Science Diet question...
Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there
is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? -- "Its the bugs that keep it running." -Joe Canuck |
Joe Canuck wrote:
Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Maybe a typo on the web?? |
Joe Canuck wrote:
Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Maybe a typo on the web?? |
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 20:22:43 -0500, Joe Canuck wrote:
Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? It looks like a change in formulation happened somewhere down the road - perhaps the BHA formula is old, and they put the new formula on the web? -- Dennis Carr - | I may be out of my mind, http://www.dennis.furtopia.org | But I have more fun that way. ------------------------------------+------------------------------- |
On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 20:22:43 -0500, Joe Canuck wrote:
Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? It looks like a change in formulation happened somewhere down the road - perhaps the BHA formula is old, and they put the new formula on the web? -- Dennis Carr - | I may be out of my mind, http://www.dennis.furtopia.org | But I have more fun that way. ------------------------------------+------------------------------- |
"Joe Canuck" wrote in message ... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Prolly using up the last print run of bags before the change. That type of package is very expensive to print and manufacture. Printing very high quantities in single press runs significantly reduces the cost per bag. Phil. |
"Joe Canuck" wrote in message ... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Prolly using up the last print run of bags before the change. That type of package is very expensive to print and manufacture. Printing very high quantities in single press runs significantly reduces the cost per bag. Phil. |
|
|
"Joe Canuck" wrote in message
... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: (deletia) From the bag (which I bought one week ago): (deletia) So what is the deal with the subtle difference? My educated guess is that the web-based ingedients list is provided for a worldwide audience, and for general informational purposes only, and thus uses more general terminology. The bag label ingredients list is authoritative, and specific to the country of sale, (which I presume from the Queen's English spellings is Canada) which likely has more specific labelling requirements. There's generally no national rules (nor is it practical for there to be, really) governing web content, while every county has generally has its own specific rules governing labelling of retail packages. The U.S. likely has less specific requirements (e.g. "mixed tocopherols" versus "BHA, propyl gallate") than Canada, and since Hill's is a U.S. company, their web author took the text from a for-sale-in-U.S. bag. I found a _Canadian_ site, http://www.agsci.ubc.ca/courses/fnh/410/lipids/5_2.htm, that discusses the chemical composition and application of antioxidants in food preservation, including BHT, BHA, and tocoperols. |
"Joe Canuck" wrote in message
... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: (deletia) From the bag (which I bought one week ago): (deletia) So what is the deal with the subtle difference? My educated guess is that the web-based ingedients list is provided for a worldwide audience, and for general informational purposes only, and thus uses more general terminology. The bag label ingredients list is authoritative, and specific to the country of sale, (which I presume from the Queen's English spellings is Canada) which likely has more specific labelling requirements. There's generally no national rules (nor is it practical for there to be, really) governing web content, while every county has generally has its own specific rules governing labelling of retail packages. The U.S. likely has less specific requirements (e.g. "mixed tocopherols" versus "BHA, propyl gallate") than Canada, and since Hill's is a U.S. company, their web author took the text from a for-sale-in-U.S. bag. I found a _Canadian_ site, http://www.agsci.ubc.ca/courses/fnh/410/lipids/5_2.htm, that discusses the chemical composition and application of antioxidants in food preservation, including BHT, BHA, and tocoperols. |
From: "ChakaShiva"
"Phil P." a écrit dans le message de news: ... "Joe Canuck" wrote in message ... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Prolly using up the last print run of bags before the change. That type of package is very expensive to print and manufacture. Printing very high quantities in single press runs significantly reduces the cost per bag. Phil. Then it is permitted to have a description on the bag differing from the true content? Interesting. I would presume more that the bag came from an old batch. I sometimes go to a little local supermarket when I have not time to go to town for my shopping. I've been seeing the very same unique bag of Science Diet kibble lying on the shelf now for certainly over a year :-). There's no mistake, its the same one because it is ripped and taped on one side. Elaine Yikes! It's still on the shelf? ________ 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 |
Interesting shift in ingredients. Back in 95, my 13-year-olf cat
