"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.c....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.