible
>> palatability), which I did. He seemed to like a few of the flavors.
>> However, in looking at the labels, it lists by-products amongst the first
>> four ingredients of mosty of its flavors (at least the ones I checked),
>> and it's made by the Purina company just like Fancy Feast, which I buy
>> for my cats (in addition to the Wellness), but I do consider the Fancy
>> Feast to be "junk food" for cats. To my mind, I can't see much difference
>> between Pro-Plan and Fancy Feast. I didn't mind buying the Pro-Plan
>> because Alex did like it, and it was on sale this week at Petco, which
>> brought it down to the same price as the Fancy Feast at the supermarket,
>> but does anyone here think there is any real difference in quality
>> between the two?
>> Thanks in advance.
>> Best regards,
>> ---Cindy S.
> I have Rumble on a Fancy feast diet to control his diabetes. I have had
> several vets including mine and also several members of this group
> recommend me to use Fancy Feast to help his diabetes. Rumble has had a
> positive result and been on insulin for over a year being on this diet. I
> use any of the varieties that have gravy in them that are not roasted,
> grilled or minced
----------
The truth of the matter is that when Alex was first diagnosed with diabetes,
and the vet told me to switch him to canned, I started feeding him Friskies
Special Diet and supermarket-brand canned cat food at 25 cents a can. And
his blood sugar returned to normal, and he was doing fine even on these
products. Then, I moved to FF because I considered that it was better
quality. As time went on, after reading this newsgroup, and after I did a
bunch of reading on the internet about the importance/quality of muscle
meats as opposed to byproducts and after I read some excerpts from the book
_Foods Pets Die For_ and learned the source of those byproducts, and then of
course the melamine thing, I wanted to feed my cats human grade cat food
which by definition cannot contain byproducts. I also needed to choose one
that contained few carbohydrates because of the diabetes and that was how I
eventually came to Wellness. At one point, I was buying Pet Promise, which I
still think is an excellent quality food, but it does contain rice and
potatoes. I had asked my vet if she thought FF was a good choice, and she
stated that she wouldn't recommend any supermarket pet food. I currently
have been feeding my cats Wellness and FF because they really like it
(despite the byproducts). My cats seem to only be willing to eat the pate
varieties. I try to avoid the varieties that are chunks or slices in gravy
because my cats just lick off the gravy and leave the rest.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

cybercat
June 24th 07, 09:25 PM
"cindys" > wrote in message
...
>
> "cybercat" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "cindys" > wrote
>>> Wellness), but I do consider the Fancy Feast to be "junk food" for cats.
>>
>> Based upon what ingredients?
> ----------
> I am troubled by the byproducts as opposed to 100% organ meats.

I am confused by your use of "byproducts as opposed to 100% organ
meats." I thought organ meats were included in the term "byproducts"
and that when an ingredient is listed as "beef, chicken," and so forth
that it was muscle meat. I could be wrong.

In any case, there are several flavors in which meat, not byproducts, is
the first ingredient. For example, the flavor my cats eat more than any
other is "Tender Beef Feast." The ingredients are listed below:

"Beef, Beef Broth, Liver, Fish, Meat Byproducts, Natural and artificial
flavors, guar gum, potassium chloride, salt, taurie, thiamine mononitrate
(vitamin B-1), Vitamine E supplement, SodiumNitrite to promote color
retention, ferrous sulfate, zinc sulfate, magnesium sulfate, Vitamin A
supplement, copper sulfate, pyroxidine hydrochoride (Vitamin B6),
Dicalcium phosphate, niacin, calcium pantothenate, Riboflavin supplement
(Vitamin B-2), Cobalt carbonate, Vitamin D-3 supplement, Vitamin B-12
supplement, Menadione Bisodium Sulfate Complex (Source of Vitamin K
activity), Folic Acid, Potassium Iodide, Biotin."

I asked my vet about these ingredients and she said most are vitamin
supplements and some are preservatives. The only one that makes me
nervous is sodium nitrite, due to the many studies linking this preservative
to cancer in lab rats, but then again, it is in my ham and hot dogs too.

Wellness beef and chicken canned cat food, one of the five flavors
it offers that are grain free (important for my cat because she has
allergies,
and for every cat because grains are used as fillers and cats need meat)
has the following ingredients:

Beef & Chicken Ingredients: Beef, Chicken Liver, Deboned Chicken, Beef
Broth,
Sweet Potatoes, Carrots, Vegetable Gums, Flaxseed, Potassium Chloride,
Alfalfa,
Cranberries, Blueberries, Yellow Squash, Yellow Zucchini, Garlic, Dicalcium
Phosphate,
Spirulina, Taurine, Choline Chloride, Vitamin E, A, D-3, And B-12
Supplements,
Beta Carotene, Thiamine Mononitrate, Niacin Supplement, Iron Sulfate, Zinc
Oxide,
Calcium Pantothenate, Iron Proteinate (Source Of Chelated Iron), Zinc
Proteinate
(Source Of Chelated Zinc), Copper Sulfate, Manganous Oxide, Pyridoxine
Hydrochloride,
Copper Proteinate(Source Of Chelated Copper), Biotin, Manganese Proteinate
(Source Of Chelated Manganese), Calcium Iodate, Riboflavin Supplement, Folic
Acid,
Sodium Selenite.

I like the lack of artifical flavors in this Wellness. That could definitely
be considered
"junky," in my book, but handy when palatability is important, as with old
cats and
sick cats who must be encouraged to eat. I like that Wellness had no
nitrites. I also
like that the vitamins are chelated, which they are not in FF. (It is my
understanding
that chelation makes the compounds more available to the body.)