developed what two vets said was an unusual form of kidney cancer: both kidneys were tremendously enlarged and practically all cancerous. The levels in the blood work just 5 months before indicated nothing. Both vets said it was very rare to see both kidneys with that type of cancer. Shortly after that, during an informal chat with a woman who worked for a pet insurance company (who sent me an article in the mail), I heard that there was research indicating a strong link between bha and bht in science diet and kidney cancer in cats. My previous cat had eaten that her whole life. I had heard that Flynt River Ranch was good for cats with urinary problems, so up until his recent blockage, my present companion had been on that his whole life. The moral of the story (to quote an icon from my young adult years): If it's not one thing, it's another. You think you're serving premium cuisine and it turns out to be high-priced sewage! :) We do the best we can and hope to find providers near where we live who understand our beloved felines.It's nice to have a forum like this where people can share their experiences. I suspect what works for one cat, might not, for another. The intuition in discerning what to do is the difference between an average vet (far too many of those in my present neck of the woods) and a good one (which, thank god, I finally found). peace, a. On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, PawsForThought wrote: From: "ChakaShiva" "Phil P." a =E9crit dans le message de news: ... "Joe Canuck" wrote in message ... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why the= re is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, co= rn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganou= s oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin = D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a sour= ce of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B1= 2 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, co= rn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid)= , chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT an= d BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, sal= t, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calciu= m iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic ac= id (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B1= 2 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Prolly using up the last print run of bags before the change. That ty= pe of package is very expensive to print and manufacture. Printing very hig= h quantities in single press runs significantly reduces the cost per bag= =2E Phil. Then it is permitted to have a description on the bag differing from the true content? Interesting. I would presume more that the bag came from an old batch. I sometimes = go to a little local supermarket when I have not time to go to town for my shopping. I've been seeing the very same unique bag of Science Diet kib= ble lying on the shelf now for certainly over a year :-). There's no mistak= e, its the same one because it is ripped and taped on one side. Elaine Yikes! It's still on the shelf? ________ 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 |
Interesting shift in ingredients. Back in 95, my 13-year-olf cat
developed what two vets said was an unusual form of kidney cancer: both kidneys were tremendously enlarged and practically all cancerous. The levels in the blood work just 5 months before indicated nothing. Both vets said it was very rare to see both kidneys with that type of cancer. Shortly after that, during an informal chat with a woman who worked for a pet insurance company (who sent me an article in the mail), I heard that there was research indicating a strong link between bha and bht in science diet and kidney cancer in cats. My previous cat had eaten that her whole life. I had heard that Flynt River Ranch was good for cats with urinary problems, so up until his recent blockage, my present companion had been on that his whole life. The moral of the story (to quote an icon from my young adult years): If it's not one thing, it's another. You think you're serving premium cuisine and it turns out to be high-priced sewage! :) We do the best we can and hope to find providers near where we live who understand our beloved felines.It's nice to have a forum like this where people can share their experiences. I suspect what works for one cat, might not, for another. The intuition in discerning what to do is the difference between an average vet (far too many of those in my present neck of the woods) and a good one (which, thank god, I finally found). peace, a. On Sat, 29 Nov 2003, PawsForThought wrote: From: "ChakaShiva" "Phil P." a =E9crit dans le message de news: ... "Joe Canuck" wrote in message ... