A cat forum. CatBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » CatBanter forum » Cat Newsgroups » Cat health & behaviour
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Liz's Food recommendations



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old October 8th 03, 06:01 PM
Alison Perera
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article . net,
"Philip ®" wrote:

I'm more interested
in the justification for restricting nutrients, including
minerals, protein etc., in order to stave off some disease that is
directly caused by excess.

Yes, from what I understand obesity leads to diabetes in cats.
Obesity is not a light-weight matter 8-O, it's just not the kind
of thing I am looking for.

-Alison in OH


You've got a conclusion and are looking for supporting evidence. Not
a good research discipline.


You're right, I should rephrase. Steve says:

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.


Ie, Hill's Science Diet is formulated to prevent nutritional excess.
This is apparently a strong motivator for Hill's R & D for the pet
market, and it's been repeated by folks such as Phil and Chris who
believe strongly that Hill's research represents the pinnacle of dietary
development.

I ask Steve what an example of disease caused by nutritional excess is,
because "dietary development is always looking at the disease we see and
trying to avoid them [sic]".

I am not expecting an answer that "obesity is a problem caused by
nutritional excess" because then Hill's would be developing and
marketing an educational campaign to get people to feed their cats less
food--including Hill's food, of course.

-Alison in OH
  #42  
Old October 8th 03, 06:08 PM
Karen M.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Steve Crane wrote:

"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.


Sorry Steve, I have to disagree with you. SD made their kitten food with
*kittens* in mind. W & F made theirs with the idea that higher protein
benefits *all* life stages in cats. Two different philosophies,
therefore two different kinds of food. Your philosophy is different, but
don't try to fool people, which is exactly what you're trying to do.
You're trying to make SD sound low-carb now, for some reason.


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.


Wrong. There's no way in hell I would buy a food with so much corn in it
(i.e. carbs and plant-based protein). I don't care who made it. You can
tell yourself people just want to hate Hill's but some of us don't like
it for a *reason*. My reason? It doesn't work with my animals, and
that's 5 different animals from completely different walks of life all
responding poorly to the same brand of food. I found two different foods
that work great with them *all* of them and I'm sticking to it. Period.







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.


  #43  
Old October 8th 03, 06:08 PM
Karen M.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default



Steve Crane wrote:

"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.


Sorry Steve, I have to disagree with you. SD made their kitten food with
*kittens* in mind. W & F made theirs with the idea that higher protein
benefits *all* life stages in cats. Two different philosophies,
therefore two different kinds of food. Your philosophy is different, but
don't try to fool people, which is exactly what you're trying to do.
You're trying to make SD sound low-carb now, for some reason.


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.


Wrong. There's no way in hell I would buy a food with so much corn in it
(i.e. carbs and plant-based protein). I don't care who made it. You can
tell yourself people just want to hate Hill's but some of us don't like
it for a *reason*. My reason? It doesn't work with my animals, and
that's 5 different animals from completely different walks of life all
responding poorly to the same brand of food. I found two different foods
that work great with them *all* of them and I'm sticking to it. Period.







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.


  #44  
Old October 8th 03, 07:33 PM
Liz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Then I started feeding her a 75% California Natural & 25% Science Diet
Nature's Best. Everything changed around mealtime... she now meows for
me to fill up the dish. She now seems to try to ferret out the Science
Diet chunks from the California Natural. If I have no treats on hand,
she will happily consider the pure Science Diet Nature's Best chunks as
a treat.


Do you have kids? Get a bowl of icecream or some chocolate chip
cookies and a bowl of steak and put both in front of the child. Most
children will go for the icecream or cookies. Does that mean this is
the best for them?
  #45  
Old October 8th 03, 07:33 PM
Liz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Then I started feeding her a 75% California Natural & 25% Science Diet
Nature's Best. Everything changed around mealtime... she now meows for
me to fill up the dish. She now seems to try to ferret out the Science
Diet chunks from the California Natural. If I have no treats on hand,
she will happily consider the pure Science Diet Nature's Best chunks as
a treat.


