|
"Karen M." wrote in message ...
Steve Crane wrote: If you want to compare products you ought to compare products within the same category. Both Wellness and Felidae are "All Life Stage" foods, which means they have passed AFFCO testing for growth and are indeed "kitten" foods. Therefore the correct comparison would be to compare one growth food to another. Let's see how that works. Science Diet Feline Kitten Protein 33%, fat 23%, fiber 3%, moisture 10%, ash 7% Total = 76% thus this food is 24% carbs. Science Diet Nature's Best Feline Kitten Protein 35%, fat 22%, fiber 2%, moisture 10%, ash 6% Total = 75% thus this food is 25% carbs. The Science Diet products are 21-33% *LOWER* in carbs than Felidae and Wellness dry products. No they're not! You're comparing the SD *kitten* food to the W & F. The two regular SDs you compared were *higher*, even after your "corrections". The W & F are *not* exclusive kitten foods, despite your attempted slight of hand. If you want to be exact, SD *kitten* food is lower in carbs if you're looking to feed a kitten. For an adult cat, it is *higher* in carbs. Karen Karen, Yes they are. The Wellnes and Felidae products passed AAFCO GROWTH trials, that how they obtained an "All Life Stages" designation. Hill's could have put "All Life Stages" on both of the kitten products. All it woudl take is a change at the printers. If you are going to compare foods of a type, you need to comapre the same types. Science Diet Kitten is also an "All Life Stages" food under the law and could have been labelled as such. Thus they are indeed far lower in carbs than the other products. AS for the adult Science Diet products being "higher", that's not entirely true as you know. Further the difference between 32.5% and 34% is completely meaningless in terms of nutrition. I think a little self honesty is in order here. Had I given you the same label numbers and told you it was Brand X, "naturally preserved" made with "holistic" "human grade" ingredients, those anti Science Diet people on this board would have given this food a 5 star rating. In fact Hill's could very easily do exactly that. There is nothing to stop them from calling Nature's Best kitten food "All Life Stages", "naturally preserved", "holistic", "human grade". All of those terms could be applied to the Nature's Best kitten product anytime Hill's wanted to. If you are honest with yourself you will agree that under those circumstances none of the anti Science Diet crowd would have disliked the food at all. Guess you'll be off to buy some Science Diet won't you? Both are lower in carbs than your picks for a dry food based upon the third grade nutrition of lowering carbs and ignoring nutrients. The biggest irony of all is that if the Nature's Best kitten was repackaged as Brand X and had claims all over the bag as "holistic", "human grade", both of which terms could legally be applied to these foods, they would be the perfect foods according to your criteria. Oh never mind that won't work because you don't care about the digestibility of ingredients, only that they sound good. Since one food contains chicken by-products which are more digestible than plain chicken you would still ignore one of them because what goes on in the animals body isn't as important as an emotional judgment made about how good ingredients SOUND. Purina Cat Chow: 37.5% carbohydrates Calcium 1.24% Phosphorus 1.25% Whiskas: 40% carbohydrates Calcium 2.73% Phosphorus 1.82% Canned: Science Diet: 5.5% carbohydrates (all grains) Sigh, same errors actual by label is 5.7% carbs – How in the world you can call this all grains is utterly beyond me. You claimed earlier that the carbohydrates were exactly the amount of grains in a food. Since this food is composed of 94.3% NON carbohydrates and only 5.7% carbohydrates how you could claim it is "(all grains)" defies logic. Felidae: 0% carbohydrates (perfect for cats with diabetes or excess weight) Calcium 1.32% - in excess of KNF maximum levels for an adult cat. Phosphorus 1.32% - in excess of the KNF maximum levels for an adult cat. Wellness: less than 3% carbohydrates but no grains Calcium 1.52% Exceeds maximum KNF levels for adult cats. Phosphorus 0.96% Exceeds maximum KNF levels for adult cats. Whiskas Ground Chicken Dinner: 0% carbohydrates No data available, But let's look at another ZERO carb grocery store food. Fancy Feast Turkey & Giblets canned = 0% carbohydrates Calcium 2.1% *Greatly* in excess of maximum KNF's for calcium for a healthy adult cat. Phosphorus 1.9% *Greatly* in excess of maximum KNF's for phosphorus for a healthy adult cat. I would expect the Whiskas product to fall into the same category. So, as you can see for yourself, Science Diet is much closer to grocery store brands than it is to the super premium brands above both in low-quality ingredients and in percentage of carbs. And you have now been proven wrong. I'm sure you didn't purposefully distort the carb levels of the foods you offered. You're too smart to think you wouldn't be checked, so I'll assume there was some math error somewhere. Felidae dry carbs = 31% with *excessive* calcium and phosphorus Wellness Dry carbs = 27% with *excessive* levels of calcium and phosphorus Science Diet Original carbs = 32.5% within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels Nature's Best Chicken carbs = 32.5% within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels. Science Diet Kitten carbs = 24% within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels. Nature's Best Kitten carbs = 25% carbs within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels. Purina Cat Chow carbs 37.7% with *excessive* calcium and phosphorus. Fancy Feast carbs 0% but with calcium double maximum KNF levels, and phos more than double maximum levels. So what you have proven is that Science Diet is anything but a "grocery store" quality food as it was the only example which kept calcium and phos levels down in the proper area. The clear message here is that some manufacturers are using much less expensive meat meals with very high percentages of ground up bone tissue in the meat meals, whereas Science Diet has chosen to use more expensive low "ash" (bone) meat meals. The only other thing "proven" is that some people still cling to third grade math levels of nutrition by basing their judgment on ingredients and have yet to take the next step to high school math level nutrition and carefully look at the nutrients. |
"Karen M." wrote in message ...