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why the= re is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, co= rn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganou= s oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin = D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a sour= ce of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B1= 2 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, co= rn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid)= , chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT an= d BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, sal= t, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calciu= m iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic ac= id (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B1= 2 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Prolly using up the last print run of bags before the change. That ty= pe of package is very expensive to print and manufacture. Printing very hig= h quantities in single press runs significantly reduces the cost per bag= =2E Phil. Then it is permitted to have a description on the bag differing from the true content? Interesting. I would presume more that the bag came from an old batch. I sometimes = go to a little local supermarket when I have not time to go to town for my shopping. I've been seeing the very same unique bag of Science Diet kib= ble lying on the shelf now for certainly over a year :-). There's no mistak= e, its the same one because it is ripped and taped on one side. Elaine Yikes! It's still on the shelf? ________ 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 |
"PawsForThought" a écrit dans le message de news: ... From: "ChakaShiva" "Phil P." a écrit dans le message de news: ... "Joe Canuck" wrote in message ... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Prolly using up the last print run of bags before the change. That type of package is very expensive to print and manufacture. Printing very high quantities in single press runs significantly reduces the cost per bag. Phil. Then it is permitted to have a description on the bag differing from the true content? Interesting. I would presume more that the bag came from an old batch. I sometimes go to a little local supermarket when I have not time to go to town for my shopping. I've been seeing the very same unique bag of Science Diet kibble lying on the shelf now for certainly over a year :-). There's no mistake, its the same one because it is ripped and taped on one side. Elaine Yikes! It's still on the shelf? I don't know now, its been long since I've been there. I do like to go in town most of the time where I can get all my organic stuff. Its an exceptionnal case. Its a supermarket in a very small town that is close to their people and I suppose someone asked for a bag, they ordered two and never sold the other. But even so, in remote areas such as mine, rotation of these products is likely to be very slow, even when sold at the vet. I remember last year going to the vet to ask for samples of SD and they only had one flavor of canned to offer. Elaine |
"PawsForThought" a écrit dans le message de news: ... From: "ChakaShiva" "Phil P." a écrit dans le message de news: ... "Joe Canuck" wrote in message ... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Prolly using up the last print run of bags before the change. That type of package is very expensive to print and manufacture. Printing very high quantities in single press runs significantly reduces the cost per bag. Phil. Then it is permitted to have a description on the bag differing from the true content? Interesting. I would presume more that the bag came from an old batch. I sometimes go to a little local supermarket when I have not time to go to town for my shopping. I've been seeing the very same unique bag of Science Diet kibble lying on the shelf now for certainly over a year :-). There's no mistake, its the same one because it is ripped and taped on one side. Elaine Yikes! It's still on the shelf? I don't know now, its been long since I've been there. I do like to go in town most of the time where I can get all my organic stuff. Its an exceptionnal case. Its a supermarket in a very small town that is close to their people and I suppose someone asked for a bag, they ordered two and never sold the other. But even so, in remote areas such as mine, rotation of these products is likely to be very slow, even when sold at the vet. I remember last year going to the vet to ask for samples of SD and they only had one flavor of canned to offer. Elaine |
Phil P. wrote:
"Joe Canuck" wrote in message ... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Prolly using up the last print run of bags before the change. That type of package is very expensive to print and manufacture. Printing very high quantities in single press runs significantly reduces the cost per bag. Phil. That's most likely the case. But it is possible that Hill's website is a bit out of date. Rich |
Phil P. wrote:
"Joe Canuck" wrote in message ... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? From the Hill's website: Ingredients Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), chicken liver flavor, DL- methionine, taurine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). From the bag (which I bought one week ago): Chicken, brewers rice, corn gluten meal, chicken by-product meal, corn meal, animal fat(preserved with BHA, propyl gallate and citric acid), chicken liver flavour, DL-methionine, taurine, preserved with BHT and BHA, beta-caroten, minerals (potassium choride, calcium sulfate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium, selenite), vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, ascorbic acid (a source of vitamin C), niacin, thiamine, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). So what is the deal with the subtle difference? Prolly using up the last print run of bags before the change. That type of package is very expensive to print and manufacture. Printing very high quantities in single press runs significantly reduces the cost per bag. Phil. That's most likely the case. But it is possible that Hill's website is a bit out of date. Rich |
Joe Canuck wrote in message m...
Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? Joe et al, The website is updated within ~24 hours of any change in the formula. The pre-printed bags can often be printed months in advance. In this case the old bag you have contains the old "artificial antioxidant" labelling. That does not mean the product contains artificial antioxidants, simply old bags being used until they are gone. The product was changed months ago. I'd be curious to know the date on the older bag. Elsewhere on this thread was a comment about BHA BHT causing cancer. That is pure internet fantasy. There has ever been a single animal that has ever been shown to have sufferred any negative consequences as a result of the use of artificial antioxidants. None, zip, zero nada. You have to understand the difference between the testing levels and what is used in pet food. If Vitamin E, Beta Carotene, Sodium, Selenium, and several other ingredients were fed at the same grossly exagerated levels, all of them would be fatal. The majority of studies were done at 1% or 10,000 parts per million, the amounts used in pet food are about 30 parts per million, more than 300 times the levels used in pet foods. Most people can take 2 aspirin without a problem, anyone who ingested 600 aspirin would suffer a fatal result. Lots of companies like Flint River use scare tactics to try to sell the food. One of Flint Rivers favorite scare tactics is to claim that a pet would ingest 26 pounds of preservatives in a year. This is of course completely ludicrous. I've spent some time trying to track this number down. And in every case, every web site that makes the claims refers to another web site, but nobody will take responsibility for the false number or explain how it was derived. It would take about 393,000 pounds of food to provide 26 pounds of artificial antioxidants. Not even a dog the size of Tyranosaurus Rex would consume that much food in a year. |
Joe Canuck wrote in message m...
Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? Joe et al, The website is updated within ~24 hours of any change in the formula. The pre-printed bags can often be printed months in advance. In this case the old bag you have contains the old "artificial antioxidant" labelling. That does not mean the product contains artificial antioxidants, simply old bags being used until they are gone. The product was changed months ago. I'd be curious to know the date on the older bag. Elsewhere on this thread was a comment about BHA BHT causing cancer. That is pure internet fantasy. There has ever been a single animal that has ever been shown to have sufferred any negative consequences as a result of the use of artificial antioxidants. None, zip, zero nada. You have to understand the difference between the testing levels and what is used in pet food. If Vitamin E, Beta Carotene, Sodium, Selenium, and several other ingredients were fed at the same grossly exagerated levels, all of them would be fatal. The majority of studies were done at 1% or 10,000 parts per million, the amounts used in pet food are about 30 parts per million, more than 300 times the levels used in pet foods. Most people can take 2 aspirin without a problem, anyone who ingested 600 aspirin would suffer a fatal result. Lots of companies like Flint River use scare tactics to try to sell the food. One of Flint Rivers favorite scare tactics is to claim that a pet would ingest 26 pounds of preservatives in a year. This is of course completely ludicrous. I've spent some time trying to track this number down. And in every case, every web site that makes the claims refers to another web site, but nobody will take responsibility for the false number or explain how it was derived. It would take about 393,000 pounds of food to provide 26 pounds of artificial antioxidants. Not even a dog the size of Tyranosaurus Rex would consume that much food in a year. |
"ChakaShiva" wrote in message ...
"Phil P." a écrit dans le message de news: ... Then it is permitted to have a description on the bag differing from the true content? Interesting. That is correct for a period of 180 days. Thus a company that claims to have an ingredient list of X ingredients, can conceivably get away with putting anything they want in the bag for 179 days and then actually put what they claim on the ingredient label for one day and revert to anything the next. It's a very weak spot in the law and one I would love to see changed. I would presume more that the bag came from an old batch. I sometimes go to a little local supermarket when I have not time to go to town for my shopping. I've been seeing the very same unique bag of Science Diet kibble lying on the shelf now for certainly over a year :-). There's no mistake, its the same one because it is ripped and taped on one side. The retailer is paid for damaged bags, it comes right off every invoice. Obviously this retailer is trying to make an extra buck or two, despite being paid in advance for any damage products. That's too bad, the objective was to eliminate such bags immediately by paying the retailer in advance, thus eliminating any chance a damaged bag would sit on a shelf anywhere for any length of time. |
"ChakaShiva" wrote in message ...