Otherwise, I see a bunch of vegetables and fruits designed to appeal to
humans, but
which cats, as obligate carnivores, can very likely do without. In addition,
garlic has
been demonstrated to cause health problems for cats, so it has no place in
cat food,
and again, appeals more to humans than cats.

I also noticed that at the site I checked, a 3-oz can of Wellness beef and
chicken is 99 cents,
whereas Fancy Feast runs 44 to 65 cents most places. I would not pay twice
the price for
the few benefits I see there for my cats, particularly since the
negatives--starch where there
should be protein and the addition of garlic--are pretty big ones.

I also noted that the 5.5 oz can of beef and chicken Wellness could be had
for $1.19 at
the web site I visited, which brings it down around the price of Fancy
Feast.

I like these kinds of discussions. Thanks.

cybercat
June 24th 07, 09:29 PM
"cindys" > wrote
> ----------

>I try to avoid the varieties that are chunks or slices in gravy because my
>cats just lick off the gravy and leave the rest.

Mine do this too!

cindys
June 24th 07, 11:14 PM
"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "cindys" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "cybercat" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "cindys" > wrote
>>>> Wellness), but I do consider the Fancy Feast to be "junk food" for
>>>> cats.
>>>
>>> Based upon what ingredients?
>> ----------
>> I am troubled by the byproducts as opposed to 100% organ meats.
>
> I am confused by your use of "byproducts as opposed to 100% organ
> meats." I thought organ meats were included in the term "byproducts"
> and that when an ingredient is listed as "beef, chicken," and so forth
> that it was muscle meat. I could be wrong.

Check out this website for a description of meat byproducts:
http://www.aplus-flint-river-ranch.com/define-animal-byproducts.php?win=small
While I understand that Flint River Ranch is promoting its own pet food (and
knocking others), what this website is describing is very similar to what I
have read on other websites. The "muscle meats" are first quality meats from
the muscle itself (as opposed to the intestine, feet, skin etc i.e. rendered
byproducts). It is illegal to put meat byproducts in human grade food.

>
> In any case, there are several flavors in which meat, not byproducts, is
> the first ingredient. For example, the flavor my cats eat more than any
> other is "Tender Beef Feast." The ingredients are listed below:

You don't have to sell me on the "Tender Beef Feast." I have an entire shelf
filled with it and two cases of it on order from Pet Food Direct. As far as
I can tell, it's the only variety of FF that doesn't list byproducts in the
first four ingredients.

>
> Wellness beef and chicken canned cat food, one of the five flavors
> it offers that are grain free (important for my cat because she has
> allergies,

The only flavor of Wellness I have ever given my cats is the Beef and
Chicken. It's not that I would be averse to trying the other flavors but
Wellness is not readily available to me in a store (unlike FF, which I could
buy at the supermarket but order only for convenience). So, I am reluctant
to get stuck with an entire case of cat food my cats won't eat. The first
time I ordered, I knew that Beef and Chicken was a safe bet, but I would be
afraid to order the Chicken and Herring flavor, for example because Pet Food
Direct is by the case only, and I don't know if my cats would like that
flavor.

snip for brevity

>
> Otherwise, I see a bunch of vegetables and fruits designed to appeal to
> humans, but

I agree completely. As one person on this group quipped, no one's ever heard
of packs of cats hanging out in cranberry bogs.


> which cats, as obligate carnivores, can very likely do without. In
> addition, garlic has
> been demonstrated to cause health problems for cats, so it has no place in
> cat food,
> and again, appeals more to humans than cats.

Cats like the taste of garlic, and it's added to the food to make the food
more palatable for them. I did ask my vet about this, and she said that the
amount of garlic in the cat food was minute and not enough to harm them.
Nevertheless, Wellness does make some garlic-free flavors because a lot of
cat owners don't want to give their cats the food with the garlic.
>
> I also noticed that at the site I checked, a 3-oz can of Wellness beef and
> chicken is 99 cents,

When I order from Pet Food Direct, the regular price of a case (24 cans) of
the 5.5-oz sized can of Wellness is $27 and change (that's before the
discount, tax, and shipping). The 20% discount more or less wipes out the
shipping charge and then some. So, in the end I'm paying around a dollar a
can for the 5.5-oz size of Wellness (give or take a few cents). The FF does
not come in 5.5-oz cans. It comes only in 3 oz cans. This time, it was on
sale from Pet Food Direct, so I got it for 41 cents a can (the sale may
still be on - check it out - $9.99 per case and the GEICO promotional code
is 20% off). The regular price for FF in my supermarket is 48 cents for the
3-oz can, so in the end, the difference in price between FF and Wellness is
negligible (around a dollar a can for 5.5 oz Wellness versus about a dollar
for two cans of 3-oz FF).

> whereas Fancy Feast runs 44 to 65 cents most places. I would not pay twice
> the price for
> the few benefits I see there for my cats, particularly since the
> negatives--starch where there
> should be protein and the addition of garlic--are pretty big ones.
>
> I also noted that the 5.5 oz can of beef and chicken Wellness could be had
> for $1.19 at
> the web site I visited, which brings it down around the price of Fancy
> Feast.

I should have read further down your note before writing my shpiel above.
Agreed. Today, I went to Petco to get the Pro-Plan on sale for 50 cents for
a 3-oz can (regular price 79 cents). The Pro-Plan Selects are a lot like the
Wellness (first four or five ingredents are organ meats, no meat byproducts,
followed by the usual list of useless vegetables and berries). They seem to
be much better quality than the regular Pro-Plan where many of the flavors
contain the byproducts and wheat gluten and fillers. When I got up to the
register, it turned out that Selects were not on sale...only the regular
Pro-Plan was on sale. I was not inclined to pay 79 cents for a 3-oz can of
cat food. As I said in the beginning, my gut feeling is that Pro-Plan is the
same as FF under a different label. It's one thing to pay 48 cents for FF,
but I wouldn't pay 79 cents for 3 ounces of any cat food (unless it were
some special prescription food from the vet)
>
> I like these kinds of discussions. Thanks.

