View Single Post
  #23  
Old October 8th 03, 01:18 AM
Steve Crane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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.