"Phil P." a écrit dans le message de news: ... Then it is permitted to have a description on the bag differing from the true content? Interesting. That is correct for a period of 180 days. Thus a company that claims to have an ingredient list of X ingredients, can conceivably get away with putting anything they want in the bag for 179 days and then actually put what they claim on the ingredient label for one day and revert to anything the next. It's a very weak spot in the law and one I would love to see changed. I would presume more that the bag came from an old batch. I sometimes go to a little local supermarket when I have not time to go to town for my shopping. I've been seeing the very same unique bag of Science Diet kibble lying on the shelf now for certainly over a year :-). There's no mistake, its the same one because it is ripped and taped on one side. The retailer is paid for damaged bags, it comes right off every invoice. Obviously this retailer is trying to make an extra buck or two, despite being paid in advance for any damage products. That's too bad, the objective was to eliminate such bags immediately by paying the retailer in advance, thus eliminating any chance a damaged bag would sit on a shelf anywhere for any length of time. |
|
|
|
|
"Steve Crane" a écrit dans le message de news: ... "ChakaShiva" wrote in message ... "Phil P." a écrit dans le message de news: ... Then it is permitted to have a description on the bag differing from the true content? Interesting. That is correct for a period of 180 days. Thus a company that claims to have an ingredient list of X ingredients, can conceivably get away with putting anything they want in the bag for 179 days and then actually put what they claim on the ingredient label for one day and revert to anything the next. It's a very weak spot in the law and one I would love to see changed. Thank you for that info. It does give alot of liberty. I wonder if the law applies when the product crosses the line to another country who might have different rules? I would presume more that the bag came from an old batch. I sometimes go to a little local supermarket when I have not time to go to town for my shopping. I've been seeing the very same unique bag of Science Diet kibble lying on the shelf now for certainly over a year :-). There's no mistake, its the same one because it is ripped and taped on one side. The retailer is paid for damaged bags, it comes right off every invoice. Obviously this retailer is trying to make an extra buck or two, despite being paid in advance for any damage products. That's too bad, the objective was to eliminate such bags immediately by paying the retailer in advance, thus eliminating any chance a damaged bag would sit on a shelf anywhere for any length of time. I wonder if this retailer dealt directly with Hill's though, since he doesn't seem to carry much of an inventory of their product. Is there a minimum that they are suppose to carry? I can understand the company for wanting damaged bags off the shelf. It does tarnish the image. In fact, the first time I noticed the bag was within the moments I was hesitant on if I should really go the home-prepared way. The sight of that sorry bag kind of triggered the green light. I thought, yeah, I'll give it a try. Élaine |
"Steve Crane" a écrit dans le message de news: ... "ChakaShiva" wrote in message ... "Phil P." a écrit dans le message de news: ... Then it is permitted to have a description on the bag differing from the true content? Interesting. That is correct for a period of 180 days. Thus a company that claims to have an ingredient list of X ingredients, can conceivably get away with putting anything they want in the bag for 179 days and then actually put what they claim on the ingredient label for one day and revert to anything the next. It's a very weak spot in the law and one I would love to see changed. Thank you for that info. It does give alot of liberty. I wonder if the law applies when the product crosses the line to another country who might have different rules? I would presume more that the bag came from an old batch. I sometimes go to a little local supermarket when I have not time to go to town for my shopping. I've been seeing the very same unique bag of Science Diet kibble lying on the shelf now for certainly over a year :-). There's no mistake, its the same one because it is ripped and taped on one side. The retailer is paid for damaged bags, it comes right off every invoice. Obviously this retailer is trying to make an extra buck or two, despite being paid in advance for any damage products. That's too bad, the objective was to eliminate such bags immediately by paying the retailer in advance, thus eliminating any chance a damaged bag would sit on a shelf anywhere for any length of time. I wonder if this retailer dealt directly with Hill's though, since he doesn't seem to carry much of an inventory of their product. Is there a minimum that they are suppose to carry? I can understand the company for wanting damaged bags off the shelf. It does tarnish the image. In fact, the first time I noticed the bag was within the moments I was hesitant on if I should really go the home-prepared way. The sight of that sorry bag kind of triggered the green light. I thought, yeah, I'll give it a try. Élaine |
