Liz's Food recommendations

For about the umpteenth time Liz, please provide us with the
commercial foods you think have fewer grains than the comparable
Hill's product. I know I have asked you for this many times before
and
you always refuse to answer. The constant lack of an answer seems
to
prove you have an anti Hill's agenda, rather than a sincere concern
about pet health.

Oh, I´m sorry, I´ve not seen that question before. How about
Wellness,
Felidae, Flint River Ranch, Wysong, Innova and other super premium
brands? The carbohydrate content of a food gives you a precise idea
of
the percentage of grains it has.

Not exactly, but close, in fact the percentage of grains will likely
be HIGHER than the percentage of carbs, since a portion of the protein
and fat is derived from grains.

All you need to do is add up all the
percentages given (protein, fat, ash, moisture, etc.) and the
remaining is carbohydrates, that is, grains (unless the manufacturer
adds other plantstuff like carrots or apples). Plain and simple. And
don´t forget to check the lable for the *quality* of the animal
protein used (by-products or not) and the process by which the food
was manufactured (heating destroys many essencial components - baking
x extrusion, cold processing, etc.).

Yes of course we wouldn't want to leave out the fact that chicken by
product meal is MORE digestible than plain chicken and contains less
ground up bone tissue – good point. Of course the comment about heat
destroying nutrients is silly scaremongering nonsense. Manufacturers
have known the degradation rate of every vitamin for forty years,
based upon time and temperature. It's a no brainer to add in
sufficient vitamin X to accommodate loss. Further all competent
manufacturers test the FINAL product to insure it has all the
nutrients it is supposed to have at the right levels AFTER the
manufacturing process. This old wives tale and scaremongering about
heat destroying stuff is complete nonsense. In fact for many
nutrients, heating is what makes them bio-available to the animal.


I have done two. If you´re interested, you can do the calculation for
the other brands I mentioned.

Terrific Examples – Thank-you now let's see what we've got.

Felidae Dry: 21% carbohydrates
First of all your calculations were in error on this one, according to
their web site they have: protein 32.0%, fat 20.0%, fiber 2.5%,
moisture 9.0%, ash 5.5% Total 69% 100-69 = 31% carbohydrates, NOT
21% carbohydrates as you claimed above. Now we'll go beyond third
grade ingredient nutrition and take a peek at the nutrients.
Calcium - 1.2% to 1.33% - In excess of KNF maximum calcium levels.
Phosphorus – 1.0% to 1.1% - in excess of KNF maximums levels for an
adult cat.


Wellness Dry: 23.22% carbohydrates
Again your calculations were in error, according to their web site
they have Protein 33.0%, fat 19.0%, fiber 5.0%, Moisture 10.0%, Ash
6.0% Total 73% 100-73 = 27% carbohydrates NOT 23.22% carbohydrates as
you claimed above.
Now we'll go beyond third grade ingredient nutrition and take a peek
at the nutrients.
Calcium 0.94%
Phosphorus 1.33% In EXCESS of KNF maximums for an adult cat.
WARNING – this food has an inverse calcium phosphorus ratio.


Science Diet Nature´s Best: 34.5% carbohydrates
carbs by adding up the guarantees, you cannot choose to measure carbs
in Science Diet products by going to the web site and getting info you
can't get from others. You must compare apples to apples. Guarantee
levels: Protein 30%, fat 19%, fiber 2.0%, moisture 10%, ash 6.5% Total
equals 67.5%. Carbs are therefore 32.5% NOT the 34.5% you noted above.
Calcium 0.92%
Phosphorus 0.74%
Digestibility Protein – 88% Fat – 92% Carbs – 94.9%


Science Diet Original: 34.3% carbohydrates
Again you erred by not adding labels and not comparing apples to
apples. Protein 30%, fat 20%, fiber 2%, Moisture 10%, ash 5.5% Total
67.5% Carbs are thus 32.5% not the 34.3% you claimed above.
Calcium 0.76%
Phosphorus 0.70%
Digestibility Protein – 87% Fat – 91% Carbs – 99.9%

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. 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 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.

Steve,

Chris and I went around and around on this topic recently. What
requirements are there for a product to pass the AAFCO (I assume that's
what you mean) feed trial for growth, other than having 8 kittens
consume the food for 10 weeks and show no significant nutritional
deficiency or stunting of growth? Theoretically speaking, if one were to
submit Science Diet Adult Maintenance to an AAFCO growth trial, would it
have any chance of passing?