Me too. On my list of "to read" books is Ann Martin's book _The Foods Pets
Die For_. It was written in 1996 long before the melamine problem. I
mentioned it to my vet this past week. She said she had never heard of it. I
read an excerpt on Amazon, and it made my hair stand on end. Here's another
point about Wellness: It's manufactured in a factory where human food is
manufactured as well and is considered human grade food, therefore it has to
meet FDA standards, unlike pet foods which are produced in a pet food
factory (which would include the Pro-Plan and Fancy Feast - which our cats
love so much). If it seems like the information in the book is for real,
I'll order a copy for my vet as well.

Thanks for a good discussion.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

>
>

Phil P.
June 24th 07, 11:19 PM
"cindys" > wrote in message
...

Hiya Cindi,


> products. Then, I moved to FF because I considered that it was better
> quality.

It is- much higher protein content.


As time went on, after reading this newsgroup, and after I did a
> bunch of reading on the internet about the importance/quality of muscle
> meats as opposed to byproducts

Actually, by-products contain *much* more nutrients than muscle meats.
Muscle meat (skeletal meat) is very deficient in most vitamins and minerals,
Cats in the wild eat much more by-products than skeletal meat


and after I read some excerpts from the book
> _Foods Pets Die For_ and learned the source of those byproducts,


Oh no! Not Ann Martin! LOL! We sliced, diced and shredded most of her
bull**** exaggerations a few years ago. She hasn't been back since. Her
bull**** claims and exaggerations didn't stand up to scrutiny. She took a
few isolated instances from a few low-end generic pet food manufacturers and
extrapolated then to the whole pet food industry. If you ask me, she isn't
playing with a full deck--



and then of
> course the melamine thing,


A real nightmare for sure. But that was actually caused by one person. Watch
the incidence of CRF in cats start declining. The person didn't just decide
to dump a load of melamine in the wheat gluten- it was gradual-- to see how
much he could get away with-

I wanted to feed my cats human grade cat food
> which by definition cannot contain byproducts.

I'm not sure you really understand what by-products are. Human foods
contain by-products.

This is the AAFCO definition:



"Meat by-products is the non-rendered, clean parts, other than meat, derived
from slaughtered mammals. It includes, but is not limited to, lungs, spleen,
kidneys, brain, livers, blood, bone, partially defatted low temperature
fatty tissue, and stomachs and intestines freed of their contents. It does
not include hair, horns, teeth and hoofs. It shall be suitable for use in
animal food. If it bears name descriptive of its kind, it must correspond
thereto. (9.3)"



I also needed to choose one
> that contained few carbohydrates because of the diabetes and that was how
I
> eventually came to Wellness.

I don't know if you know that Wellnesss is manufactured by Menu Foods, too.
Wellness also contains a lot of vegetables which have a higher glycemic
index than most grains.


At one point, I was buying Pet Promise, which I
> still think is an excellent quality food, but it does contain rice and
> potatoes. I had asked my vet if she thought FF was a good choice, and she
> stated that she wouldn't recommend any supermarket pet food.

Most vets are clueless about nutrition. They're "educated" by pet food
manufacturers' reps.


I currently
> have been feeding my cats Wellness and FF because they really like it
> (despite the byproducts). My cats seem to only be willing to eat the pate
> varieties. I try to avoid the varieties that are chunks or slices in gravy
> because my cats just lick off the gravy and leave the rest.
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.

I'm really happy you've weaned your cat off insulin!!! I've weaned several
diabetic cats off insulin by feeding them Fancy Feast Oceanfish and Tuna. I
also had good results with Nutro California Chicken a few years ago, but I
think Nutro changed their formula. Nutro is another company that used to
make great food but slid dow the pole.

Best of luck,

Phil

Cheryl
June 25th 07, 01:35 AM
On Sun 24 Jun 2007 06:19:06p, Phil P. wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav <news:[email protected]>:

> and then of
>> course the melamine thing,
>
>
> A real nightmare for sure. But that was actually caused by one
> person. Watch the incidence of CRF in cats start declining. The
> person didn't just decide to dump a load of melamine in the
> wheat gluten- it was gradual-- to see how much he could get away
> with-

Interesting thought. I'd bet that you're right. I keep reading that
CRF is the biggest killer illnesses in cats.

--
Cheryl

Matthew
June 25th 07, 01:53 AM
"Phil P." >

I don't know if you say or not Phil but Rumble has been one year off of
insulin due to your and a few others recommendations

THANK YOU ALL AGAIN

cindys
June 27th 07, 04:55 PM
"Phil P." > wrote in message
news:[email protected]
>
> "cindys" > wrote in message
> ...
>
> Hiya Cindi,

Hi yourself, Phil!
>
>
>> products. Then, I moved to FF because I considered that it was better
>> quality.
>
> It is- much higher protein content.
>
>
> As time went on, after reading this newsgroup, and after I did a
>> bunch of reading on the internet about the importance/quality of muscle
>> meats as opposed to byproducts
>
> Actually, by-products contain *much* more nutrients than muscle meats.
> Muscle meat (skeletal meat) is very deficient in most vitamins and
> minerals,
> Cats in the wild eat much more by-products than skeletal meat

I thought the by-products were processed parts of the animals, parts that
were unusable for humans and would be rejected by the FDA.

