Ann MArtin claims debate

I thought I would start a new thread and the other is getting
unwieldy.

Let's take a look at this from another angle.

ONLY for the sake of argument, let's suppose Ann Martin is right and
all pet food contains large amounts of rejected meat meals from human
processing, and all the dead cows and pigs from the feed lots. Just to
make sure everyone understands - I disagree that such is the case for
the major premium manufacturers and can state unequivocally it is not
the case for Hill's.

But just to take this debate further along let's assume the opposite.
Please provide for me an example of a nutrient that is missing, or a
nutrient that is in excess, *and* that has proven to be harmful at the
level included in the final end product the consumer feeds. Don't
waste our time with bogus claims of pentobarb, that's already been
proven to be nothing more than scare tactics. Give me a nutrient in
excess or a nutrient that is too low and then prove some harm has
occurred. This needs to be factual, not opinion. Show us what disease,
what deaths, etc have directly occurred because of this supposed
contamination. Don't waste our time with Internet Fantasy from the
lunatic fringe - provide us with some factual proof.

From: (Steve Crane)

Don't
waste our time with bogus claims of pentobarb, that's already been
proven to be nothing more than scare tactics.

I came across this, from a government website. So I don't think these claims
you say are bogus, are indeed bogus:

http://www.fda.gov/cvm/efoi/DFChart.htm

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: (Steve Crane)

Don't
waste our time with bogus claims of pentobarb, that's already been
proven to be nothing more than scare tactics.

I came across this, from a government website. So I don't think these claims
you say are bogus, are indeed bogus:

http://www.fda.gov/cvm/efoi/DFChart.htm

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

(Steve Crane) wrote in message . com...
I thought I would start a new thread and the other is getting
unwieldy.

Let's take a look at this from another angle.

ONLY for the sake of argument, let's suppose Ann Martin is right and
all pet food contains large amounts of rejected meat meals from human
processing, and all the dead cows and pigs from the feed lots. Just to
make sure everyone understands - I disagree that such is the case for
the major premium manufacturers and can state unequivocally it is not
the case for Hill's.

First, I have never stated that "all pet food contains large amounts
of rejected meat meals from human processing, and all the dead cows
and pigs from the feed lots." Many do. As I have stated a number of
times, MEAT MEAL, not chicken meat, not poultry meal, MEAT MEAL, is
material from rendering plants and CAN contain, 4-D animals, road
kill,(too large to be buried at road side), zoo animals, restaurant
garbage and grease, grocery store garbage and euthanized dogs and
cats. I might also add when I contacted David Dzanis, formerly with
the CVM and asked if the "ingredient definitions" that the AAFCO
publishes also applied to pet food, his reply was "YES". Maybe we
should take a look at some of these tasty ingredients. "Dehydrated
garbage," "Dehydrated Food Waste," "Hydrolysed hair," "Dried poultry
Waste," "Dried Swine Waste," "Undried processed animal waste product,"
The latter is defined as "composed of excreta, with or without the
litter, from poultry, ruminants, or any other animal except humans."
Guess our pets would be getting all the nutrients they require in this
mix.

But just to take this debate further along let's assume the opposite.
Please provide for me an example of a nutrient that is missing, or a
nutrient that is in excess, *and* that has proven to be harmful at the
level included in the final end product the consumer feeds. Don't
waste our time with bogus claims of pentobarb, that's already been
proven to be nothing more than scare tactics. Give me a nutrient in
excess or a nutrient that is too low and then prove some harm has
occurred. This needs to be factual, not opinion. Show us what disease,
what deaths, etc have directly occurred because of this supposed
contamination. Don't waste our time with Internet Fantasy from the
lunatic fringe - provide us with some factual proof.

Try zinc with a level of 1150 ppm? I could also state that three
mycotoxins were also found in this "premium" pet food.

"Ann Martin" wrote in message
om...

First, I have never stated that "all pet food contains large amounts
of rejected meat meals

....but you skillfully worded your phrases to leave the reader with the
impression all pet food contains contaminated or rejected ingredients. Most
pet owners know very little about feline nutrition and are very susceptible
to ambiguous statements. So its easy for an author to phase a statement in
such a way that the reader draws the conclusion the author wanted the reader
to reach without the author being liable for making false statements.