From: (GAUBSTER2)
From: afr Interesting shift in ingredients. No, just a change in the preservative system. That should make most of you happy, no? Shortly after that, during an informal chat with a woman who worked for a pet insurance company (who sent me an article in the mail), I heard that there was research indicating a strong link between bha and bht in science diet and kidney cancer in cats. Unfortunately, there is no such "link". Which insurance company was it? I want to know so that I can steer clear of them! BHA and BHT are completely safe preservatives when used at the levels found in pet foods. Period. http://www.takingthelead.co.uk/2/Hea...t_dog_food.htm ________ See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm |
From: (GAUBSTER2)
From: afr Interesting shift in ingredients. No, just a change in the preservative system. That should make most of you happy, no? Shortly after that, during an informal chat with a woman who worked for a pet insurance company (who sent me an article in the mail), I heard that there was research indicating a strong link between bha and bht in science diet and kidney cancer in cats. Unfortunately, there is no such "link". Which insurance company was it? I want to know so that I can steer clear of them! BHA and BHT are completely safe preservatives when used at the levels found in pet foods. Period. http://www.takingthelead.co.uk/2/Hea...t_dog_food.htm ________ 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 |
Steve Crane wrote:
Joe Canuck wrote in message m... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? Joe et al, The website is updated within ~24 hours of any change in the formula. The pre-printed bags can often be printed months in advance. In this case the old bag you have contains the old "artificial antioxidant" labelling. That does not mean the product contains artificial antioxidants, simply old bags being used until they are gone. The product was changed months ago. I'd be curious to know the date on the older bag. I purchased the bag at least one month ago now. At the top of the bag is the following: "BEST BEFORE 04 2004 R26100916 AW". Here is a question: By the time a bag makes into a store, how far away from the expiry date should the bag be? I purchased this one from a local vet who had to order it. I would have liked a fresher product. Good thing I didn't order the 20 pound bag! -- "Its the bugs that keep it running." -Joe Canuck |
Steve Crane wrote:
Joe Canuck wrote in message m... Okay, this has just come to my attention. Can anyone explain why there is a discrepancy between the ingredient list on the bag and the ingredient list on the website for Science Diet Adult Chicken & Rice Recipe? Joe et al, The website is updated within ~24 hours of any change in the formula. The pre-printed bags can often be printed months in advance. In this case the old bag you have contains the old "artificial antioxidant" labelling. That does not mean the product contains artificial antioxidants, simply old bags being used until they are gone. The product was changed months ago. I'd be curious to know the date on the older bag. I purchased the bag at least one month ago now. At the top of the bag is the following: "BEST BEFORE 04 2004 R26100916 AW". Here is a question: By the time a bag makes into a store, how far away from the expiry date should the bag be? I purchased this one from a local vet who had to order it. I would have liked a fresher product. Good thing I didn't order the 20 pound bag! -- "Its the bugs that keep it running." -Joe Canuck |
"ChakaShiva" wrote in message . ..
Thank you for that info. It does give alot of liberty. I wonder if the law applies when the product crosses the line to another country who might have different rules? That is correct, each country has its' own rules and regulations. Even the way the nutrients are displayed varies from one area to another. Japan is by far the most difficult and stringent of any country. EU is annoying, owing mostly to protectionist activities. I wonder if this retailer dealt directly with Hill's though, since he doesn't seem to carry much of an inventory of their product. Is there a minimum that they are suppose to carry? I can understand the company for wanting damaged bags off the shelf. It does tarnish the image. In fact, the first time I noticed the bag was within the moments I was hesitant on if I should really go the home-prepared way. The sight of that sorry bag kind of triggered the green light. I thought, yeah, I'll give it a try. It is possible. I believe Canada works the same way, since it is an actual division of Hill's. In some countries, Ukraine, South Africa, India, South America, etc, there is a distributor who set thier own rules and regulations about returns and damages. Minimum order in the US is only 75 pounds, so that rarely is an issue even for the smallest of veterinary clinics or pet retailers. Even the vet in Barrow Alaska doesn't have any trouble with the minimums. |
"ChakaShiva" wrote in message . ..