>
>
> and after I read some excerpts from the book
>> _Foods Pets Die For_ and learned the source of those byproducts,
>
>
> Oh no! Not Ann Martin! LOL! We sliced, diced and shredded most of her
> bull**** exaggerations a few years ago. She hasn't been back since.

Thanks for saving me time and money. I was going to buy her book. Now, I
won't.


>Her
> bull**** claims and exaggerations didn't stand up to scrutiny. She took a
> few isolated instances from a few low-end generic pet food manufacturers
> and
> extrapolated then to the whole pet food industry. If you ask me, she
> isn't
> playing with a full deck--
>
>
>
> and then of
>> course the melamine thing,
>
>
> A real nightmare for sure. But that was actually caused by one person.

Yup.


>Watch
> the incidence of CRF in cats start declining. The person didn't just
> decide
> to dump a load of melamine in the wheat gluten- it was gradual-- to see
> how
> much he could get away with-

Yup.

>
> I wanted to feed my cats human grade cat food
>> which by definition cannot contain byproducts.
>
> I'm not sure you really understand what by-products are. Human foods
> contain by-products.
>
> This is the AAFCO definition:
>
>
>
> "Meat by-products is the non-rendered, clean parts, other than meat,
> derived
> from slaughtered mammals. It includes, but is not limited to, lungs,
> spleen,
> kidneys, brain, livers, blood, bone, partially defatted low temperature
> fatty tissue, and stomachs and intestines freed of their contents. It does
> not include hair, horns, teeth and hoofs. It shall be suitable for use in
> animal food. If it bears name descriptive of its kind, it must correspond
> thereto. (9.3)"

This is just the opposite of what I thought the byproducts were. I thought
they were rendered, nonclean parts etc and *did* include horns, hair, teeth,
hoofs, etc However, I *thought* I got my information regarding the
preferability of muscle meats from the website where the veterinarian
explains about cat food and then recommends a few different ones, but I've
read so many things, I really can't say for sure.

>
> I also needed to choose one
>> that contained few carbohydrates because of the diabetes and that was how
> I
>> eventually came to Wellness.
>
> I don't know if you know that Wellnesss is manufactured by Menu Foods,
> too.
> Wellness also contains a lot of vegetables which have a higher glycemic
> index than most grains.

Interesting.
>
>
> At one point, I was buying Pet Promise, which I
>> still think is an excellent quality food, but it does contain rice and
>> potatoes. I had asked my vet if she thought FF was a good choice, and she
>> stated that she wouldn't recommend any supermarket pet food.
>
> Most vets are clueless about nutrition. They're "educated" by pet food
> manufacturers' reps.

I can't speak for the supermarket brand, but I did know the Pet Promise was
good food and it was available in the supermarket. When I asked the vet
about it, she was completely unfamiliar with it.
>
>
> I currently
>> have been feeding my cats Wellness and FF because they really like it
>> (despite the byproducts). My cats seem to only be willing to eat the pate
>> varieties. I try to avoid the varieties that are chunks or slices in
>> gravy
>> because my cats just lick off the gravy and leave the rest.
>> Best regards,
>> ---Cindy S.
>
> I'm really happy you've weaned your cat off insulin!!!

It happened almost immediately after I put him on canned food (and Purina OM
dry).

>I've weaned several
> diabetic cats off insulin by feeding them Fancy Feast Oceanfish and Tuna.

That's another flavor I sometimes buy in addition to the Tender Beef Feast.

Phil, I just want to thank you again for all your help. I also want to share
with you (and don't ask me how this could be, but I'm not going to look a
gift horse in the mouth), that Alex's BUN is back to being within normal
limits. His creatinine is still abnormal but has come down considerably and
is much closer to the normal range. I followed your advice and did not put
him on low protein cat food (contrary to the vet's advice). I also give him
potassium and omega-3 supplementation on the basis of your advice. I have
done subcu fluids a few times, but overall not, as the vet says he doesn't
really need them at this point. I can't say he's bouncy and perky, but for a
senior cat, he's doing okay. I do give him Pepcid daily now and that seems
to keep his appetite up. The vet now says he seems stable, and even though
he has CRF, he could potentially stay at his current numbers for several
years without the disease actually progressing.

Once again, thank you so much for all your help.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

>I
> also had good results with Nutro California Chicken a few years ago, but I
> think Nutro changed their formula. Nutro is another company that used to
> make great food but slid dow the pole.
>
> Best of luck,
>
> Phil
>
>

Rhonda
June 27th 07, 07:51 PM
cindys wrote:
> This is just the opposite of what I thought the byproducts were. I thought
> they were rendered, nonclean parts etc and *did* include horns, hair, teeth,
> hoofs, etc However, I *thought* I got my information regarding the
> preferability of muscle meats from the website where the veterinarian
> explains about cat food and then recommends a few different ones, but I've
> read so many things, I really can't say for sure.

Hey Cindy,

This was an interesting bit of additional grossness from one cat site:

--------------------
Definition: Meat By-Products are parts of slaughtered animals, not
including meat (please note: no muscle meat included). Included are
lungs, spleen, kidneys, brain, liver, blood, bone, partially defatted
low-temperature fatty tissue, and stomach and intestines freed of their
contents.

What AAFCO doesn't mention is that meat byproducts may also legally
contain: "4D animals (dead, dying, diseased, down), road kill,
euthanized cats and dogs, including their collars. These source products
are rendered, the fat is siphoned off to be used as "animal fat," and
the remaining material is extruded to form "meat by-product meal."

From: http://cats.about.com/od/catfoodglossary/g/meatbyprod.htm
--------------------

Ick!