Do you have any actual formal training in veterinary nutrition, or do you
just write books to make money by scaring people based on your own
conclusions and agenda?

Lets be realistic, if even 1/10 of your book was true, thousands of cats who
eat commercial cat food would be dropping like flies every day instead of
living well into their teens and early
twenties....

At least you oppose raw feeding.. I'll give your book that.

..

"Phil P." wrote

First, I have never stated that "all pet food contains large amounts
of rejected meat meals

...but you skillfully worded your phrases to leave the reader with the
impression all pet food contains contaminated or rejected ingredients. Most
pet owners know very little about feline nutrition and are very susceptible
to ambiguous statements. So its easy for an author to phase a statement in
such a way that the reader draws the conclusion the author wanted the reader
to reach without the author being liable for making false statements.

And what do you think is going into pet food? If it was meat, grains
or fats found fit for human consumption they would not be using them
in pet food. Meats, rejected, unfit for human consumption are used in
pet food. Animals, that contain high levels of hormones and drugs are
rejected for human consumption are dumped for pet food. Rendered
material, a wide array of dead animals, are mixed together to produce
meat meal. Talk to a meat inspector or an executive from a rendering
plant and they will tell you what is going for pet food.

Do you have any actual formal training in veterinary nutrition, or do you
just write books to make money by scaring people based on your own
conclusions and agenda?

These are not my "conclusions" or "agenda". Read the extensive
endnotes in any of my books and you will see that ALL information
comes from reputable sources.

Lets be realistic, if even 1/10 of your book was true, thousands of cats who
eat commercial cat food would be dropping like flies every day instead of
living well into their teens and early
twenties....

And thousands of cats did die from lack of taurine in the commercial
pet foods.


At least you oppose raw feeding.. I'll give your book that.

.

(Ann Martin) wrote in message . com...

And what do you think is going into pet food? If it was meat, grains
or fats found fit for human consumption they would not be using them
in pet food. Meats, rejected, unfit for human consumption are used in
pet food. Animals, that contain high levels of hormones and drugs are
rejected for human consumption are dumped for pet food. Rendered
material, a wide array of dead animals, are mixed together to produce
meat meal. Talk to a meat inspector or an executive from a rendering
plant and they will tell you what is going for pet food.

Again Ann, lets try this again. Let's assume all your allegatiosn are
true, show us the proof os ANY negative harmful effects. Let's also
keep in mind that you are suggesting to people they move to "human
grade" foods. Now you need to prove that the pet foods you claim are
WORSE than the human foods you think poeple should move to. I think
you'd better do a bit more research on the incidence of disease in
"human grade" foods and then come back and show us that pet foods have
caused MORE disease than what you are suggesting. Meanwhile we'll just
keep on ignoring REAL PROVEN disease like kidney failure exacerbated
by high levels of phosphorus, sodium and calcium in diet - because
what the heck it's only the second biggest REAL PROVEN killer of cats.





And thousands of cats did die from lack of taurine in the commercial
pet foods.

Ahh, there you go back another couple decades. But wait we forgot
something, millions of cats died from eating undetected levels of
rancid fats up until the 1960's when we discoverd that an artificial
antioxidant in cat food could stop that cause of death dead in it's
tracks. Ooops can't talk about that since it was the awful evil
ethoxyquin that saved millions of cats lives for 40 years. Never mind
lets not let the facts get in the way of our agenda.








At least you oppose raw feeding.. I'll give your book that.

.

(Ann Martin) wrote in message . com...

And what do you think is going into pet food? If it was meat, grains
or fats found fit for human consumption they would not be using them
in pet food. Meats, rejected, unfit for human consumption are used in
pet food. Animals, that contain high levels of hormones and drugs are
rejected for human consumption are dumped for pet food. Rendered
material, a wide array of dead animals, are mixed together to produce
meat meal. Talk to a meat inspector or an executive from a rendering
plant and they will tell you what is going for pet food.