Steve Crane wrote: If you want to compare products you ought to compare products within the same category. Both Wellness and Felidae are "All Life Stage" foods, which means they have passed AFFCO testing for growth and are indeed "kitten" foods. Therefore the correct comparison would be to compare one growth food to another. Let's see how that works. Science Diet Feline Kitten Protein 33%, fat 23%, fiber 3%, moisture 10%, ash 7% Total = 76% thus this food is 24% carbs. Science Diet Nature's Best Feline Kitten Protein 35%, fat 22%, fiber 2%, moisture 10%, ash 6% Total = 75% thus this food is 25% carbs. The Science Diet products are 21-33% *LOWER* in carbs than Felidae and Wellness dry products. No they're not! You're comparing the SD *kitten* food to the W & F. The two regular SDs you compared were *higher*, even after your "corrections". The W & F are *not* exclusive kitten foods, despite your attempted slight of hand. If you want to be exact, SD *kitten* food is lower in carbs if you're looking to feed a kitten. For an adult cat, it is *higher* in carbs. Karen Karen, Yes they are. The Wellnes and Felidae products passed AAFCO GROWTH trials, that how they obtained an "All Life Stages" designation. Hill's could have put "All Life Stages" on both of the kitten products. All it woudl take is a change at the printers. If you are going to compare foods of a type, you need to comapre the same types. Science Diet Kitten is also an "All Life Stages" food under the law and could have been labelled as such. Thus they are indeed far lower in carbs than the other products. AS for the adult Science Diet products being "higher", that's not entirely true as you know. Further the difference between 32.5% and 34% is completely meaningless in terms of nutrition. I think a little self honesty is in order here. Had I given you the same label numbers and told you it was Brand X, "naturally preserved" made with "holistic" "human grade" ingredients, those anti Science Diet people on this board would have given this food a 5 star rating. In fact Hill's could very easily do exactly that. There is nothing to stop them from calling Nature's Best kitten food "All Life Stages", "naturally preserved", "holistic", "human grade". All of those terms could be applied to the Nature's Best kitten product anytime Hill's wanted to. If you are honest with yourself you will agree that under those circumstances none of the anti Science Diet crowd would have disliked the food at all. Guess you'll be off to buy some Science Diet won't you? Both are lower in carbs than your picks for a dry food based upon the third grade nutrition of lowering carbs and ignoring nutrients. The biggest irony of all is that if the Nature's Best kitten was repackaged as Brand X and had claims all over the bag as "holistic", "human grade", both of which terms could legally be applied to these foods, they would be the perfect foods according to your criteria. Oh never mind that won't work because you don't care about the digestibility of ingredients, only that they sound good. Since one food contains chicken by-products which are more digestible than plain chicken you would still ignore one of them because what goes on in the animals body isn't as important as an emotional judgment made about how good ingredients SOUND. Purina Cat Chow: 37.5% carbohydrates Calcium 1.24% Phosphorus 1.25% Whiskas: 40% carbohydrates Calcium 2.73% Phosphorus 1.82% Canned: Science Diet: 5.5% carbohydrates (all grains) Sigh, same errors actual by label is 5.7% carbs – How in the world you can call this all grains is utterly beyond me. You claimed earlier that the carbohydrates were exactly the amount of grains in a food. Since this food is composed of 94.3% NON carbohydrates and only 5.7% carbohydrates how you could claim it is "(all grains)" defies logic. Felidae: 0% carbohydrates (perfect for cats with diabetes or excess weight) Calcium 1.32% - in excess of KNF maximum levels for an adult cat. Phosphorus 1.32% - in excess of the KNF maximum levels for an adult cat. Wellness: less than 3% carbohydrates but no grains Calcium 1.52% Exceeds maximum KNF levels for adult cats. Phosphorus 0.96% Exceeds maximum KNF levels for adult cats. Whiskas Ground Chicken Dinner: 0% carbohydrates No data available, But let's look at another ZERO carb grocery store food. Fancy Feast Turkey & Giblets canned = 0% carbohydrates Calcium 2.1% *Greatly* in excess of maximum KNF's for calcium for a healthy adult cat. Phosphorus 1.9% *Greatly* in excess of maximum KNF's for phosphorus for a healthy adult cat. I would expect the Whiskas product to fall into the same category. So, as you can see for yourself, Science Diet is much closer to grocery store brands than it is to the super premium brands above both in low-quality ingredients and in percentage of carbs. And you have now been proven wrong. I'm sure you didn't purposefully distort the carb levels of the foods you offered. You're too smart to think you wouldn't be checked, so I'll assume there was some math error somewhere. Felidae