And don't get me started on gelatin for humans. I can no longer eat
Jello (or gummi bears for that matter) since I found out it's boiled
bones and tissues and stuff.

Charlie -- the sun will come out tomorrow.

Rhonda

cindys
June 27th 07, 08:39 PM
"Rhonda" > wrote in message
...
> cindys wrote:
>> This is just the opposite of what I thought the byproducts were. I
>> thought they were rendered, nonclean parts etc and *did* include horns,
>> hair, teeth, hoofs, etc However, I *thought* I got my information
>> regarding the preferability of muscle meats from the website where the
>> veterinarian explains about cat food and then recommends a few different
>> ones, but I've read so many things, I really can't say for sure.
>
> Hey Cindy,
>
> This was an interesting bit of additional grossness from one cat site:
>
> --------------------
> Definition: Meat By-Products are parts of slaughtered animals, not
> including meat (please note: no muscle meat included). Included are lungs,
> spleen, kidneys, brain, liver, blood, bone, partially defatted
> low-temperature fatty tissue, and stomach and intestines freed of their
> contents.
>
> What AAFCO doesn't mention is that meat byproducts may also legally
> contain: "4D animals (dead, dying, diseased, down), road kill, euthanized
> cats and dogs, including their collars. These source products are
> rendered, the fat is siphoned off to be used as "animal fat," and the
> remaining material is extruded to form "meat by-product meal."
>
> From: http://cats.about.com/od/catfoodglossary/g/meatbyprod.htm
> --------------------

This is what I previously read as well (but on a different website). That
was precisely why I was trying to avoid cat food with byproducts.
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

>
> Ick!
>
> And don't get me started on gelatin for humans. I can no longer eat Jello
> (or gummi bears for that matter) since I found out it's boiled bones and
> tissues and stuff.
>
> Charlie -- the sun will come out tomorrow.
>
> Rhonda
>

cybercat
June 27th 07, 09:18 PM
"Rhonda" > wrote
> Hey Cindy,
>
> This was an interesting bit of additional grossness from one cat site:
>
> --------------------
> Definition: Meat By-Products are parts of slaughtered animals, not
> including meat (please note: no muscle meat included). Included are lungs,
> spleen, kidneys, brain, liver, blood, bone, partially defatted
> low-temperature fatty tissue, and stomach and intestines freed of their
> contents.
>
> What AAFCO doesn't mention is that meat byproducts may also legally
> contain: "4D animals (dead, dying, diseased, down), road kill, euthanized
> cats and dogs, including their collars. These source products are
> rendered, the fat is siphoned off to be used as "animal fat," and the
> remaining material is extruded to form "meat by-product meal."
>
> From: http://cats.about.com/od/catfoodglossary/g/meatbyprod.htm
> --------------------

Rhonda, I don't believe that the pet food we buy in the US can contain
euthanized dogs and cats and their collars.

Horse ****.

cybercat
June 27th 07, 09:26 PM
"Rhonda" > wrote
> What AAFCO doesn't mention is that meat byproducts may also legally
> contain: "4D animals (dead, dying, diseased, down), road kill, euthanized
> cats and dogs, including their collars. These source products are
> rendered, the fat is siphoned off to be used as "animal fat," and the
> remaining material is extruded to form "meat by-product meal."

I note that although the author puts this section in quotes, she does not
name her source. I looked but can't find a way to email her from the site.
It may be true, but it sure doesn't ring true to me.

cindys
June 27th 07, 10:40 PM
"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Rhonda" > wrote
>> What AAFCO doesn't mention is that meat byproducts may also legally
>> contain: "4D animals (dead, dying, diseased, down), road kill, euthanized
>> cats and dogs, including their collars. These source products are
>> rendered, the fat is siphoned off to be used as "animal fat," and the
>> remaining material is extruded to form "meat by-product meal."
>
> I note that although the author puts this section in quotes, she does not
> name her source. I looked but can't find a way to email her from the site.
> It may be true, but it sure doesn't ring true to me.
--------
Maybe her source was Ann Martin ?
Best regards,
---Cindy S.

Cheryl
June 28th 07, 02:48 AM
On Wed 27 Jun 2007 04:26:56p, cybercat wrote in
rec.pets.cats.health+behav >:

> "Rhonda" > wrote
>> What AAFCO doesn't mention is that meat byproducts may also
>> legally contain: "4D animals (dead, dying, diseased, down),
>> road kill, euthanized cats and dogs, including their collars.
>> These source products are rendered, the fat is siphoned off to
>> be used as "animal fat," and the remaining material is extruded
>> to form "meat by-product meal."
>
> I note that although the author puts this section in quotes, she
> does not name her source. I looked but can't find a way to email
> her from the site. It may be true, but it sure doesn't ring true
> to me.

Nothing about pet food surprises me anymore. What I go on is how
my cats health is. Are they thriving? Suffering? I'm beginning to
think that bloodwork at every yearly exam has to be done. We need
baselines of their health.

--
Cheryl

Rhonda
June 28th 07, 08:30 AM
cybercat wrote:
> "Rhonda" > wrote
>
>>Hey Cindy,
>>
>>This was an interesting bit of additional grossness from one cat site:
>>
>>--------------------
>>Definition: Meat By-Products are parts of slaughtered animals, not
>>including meat (please note: no muscle meat included). Included are lungs,
>>spleen, kidneys, brain, liver, blood, bone, partially defatted
>>low-temperature fatty tissue, and stomach and intestines freed of their
>>contents.
>>
>>What AAFCO doesn't mention is that meat byproducts may also legally
>>contain: "4D animals (dead, dying, diseased, down), road kill, euthanized
>>cats and dogs, including their collars. These source products are
>>rendered, the fat is siphoned off to be used as "animal fat," and the
>>remaining material is extruded to form "meat by-product meal."
>>
>>From: http://cats.about.com/od/catfoodglossary/g/meatbyprod.htm
>>--------------------
>
>
> Rhonda, I don't believe that the pet food we buy in the US can contain
> euthanized dogs and cats and their collars.
>
> Horse ****.