Thank you for that info. It does give alot of liberty. I wonder if the law applies when the product crosses the line to another country who might have different rules? That is correct, each country has its' own rules and regulations. Even the way the nutrients are displayed varies from one area to another. Japan is by far the most difficult and stringent of any country. EU is annoying, owing mostly to protectionist activities. I wonder if this retailer dealt directly with Hill's though, since he doesn't seem to carry much of an inventory of their product. Is there a minimum that they are suppose to carry? I can understand the company for wanting damaged bags off the shelf. It does tarnish the image. In fact, the first time I noticed the bag was within the moments I was hesitant on if I should really go the home-prepared way. The sight of that sorry bag kind of triggered the green light. I thought, yeah, I'll give it a try. It is possible. I believe Canada works the same way, since it is an actual division of Hill's. In some countries, Ukraine, South Africa, India, South America, etc, there is a distributor who set thier own rules and regulations about returns and damages. Minimum order in the US is only 75 pounds, so that rarely is an issue even for the smallest of veterinary clinics or pet retailers. Even the vet in Barrow Alaska doesn't have any trouble with the minimums. |
Joe Canuck wrote in message ...
I purchased the bag at least one month ago now. At the top of the bag is the following: "BEST BEFORE 04 2004 R26100916 AW". Here is a question: By the time a bag makes into a store, how far away from the expiry date should the bag be? Joe, That date indicates it was produced in April of 2003, about 7 months ago. That's actually quite old for most Hill's products. 20 years ago Hill's used to manufacture one type of food for a week or more and then switch to the next needed item. Production runs were always quite long because it used to take nearly 2 full days to switch a manufacturing line from one food to another. Automation, better equipment and computer driven manufacturing has reduced that switch over time to about 13 minutes. Hill's no longer makes more food than will be sold in any given week. Some exceptions, Hill's has a couple Prescription Diet products that have very small use. Some of these are non-profit products due to their low consumption rate and a single manufacturing run could be a few months supply. Most of the time the bags on the retail shelf will be less than a month old, especially in a veterinary clinic. Particularly true for Science Diet products with their larger volume demands. I would have to check with Canada and see if they are warehousing foods. I would doubt it. We have no warehousing anywhere in the US. We have local distribution points which may maintain a weeks supply at the most, of Science Diet products, but no warehousing to hold anything long term. Canned food we do tend to warehouse in Canada, Alaska, and some parts of the Pacific Northwest due to problems shipping it in the winter. Freezing canned food wreaks havoc with palatability. What part of Canada are you in? |
Joe Canuck wrote in message ...