dry carbs = 31% with *excessive* calcium and phosphorus Wellness Dry carbs = 27% with *excessive* levels of calcium and phosphorus Science Diet Original carbs = 32.5% within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels Nature's Best Chicken carbs = 32.5% within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels. Science Diet Kitten carbs = 24% within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels. Nature's Best Kitten carbs = 25% carbs within KNF guidelines for calcium and phosphorus levels. Purina Cat Chow carbs 37.7% with *excessive* calcium and phosphorus. Fancy Feast carbs 0% but with calcium double maximum KNF levels, and phos more than double maximum levels. So what you have proven is that Science Diet is anything but a "grocery store" quality food as it was the only example which kept calcium and phos levels down in the proper area. The clear message here is that some manufacturers are using much less expensive meat meals with very high percentages of ground up bone tissue in the meat meals, whereas Science Diet has chosen to use more expensive low "ash" (bone) meat meals. The only other thing "proven" is that some people still cling to third grade math levels of nutrition by basing their judgment on ingredients and have yet to take the next step to high school math level nutrition and carefully look at the nutrients. |
In ,
PawsForThought being of bellicose mind posted: From: (Liz) This philosophy of Hill´s (and some other companies) treating consumers as morons infuriates me. It shows how much the company respects their customer - nothing at all. They (customers) are all a bunch of easily-manipulated imbeciles. So let´s go ahead and launch the 15% carbs Atkin´s type diet even knowing it doesn´t work. Who cares? We are making money and that´s all that matters. Have you checked out Hill's newest "formula" called Advanced Protection? Ingredients: Brewers rice, chicken by-product meal, corn gluten meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), dried egg product, chicken liver flavor, fish oil (preserved with mixed tocopherols and ascorbic acid), DL-methionine, L-lysine, natural flavor, taurine, L-cysteine, L-carnitine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, calcium carbonate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta-carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin E supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of Vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). Again, it looks like another grain based diet, cooked to death, and then they throw some vitamins in. I still haven't figured out exacftly what dried egg product is, and once again, they add chicken liver "flavor" but no chicken liver. Animal fat could be from any source, who knows? Ah wait, I just found this website: http://www.hillssciencediet.info/DEFINITION.htm Lauren ________ The only thing I look for on a can of cat food is the ABSENCE of "meat byproducts." -- ~~Philip "Never let school interfere with your education - Mark Twain" |
In ,
PawsForThought being of bellicose mind posted: From: (Liz) This philosophy of Hill´s (and some other companies) treating consumers as morons infuriates me. It shows how much the company respects their customer - nothing at all. They (customers) are all a bunch of easily-manipulated imbeciles. So let´s go ahead and launch the 15% carbs Atkin´s type diet even knowing it doesn´t work. Who cares? We are making money and that´s all that matters. Have you checked out Hill's newest "formula" called Advanced Protection? Ingredients: Brewers rice, chicken by-product meal, corn gluten meal, corn meal, animal fat (preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid), dried egg product, chicken liver flavor, fish oil (preserved with mixed tocopherols and ascorbic acid), DL-methionine, L-lysine, natural flavor, taurine, L-cysteine, L-carnitine, preserved with mixed tocopherols and citric acid, minerals (potassium chloride, calcium sulfate, calcium carbonate, salt, ferrous sulfate, zinc oxide, copper sulfate, manganous oxide, calcium iodate, sodium selenite), rosemary extract, beta-carotene, vitamins (choline chloride, vitamin A supplement, vitamin E supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, L-ascorbyl-2-polyphosphate (a source of Vitamin C), niacin, thiamine mononitrate, calcium pantothenate, riboflavin, pyridoxine hydrochloride, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement). Again, it looks like another grain based diet, cooked to death, and then they throw some vitamins in. I still haven't figured out exacftly what dried egg product is, and once again, they add chicken liver "flavor" but no chicken liver. Animal fat could be from any source, who knows? Ah wait, I just found this website: http://www.hillssciencediet.info/DEFINITION.htm Lauren ________ The only thing I look for on a can of cat food is the ABSENCE of "meat byproducts." -- ~~Philip "Never let school interfere with your education - Mark Twain" |
olitter (PawsForThought) wrote in message ...