Oh no. Horse **** is now in pet foods too?

Rhonda ;)

Rhonda
June 28th 07, 08:35 AM
cybercat wrote:
> "Rhonda" > wrote
>
>>What AAFCO doesn't mention is that meat byproducts may also legally
>>contain: "4D animals (dead, dying, diseased, down), road kill, euthanized
>>cats and dogs, including their collars. These source products are
>>rendered, the fat is siphoned off to be used as "animal fat," and the
>>remaining material is extruded to form "meat by-product meal."
>
>
> I note that although the author puts this section in quotes, she does not
> name her source. I looked but can't find a way to email her from the site.
> It may be true, but it sure doesn't ring true to me.


Okay, I read a few more sites. Below is part of an interesting one. I
think from now on I'm just going to feed our cats mice. -Rhonda

Animal Protein

Dogs and cats are carnivores, and do best on a meat-based diet. The
protein used in pet food comes from a variety of sources. When cattle,
swine, chickens, lambs, or other animals are slaughtered, lean muscle
tissue is trimmed away from the carcass for human consumption, along
with the few organs that people like to eat, such as tongues and tripe.

However, about 50% of every food animal does not get used in human
foods. Whatever remains of the carcass — heads, feet, bones, blood,
intestines, lungs, spleens, livers, ligaments, fat trimmings, unborn
babies, and other parts not generally consumed by humans — is used in
pet food, animal feed, fertilizer, industrial lubricants, soap, rubber,
and other products. These “other parts” are known as “by-products.”
By-products are used in feed for poultry and livestock as well as in pet
food.

The nutritional quality of by-products, meals, and digests can vary from
batch to batch. James Morris and Quinton Rogers, of the University of
California at Davis Veterinary School, assert that, “[pet food]
ingredients are generally by-products of the meat, poultry and fishing
industries, with the potential for a wide variation in nutrient
composition. Claims of nutritional adequacy of pet foods based on the
current Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) nutrient
allowances (‘profiles’) do not give assurances of nutritional adequacy
and will not until ingredients are analyzed and bioavailability values
are incorporated.”3

Meat or poultry “by-products” are very common in wet pet foods. Remember
that “meat” refers to only cows, swine, sheep, and goats. Since sheep
and goats are rare compared to the 37 million cows and 100 million hogs
slaughtered for food every year, nearly all meat by-products come from
cattle and pigs.

The better brands of pet food, such as many “super-premium,” “natural,”
and “organic” varieties, do not use by-products. On the label, you’ll
see one or more named meats among the first few ingredients, such as
“turkey” or “lamb.” These meats are still mainly leftover scraps; in the
case of poultry, bones are allowed, so “chicken” consists mainly of
backs and frames—the spine and ribs, minus their expensive breast meat.
The small amount of meat left on the bones is the meat in the pet food.
Even with this less-attractive source, pet food marketers are very
tricky when talking about meat, so this is explained further in the
section on “Marketing Magic” below.

Meat meals, poultry meals, by-product meals, and meat-and-bone meal are
common ingredients in dry pet foods. The term “meal” means that these
materials are not used fresh, but have been rendered. While there are
chicken, turkey, and poultry by-product meals there is no equivalent
term for mammal “meat by-product meal” — it is called
“meat-and-bone-meal.” It may also be referred to by species, such as
“beef-and-bone-meal” or “pork-and-bone-meal.”

What is rendering? As defined by Webster’s Dictionary, to render is “to
process as for industrial use: to render livestock carcasses and to
extract oil from fat, blubber, etc., by melting.” In other words, raw
materials are dumped into large vat and boiled for several hours.
Rendering separates fat, removes water, and kills bacteria, viruses,
parasites, and other organisms. However, the high temperatures used
(270°F/130°C) can alter or destroy natural enzymes and proteins found in
the raw ingredients.

Because of persistent rumors that rendered by-products contain dead dogs
and cats, the FDA conducted a study looking for pentobarbital, the most
common euthanasia drug, in pet foods. They found it. Ingredients that
were most commonly associated with the presence of pentobarbital were
meat-and-bone-meal and animal fat. However, they also used very
sensitive tests to look for canine and feline DNA, which were not found.
Industry insiders admit that rendered pets and roadkill were used in pet
food some years ago. Although there are still no laws or regulations
against it, the practice is uncommon today, and pet food companies
universally deny that their products contain any such materials.
However, so-called “4D” animals (dead, dying, diseased, disabled) were
only recently banned for human consumption and are still legitimate
ingredients for pet food.

http://www.api4animals.org/facts?p=359&more=1

cybercat
June 28th 07, 02:06 PM
"Rhonda" > wrote :
>>
>> Rhonda, I don't believe that the pet food we buy in the US can contain
>> euthanized dogs and cats and their collars.
>>
>> Horse ****.
>
> Oh no. Horse **** is now in pet foods too?
>
> Rhonda ;)
>

hahaha!