Do you have kids? Get a bowl of icecream or some chocolate chip
cookies and a bowl of steak and put both in front of the child. Most
children will go for the icecream or cookies. Does that mean this is
the best for them?
  #46  
Old October 8th 03, 07:36 PM
Liz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Not to mention all the sulfate salts. Sulfates consume (destroy)
vitamin E. What grade should we give them for their new formula? LOL
  #47  
Old October 8th 03, 07:36 PM
Liz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Not to mention all the sulfate salts. Sulfates consume (destroy)
vitamin E. What grade should we give them for their new formula? LOL
  #48  
Old October 8th 03, 07:48 PM
Liz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.


I would say they are being responsible. Heck, people can´t even take
care of themselves when it comes to eating and you expect them to do a
good job with their pets? How many people would have the time and
money to prepare a balanced raw diet? And how many of these would
handle meat safely, both for them and for their pets? How many people
are in fact hygienic? How many people wash their hands before they
handle meat? How many lawsuits would they be against the veterinary
community if they acquired toxo by handling meat for their pets? If I
were a vet, I would definitively be hesitant to advocate raw without
first giving a lecture about feeding raw. Afterall, a vet simply does
not know what kind of a person (or pig) they´re dealing with. The fact
that they don´t advocate raw does not necessarily mean raw is not the
best for the animal.
  #49  
Old October 8th 03, 07:48 PM
Liz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

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.


I would say they are being responsible. Heck, people can´t even take
care of themselves when it comes to eating and you expect them to do a
good job with their pets? How many people would have the time and
money to prepare a balanced raw diet? And how many of these would
handle meat safely, both for them and for their pets? How many people
are in fact hygienic? How many people wash their hands before they
handle meat? How many lawsuits would they be against the veterinary
community if they acquired toxo by handling meat for their pets? If I
were a vet, I would definitively be hesitant to advocate raw without
first giving a lecture about feeding raw. Afterall, a vet simply does
not know what kind of a person (or pig) they´re dealing with. The fact
that they don´t advocate raw does not necessarily mean raw is not the
best for the animal.
  #50  
Old October 8th 03, 08:32 PM
Liz
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I guess I will break these up a bit. Yes the word is nonsense. Who do
you think pioneered adding high levels of Omega 3 and 6 fatty acids to
diets? in *1962* - Hill's. But you're right that was only 41 years
ago, not 50. There isn't a diet out there with more N3,6's than
products made by Hill's.


What is the percentage of omega 3 and omega 6 in Science Diet Adult
Maintenance?

What you fail to recognize, primarily becauaue you have followed down
the path of totally UNPROVEN carbophobia is that once the state of
metabolic acidosis is reached, it doesn't mater what the level of
carbs are - not one bit. It doesn't matter for treating weight loss or
for diabetes.


Who said anything about metabolic acidosis? I´m talking about the
Atkin´s diet. How did you go from the Atkin´s diet to metabolic
acidosis?

That's always the fall back isn't it. Play Chicken little and claim
the sky *might* be falling. I would suggest that you need to look at a
number of possible nutrients that are ONLY available when cooked. Be
sure to tell me how you are planning for these unknown nutrients that
are ONLY available in cooked foods.


Oh dear, someone really needs to be a genious to figure this one out.
For how long have cats (or humans) existed? And for how long have we
been cooking our food? For how long have cats been cooking their food?
If any essential nutrient were only available after cooking, we
wouldn´t be here, don´t you think?

Oh goodness. Now this is wild bs. Please state one. And let me remind
you that cellulose or starch are *not* necessary at all in a cat´s
diet.


Can you spell lycopene? trypsin in native states? and of course the
dreaded and evil carbohydrates, despite the myths and unsubstantiated
hypothesis of the carbophobics.


Lycopene. Red pigment only present in certain plants. Cats do not eat
plants. Should we assume lycopene is essential to cats? Does cooking
actually affect lycopene or does it rupture the cell wall of plants
making its contents available to us or cats, both uncapable of
breaking through the cell wall of plants? And a correction: lycopene
is more available in cooked plants than raw plants, it´s not *only*
available in cooked plants.

Trypsin is an enzyme and all enzymes are proteins. Proteins are
denatured by heat and the more denatured they are, the harder they
become to digest until they become completely undigestible. Please
give me the source of your information as I will *definitively* check
this one.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Before commercial cat food..... Kitten M Cat health & behaviour 716 October 18th 03 02:04 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CatBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.