-Alison in OH

Steve,

Chris and I went around and around on this topic recently. What
requirements are there for a product to pass the AAFCO (I assume that's
what you mean) feed trial for growth, other than having 8 kittens
consume the food for 10 weeks and show no significant nutritional
deficiency or stunting of growth? Theoretically speaking, if one were to
submit Science Diet Adult Maintenance to an AAFCO growth trial, would it
have any chance of passing?

-Alison in OH

LOL! That´s all it takes? I bet bread and butter would be approved
since the deficiency would have to be *significant*.

From: (Liz)

LOL! That´s all it takes? I bet bread and butter would be approved
since the deficiency would have to be *significant*.


You've responded to Alison, how about responding to Steve's post refuting just
about everything you previously said? Or are you just going to ignore that
too, since it proves you wrong AGAIN?

From: (Liz)

LOL! That´s all it takes? I bet bread and butter would be approved
since the deficiency would have to be *significant*.


You've responded to Alison, how about responding to Steve's post refuting just
about everything you previously said? Or are you just going to ignore that
too, since it proves you wrong AGAIN?

Alison Perera wrote in message ...
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.

Steve,

Chris and I went around and around on this topic recently. What
requirements are there for a product to pass the AAFCO (I assume that's
what you mean) feed trial for growth, other than having 8 kittens
consume the food for 10 weeks and show no significant nutritional
deficiency or stunting of growth? Theoretically speaking, if one were to
submit Science Diet Adult Maintenance to an AAFCO growth trial, would it
have any chance of passing?

-Alison in OH

Alison,
AAFCO has two methods of approving a food. For many years there was
only one method and that involved an actual feeding trial. A few years
ago AAFCO got weak (my personal opinion) and permitted a manufacturer
to show that one food was similar to something else they already run
through feeding trials and therefore it wasn't necessary to actually
run a feeding trial. (Similar formulas expected to provide similar
results philosophy) You can tell the difference because the legal
AAFCO statement either uses the word "feeding" in the language of the
statement or doesn't.
There are essentially two forms of actual feeding trials. One is
for growth and the other is for adult maintenance. There is no feeding
trial for "All Life Stages". It is presumed that if a food can
satisfactorily pass the more strenuous growth test than it will
provide sufficient nutrition for adult maintenance. Feeding trial are
not deigned ot look for long term effects of excessive levels of
anything. The growth trial requires that puppies in the trial be fed
the food and that blood tests be taken every week during the trial.
PCV, RBC, WBC, and typical serum chemistries must remain within normal
ranges during the entire trial period or the food fails. Puppies and
kittens are growing at an enormous rate during this time and need
vastly greater quantities of calcium, phosphorus, fat, protein etc
than an adult dog or cat which isn't growing at such a prodigious
rate. And no, it's not as simple as the *amount* of food needed. The
ratio of protein to total energy intake is vastly different when you
are doubling in size during the trial period.
In contrast the adult trial requires the same blood test each week
and must deliver the same consequences at the end of the trial, but
the animals involved are not doubling their weight during the trial
and thus need far fewer amounts of many nutrients.
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)

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

In ,
Alison Perera being of bellicose mind
posted:
..snip

Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess,
other than obesity.

-Alison in OH

Indirectly, being obese leads to diabetes in people. How about cats?
For that matter, obesity is a gateway condition to numerous other
diseases. Not in cats?
--

~~Philip "Never let school interfere
with your education - Mark Twain"

In article . net,
"Philip ®" wrote:

In ,
Alison Perera being of bellicose mind
posted:
.snip

Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess,
other than obesity.

-Alison in OH

Indirectly, being obese leads to diabetes in people. How about cats?
For that matter, obesity is a gateway condition to numerous other
diseases. Not in cats?

Obesity in cats is generally caused by the consumption of too many
calories for the lifestyle of the cat. Since the owner of an indoor cat
has complete control over the cat's intake, I don't consider this to be
a failing in whatever complete commercial diet or other foodstuff that
the cat is consuming. 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

In article . net,
"Philip ®" wrote:

In ,
Alison Perera being of bellicose mind
posted:
.snip

Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess,
other than obesity.

-Alison in OH

Indirectly, being obese leads to diabetes in people. How about cats?
For that matter, obesity is a gateway condition to numerous other
diseases. Not in cats?

Obesity in cats is generally caused by the consumption of too many
calories for the lifestyle of the cat. Since the owner of an indoor cat
has complete control over the cat's intake, I don't consider this to be
a failing in whatever complete commercial diet or other foodstuff that
the cat is consuming. 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