What a style you have!

cybercat
June 28th 07, 02:10 PM
"Rhonda" > wrote :
>
> Because of persistent rumors that rendered by-products contain dead dogs
> and cats, the FDA conducted a study looking for pentobarbital, the most
> common euthanasia drug, in pet foods. They found it. Ingredients that were
> most commonly associated with the presence of pentobarbital were
> meat-and-bone-meal and animal fat. However, they also used very sensitive
> tests to look for canine and feline DNA, which were not found. Industry
> insiders admit that rendered pets and roadkill were used in pet food some
> years ago. Although there are still no laws or regulations against it, the
> practice is uncommon today, and pet food companies universally deny that
> their products contain any such materials. However, so-called “4D” animals
> (dead, dying, diseased, disabled) were only recently banned for human
> consumption and are still legitimate ingredients for pet food.
>

If no cat or dog DNA, then no pets. Good to know.

Maybe the pentobarbital is used to euthanize injured livestock?
Thanks for looking this up for me, Rhonda.

-L.
June 30th 07, 07:51 AM
Rhonda wrote:
<sniperoo>

>
> Because of persistent rumors that rendered by-products contain dead dogs
> and cats, the FDA conducted a study looking for pentobarbital, the most
> common euthanasia drug, in pet foods. They found it. Ingredients that
> were most commonly associated with the presence of pentobarbital were
> meat-and-bone-meal and animal fat. However, they also used very
> sensitive tests to look for canine and feline DNA, which were not found.

Doesn't mean much. There are a number of ways the DNA might not show
up: If dogs and cats are a minimal additive, as compared to cow or
beef; if the product is heated at high enough temps the DNA is
denatured resulting in false negatives; since there are tons of other
enzymes floating around in the mix, the DNA is probably chewed beyond
the point where it could be found using PCR which is probably what
they used; and the experiments may be poorly designed.

I would be interested to see what positive controls they used in the
experiments. Basically, they would need to add dog and/or cat bodies
to processing-sized vats of other meats in different concentrations
until the DNA could be detected, and then, IF the amount detected was
small enough to be significant and easily detected, they could
extrapolate whether or not production vats are likely to have
contained dogs and/or cats based on their sampling results. To do
this experiment properly, it would be extremely expensive. Knowing
the FDA as I do, I find it highly unlikely that they did anything more
than take multiple samples and test it for dog and cat DNA at *some*
level, which may or may not be relevant.

Sorry if this doesn't make complete sense - I am surfing on a killer
migraine today...
-L.

Barry
June 30th 07, 03:51 PM
On Jun 30, 2:51 am, "-L." > wrote:

> Sorry if this doesn't make complete sense - I am surfing on a killer
> migraine today...
> -L.

what's the problem

cybercat
June 30th 07, 03:56 PM
"-L." > wrote in message
oups.com...

> Doesn't mean much. There are a number of ways the DNA might not show
> up: If dogs and cats are a minimal additive, as compared to cow or
> beef; if the product is heated at high enough temps the DNA is
> denatured resulting in false negatives; since there are tons of other
> enzymes floating around in the mix, the DNA is probably chewed beyond
> the point where it could be found using PCR which is probably what
> they used; and the experiments may be poorly designed.
>

The question is, why would anyone bother trying to feed cats and dogs
to cats and dogs?

Phil P.
June 30th 07, 10:38 PM
"cybercat" > wrote in message
...
>
> "-L." > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>
> > Doesn't mean much. There are a number of ways the DNA might not show
> > up: If dogs and cats are a minimal additive, as compared to cow or
> > beef; if the product is heated at high enough temps the DNA is
> > denatured resulting in false negatives; since there are tons of other
> > enzymes floating around in the mix, the DNA is probably chewed beyond
> > the point where it could be found using PCR which is probably what
> > they used; and the experiments may be poorly designed.
> >
>
> The question is, why would anyone bother trying to feed cats and dogs
> to cats and dogs?


I wouldn't give much credibility to anything written by the API . They're
on the fringe-- right next to Ann Martin!

Phil P.
June 30th 07, 11:25 PM
"cindys" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Phil P." > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]
> >
> > "cindys" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> > Hiya Cindi,
>
> Hi yourself, Phil!
> >
> >
> >> products. Then, I moved to FF because I considered that it was better
> >> quality.
> >
> > It is- much higher protein content.
> >
> >
> > As time went on, after reading this newsgroup, and after I did a
> >> bunch of reading on the internet about the importance/quality of muscle
> >> meats as opposed to byproducts
> >
> > Actually, by-products contain *much* more nutrients than muscle meats.
> > Muscle meat (skeletal meat) is very deficient in most vitamins and
> > minerals,
> > Cats in the wild eat much more by-products than skeletal meat
>
> I thought the by-products were processed parts of the animals, parts that
> were unusable for humans and would be rejected by the FDA.


Most of the cat's natural diet would be rejected by the FDA.


>
> >
> >
> > and after I read some excerpts from the book
> >> _Foods Pets Die For_ and learned the source of those byproducts,
> >
> >
> > Oh no! Not Ann Martin! LOL! We sliced, diced and shredded most of her
> > bull**** exaggerations a few years ago. She hasn't been back since.
>
> Thanks for saving me time and money. I was going to buy her book. Now, I
> won't.
>
>
> >Her
> > bull**** claims and exaggerations didn't stand up to scrutiny. She took
a
> > few isolated instances from a few low-end generic pet food manufacturers
> > and
> > extrapolated then to the whole pet food industry. If you ask me, she
> > isn't
> > playing with a full deck--
> >
> >
> >
> > and then of
> >> course the melamine thing,
> >
> >
> > A real nightmare for sure. But that was actually caused by one person.
>
> Yup.
>
>
> >Watch
> > the incidence of CRF in cats start declining. The person didn't just
> > decide
> > to dump a load of melamine in the wheat gluten- it was gradual-- to see
> > how
> > much he could get away with-
>
> Yup.
>
> >
> > I wanted to feed my cats human grade cat food
> >> which by definition cannot contain byproducts.
> >
> > I'm not sure you really understand what by-products are. Human foods
> > contain by-products.
> >
> > This is the AAFCO definition:
> >
> >
> >
> > "Meat by-products is the non-rendered, clean parts, other than meat,
> > derived
> > from slaughtered mammals. It includes, but is not limited to, lungs,
> > spleen,
> > kidneys, brain, livers, blood, bone, partially defatted low temperature
> > fatty tissue, and stomachs and intestines freed of their contents. It
does
> > not include hair, horns, teeth and hoofs. It shall be suitable for use
in
> > animal food. If it bears name descriptive of its kind, it must
correspond
> > thereto. (9.3)"
>
> This is just the opposite of what I thought the byproducts were. I thought
> they were rendered, nonclean parts etc and *did* include horns, hair,
teeth,
> hoofs, etc However, I *thought* I got my information regarding the
> preferability of muscle meats from the website where the veterinarian
> explains about cat food and then recommends a few different ones, but I've
> read so many things, I really can't say for sure.