Animal fat could be from any source, who knows? Ah wait, I just found this website: http://www.hillssciencediet.info/DEFINITION.htm Lauren Lauren, I'm begining to think you are purposefully being deceitful. You have "just found" that same website for months. Never mind that proof of the effectiveness of the very high levels of antioxidants matching those in AP have been published in peer reviewed journals. It should give a logically thinking grown-up some pause to wonder why 99.99% of all practicing veterinarians, EVERY board certified diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Nutrition, and every Board certified diplomate of the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine refuses to endorse the BARF philosophy. You have to wonder what causes people to get so wrapped up in emotional judgements that they refuse to accept what hard scientific proof and every recognized expert suggests. |
From: "Philip ®" lid
The only thing I look for on a can of cat food is the ABSENCE of "meat byproducts." -- By-products, if listed as chicken by-products, for example, are not a bad thing if they contain things like liver, kidney, heart, etc., but not so good if they contain things like feathers or beaks. If a food lists by-products as "animal" by-products, well then, that could be anything. Cats need offal in their diet in the form of kidney, heart and other internal organs. But if the by-products as listed on the can are questionable, as in "animal" by-products, then you're right to avoid it. Lauren ________ See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm |
From: "Philip ®" lid
The only thing I look for on a can of cat food is the ABSENCE of "meat byproducts." -- By-products, if listed as chicken by-products, for example, are not a bad thing if they contain things like liver, kidney, heart, etc., but not so good if they contain things like feathers or beaks. If a food lists by-products as "animal" by-products, well then, that could be anything. Cats need offal in their diet in the form of kidney, heart and other internal organs. But if the by-products as listed on the can are questionable, as in "animal" by-products, then you're right to avoid it. Lauren ________ See my cats: http://community.webshots.com/album/56955940rWhxAe Raw Diet Info: http://www.holisticat.com/drjletter.html http://www.geocities.com/rawfeeders/ForCatsOnly.html Declawing Info: http://www.wholecat.com/articles/claws.htm |
In article ,
(Steve Crane) wrote: In article , (Steve Crane) wrote: If you want to compare products you ought to compare products within the same category. Both Wellness and Felidae are "All Life Stage" foods, which means they have passed AFFCO testing for growth and are indeed "kitten" foods. Therefore the correct comparison would be to compare one growth food to another. Science Diet adult products are designed and developed for adult animals, not puppies or kittens and thus would not be subjected to the growth trial. It would be purely a guess on my part, but I would guess some might pass and others might not. Science Diet puppy and kitten products could be labelled for "All Life Stages", however Hill's feels this may mislead a pet owner into feeding a growth product to an adult. Hill's has a tradition and history of treating disease with the Prescription Diet products. As a consequence the level so fnutrients like calcium and phosphorus that are so critical in renal failrue and other diseases get particular attention. As a consequence dietary development is always looking at the disease we see and trying to avoid them. 50 years ago we saw pets in veterinary clinics with examples of deficiencies in the diets, today we see only the results of excesses in the veterinary clinic. (Outside of the occasional animals dumped on the road and suffering from mal nutrition) So there would be nothing precluding Science Diet Adult from participating in a feed trial for growth, and no reason it wouldn't pass except for nutrient levels that cause nutritional deficiency in young growing animals. Even the most bargain-basement Walmart and grocery store foods around here have the AAFCO feed trial label for all life stages. Either Science Diet is less nutritious than Dad's Original Cat Food, or it's hypocritical for you to criticize a boutique brand because it plays to the marketing hype and shoots for the "All Life Stages" label that appeals to consumers. Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess, other than obesity. -Alison in OH |
All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:27 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CatBanter.com