I purchased the bag at least one month ago now. At the top of the bag is the following: "BEST BEFORE 04 2004 R26100916 AW". Here is a question: By the time a bag makes into a store, how far away from the expiry date should the bag be? Joe, That date indicates it was produced in April of 2003, about 7 months ago. That's actually quite old for most Hill's products. 20 years ago Hill's used to manufacture one type of food for a week or more and then switch to the next needed item. Production runs were always quite long because it used to take nearly 2 full days to switch a manufacturing line from one food to another. Automation, better equipment and computer driven manufacturing has reduced that switch over time to about 13 minutes. Hill's no longer makes more food than will be sold in any given week. Some exceptions, Hill's has a couple Prescription Diet products that have very small use. Some of these are non-profit products due to their low consumption rate and a single manufacturing run could be a few months supply. Most of the time the bags on the retail shelf will be less than a month old, especially in a veterinary clinic. Particularly true for Science Diet products with their larger volume demands. I would have to check with Canada and see if they are warehousing foods. I would doubt it. We have no warehousing anywhere in the US. We have local distribution points which may maintain a weeks supply at the most, of Science Diet products, but no warehousing to hold anything long term. Canned food we do tend to warehouse in Canada, Alaska, and some parts of the Pacific Northwest due to problems shipping it in the winter. Freezing canned food wreaks havoc with palatability. What part of Canada are you in? |
From: olitter (PawsForThought)
I heard that there was research indicating a strong link between bha and bht in science diet and kidney cancer in cats. Unfortunately, there is no such "link". Which insurance company was it? I want to know so that I can steer clear of them! BHA and BHT are completely safe preservatives when used at the levels found in pet foods. Period. http://www.takingthelead.co.uk/2/Hea...t_dog_food.htm That wasn't even a nice try, not even for you Lauren. That's the same opinion (word for word) that's posted on countless websites. Too bad, AGAIN, that there is no proof, but only somebody's opinion. Where's the research indicating a "strong link"?? Check out www.petdiets.com |
From: olitter (PawsForThought)
I heard that there was research indicating a strong link between bha and bht in science diet and kidney cancer in cats. Unfortunately, there is no such "link". Which insurance company was it? I want to know so that I can steer clear of them! BHA and BHT are completely safe preservatives when used at the levels found in pet foods. Period. http://www.takingthelead.co.uk/2/Hea...t_dog_food.htm That wasn't even a nice try, not even for you Lauren. That's the same opinion (word for word) that's posted on countless websites. Too bad, AGAIN, that there is no proof, but only somebody's opinion. Where's the research indicating a "strong link"?? Check out www.petdiets.com |
Steve Crane wrote:
Joe Canuck wrote in message ... I purchased the bag at least one month ago now. At the top of the bag is the following: "BEST BEFORE 04 2004 R26100916 AW". Here is a question: By the time a bag makes into a store, how far away from the expiry date should the bag be? Joe, That date indicates it was produced in April of 2003, about 7 months ago. That's actually quite old for most Hill's products. 20 years ago Hill's used to manufacture one type of food for a week or more and then switch to the next needed item. Production runs were always quite long because it used to take nearly 2 full days to switch a manufacturing line from one food to another. Automation, better equipment and computer driven manufacturing has reduced that switch over time to about 13 minutes. Hill's no longer makes more food than will be sold in any given week. Some exceptions, Hill's has a couple Prescription Diet products that have very small use. Some of these are non-profit products due to their low consumption rate and a single manufacturing run could be a few months supply. Most of the time the bags on the retail shelf will be less than a month old, especially in a veterinary clinic. Particularly true for Science Diet products with their larger volume demands. I would have to check with Canada and see if they are warehousing foods. I would doubt it. We have no warehousing anywhere in the US. We have local distribution points which may maintain a weeks supply at the most, of Science Diet products, but no warehousing to hold anything long term. Canned food we do tend to warehouse in Canada, Alaska, and some parts of the Pacific Northwest due to problems shipping it in the winter. Freezing canned food wreaks havoc with palatability. What part of Canada are you in? Rouyn-Noranda, Quebec... about 500 miles straight north of Montreal. When I order, the food takes less than a week to arrive at the vet. So the order time is great, but the product I get seems to have been sitting around for a while. I ordered two bags each within a week of each other. The SD Adult Chicken which we have been discussing, and a bag of SD Nature's Best... the expiry on that bag is "BEST BEFORE 07 2004 K17171455 PN" Now, I noticed at a store in town a rather sorry looking 8.5 lb bag of Science Diet Nature's Best. The bag was sitting on the floor by the door. This was the end of October, the expiry date was November the next month. Clerk tried to convince me to buy the bag which I didn't. -- "Its the bugs that keep it running." -Joe Canuck |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:59 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CatBanter.com