Who was the vat? Pitcairn? lol Go to the USDA Nutrient Database and look up
the nutrient content of muscle meats-- you'll see they contain little to no
vitamins and very little minerals.


By-products got a bad name from the au natural fanatics and Nutro.


>
> >
> > I also needed to choose one
> >> that contained few carbohydrates because of the diabetes and that was
how
> > I
> >> eventually came to Wellness.
> >
> > I don't know if you know that Wellnesss is manufactured by Menu Foods,
> > too.
> > Wellness also contains a lot of vegetables which have a higher glycemic
> > index than most grains.
>
> Interesting.
> >
> >
> > At one point, I was buying Pet Promise, which I
> >> still think is an excellent quality food, but it does contain rice and
> >> potatoes. I had asked my vet if she thought FF was a good choice, and
she
> >> stated that she wouldn't recommend any supermarket pet food.
> >
> > Most vets are clueless about nutrition. They're "educated" by pet food
> > manufacturers' reps.
>
> I can't speak for the supermarket brand, but I did know the Pet Promise
was
> good food and it was available in the supermarket. When I asked the vet
> about it, she was completely unfamiliar with it.
> >
> >
> > I currently
> >> have been feeding my cats Wellness and FF because they really like it
> >> (despite the byproducts). My cats seem to only be willing to eat the
pate
> >> varieties. I try to avoid the varieties that are chunks or slices in
> >> gravy
> >> because my cats just lick off the gravy and leave the rest.
> >> Best regards,
> >> ---Cindy S.
> >
> > I'm really happy you've weaned your cat off insulin!!!
>
> It happened almost immediately after I put him on canned food (and Purina
OM
> dry).
>
> >I've weaned several
> > diabetic cats off insulin by feeding them Fancy Feast Oceanfish and
Tuna.
>
> That's another flavor I sometimes buy in addition to the Tender Beef
Feast.
>
> Phil, I just want to thank you again for all your help. I also want to
share
> with you (and don't ask me how this could be, but I'm not going to look a
> gift horse in the mouth), that Alex's BUN is back to being within normal
> limits. His creatinine is still abnormal but has come down considerably
and
> is much closer to the normal range.


I'm glad to hear it- but I'm not surprised- Omega-3s are renoprotective. My
CRF cat's renal parameters are back in the normal range- even her USG has
increased since I've been giving her omega-3s and K+ supplements.


I followed your advice and did not put
> him on low protein cat food (contrary to the vet's advice). I also give
him
> potassium and omega-3 supplementation on the basis of your advice.


I'm very happy you decided against a low protein diet at this point.


I have
> done subcu fluids a few times, but overall not, as the vet says he doesn't
> really need them at this point. I can't say he's bouncy and perky, but for
a
> senior cat, he's doing okay. I do give him Pepcid daily now and that seems
> to keep his appetite up. The vet now says he seems stable, and even though
> he has CRF, he could potentially stay at his current numbers for several
> years without the disease actually progressing.
>
> Once again, thank you so much for all your help.
> Best regards,
> ---Cindy S.

Thanks for the update- I love to hear good news for a change!

Phil

-L.
July 2nd 07, 10:08 AM
cybercat wrote:
>
> The question is, why would anyone bother trying to feed cats and dogs
> to cats and dogs?

Cheap source of protein. The bodies are disposed of, anyway, so if
they can be sent to a rendering plant and that material used in dog
food - voila - income for whomever is selling the bodies. For the
manufactuer, it's gotta be cheaper than cow, pig and chicken guts.

-L.

Rhonda
July 4th 07, 07:10 AM
-L. wrote:
> cybercat wrote:
>
>>The question is, why would anyone bother trying to feed cats and dogs
>>to cats and dogs?
>
>
> Cheap source of protein. The bodies are disposed of, anyway, so if
> they can be sent to a rendering plant and that material used in dog
> food - voila - income for whomever is selling the bodies. For the
> manufactuer, it's gotta be cheaper than cow, pig and chicken guts.

It would be wonderful to know someone who works in the pet food industry
and see what they had to say about the practice. Even if they buy
byproducts in bulk from a plant they feel is reputable, how can they be
100% certain of the contents when exact byproduct ingredients do not
need to be listed?

Rhonda

cookie
July 4th 07, 07:41 AM
On Jul 4, 2:10 am, Rhonda > wrote:
> how can they be
> 100% certain of the contents
>
> Rhonda

by the date on the can silly <g>

yeah right! this bad cat food will stay bad till July 31st 2007

If I had the money, I'd hire a chef, who can also prepare the cats
meals.
but! how do I know the grocers chicken won't knock me out with foul
chicken parts.