Again Ann, lets try this again. Let's assume all your allegatiosn are
true, show us the proof os ANY negative harmful effects. Let's also
keep in mind that you are suggesting to people they move to "human
grade" foods. Now you need to prove that the pet foods you claim are
WORSE than the human foods you think poeple should move to. I think
you'd better do a bit more research on the incidence of disease in
"human grade" foods and then come back and show us that pet foods have
caused MORE disease than what you are suggesting. Meanwhile we'll just
keep on ignoring REAL PROVEN disease like kidney failure exacerbated
by high levels of phosphorus, sodium and calcium in diet - because
what the heck it's only the second biggest REAL PROVEN killer of cats.





And thousands of cats did die from lack of taurine in the commercial
pet foods.

Ahh, there you go back another couple decades. But wait we forgot
something, millions of cats died from eating undetected levels of
rancid fats up until the 1960's when we discoverd that an artificial
antioxidant in cat food could stop that cause of death dead in it's
tracks. Ooops can't talk about that since it was the awful evil
ethoxyquin that saved millions of cats lives for 40 years. Never mind
lets not let the facts get in the way of our agenda.








At least you oppose raw feeding.. I'll give your book that.

.

"Phil P." wrote

First, I have never stated that "all pet food contains large amounts
of rejected meat meals

...but you skillfully worded your phrases to leave the reader with the
impression all pet food contains contaminated or rejected ingredients. Most
pet owners know very little about feline nutrition and are very susceptible
to ambiguous statements. So its easy for an author to phase a statement in
such a way that the reader draws the conclusion the author wanted the reader
to reach without the author being liable for making false statements.

And what do you think is going into pet food? If it was meat, grains
or fats found fit for human consumption they would not be using them
in pet food. Meats, rejected, unfit for human consumption are used in
pet food. Animals, that contain high levels of hormones and drugs are
rejected for human consumption are dumped for pet food. Rendered
material, a wide array of dead animals, are mixed together to produce
meat meal. Talk to a meat inspector or an executive from a rendering
plant and they will tell you what is going for pet food.

Do you have any actual formal training in veterinary nutrition, or do you
just write books to make money by scaring people based on your own
conclusions and agenda?

These are not my "conclusions" or "agenda". Read the extensive
endnotes in any of my books and you will see that ALL information
comes from reputable sources.

Lets be realistic, if even 1/10 of your book was true, thousands of cats who
eat commercial cat food would be dropping like flies every day instead of
living well into their teens and early
twenties....

And thousands of cats did die from lack of taurine in the commercial
pet foods.


At least you oppose raw feeding.. I'll give your book that.

.

"Ann Martin" wrote in message
om...
(Steve Crane) wrote in message
. com...
I thought I would start a new thread and the other is getting
unwieldy.

Let's take a look at this from another angle.

ONLY for the sake of argument, let's suppose Ann Martin is right and
all pet food contains large amounts of rejected meat meals from human
processing, and all the dead cows and pigs from the feed lots. Just to
make sure everyone understands - I disagree that such is the case for
the major premium manufacturers and can state unequivocally it is not
the case for Hill's.

First, I have never stated that "all pet food contains large amounts
of rejected meat meals from human processing, and all the dead cows
and pigs from the feed lots." Many do. As I have stated a number of
times, MEAT MEAL, not chicken meat, not poultry meal, MEAT MEAL, is
material from rendering plants and CAN contain, 4-D animals, road
kill,(too large to be buried at road side), zoo animals, restaurant
garbage and grease, grocery store garbage and euthanized dogs and
cats. I might also add when I contacted David Dzanis, formerly with
the CVM and asked if the "ingredient definitions" that the AAFCO
publishes also applied to pet food, his reply was "YES". Maybe we
should take a look at some of these tasty ingredients. "Dehydrated
garbage," "Dehydrated Food Waste," "Hydrolysed hair," "Dried poultry
Waste," "Dried Swine Waste," "Undried processed animal waste product,"
The latter is defined as "composed of excreta, with or without the
litter, from poultry, ruminants, or any other animal except humans."
Guess our pets would be getting all the nutrients they require in this
mix.

But just to take this debate further along let's assume the opposite.
Please provide for me an example of a nutrient that is missing, or a
nutrient that is in excess, *and* that has proven to be harmful at the
level included in the final end product the consumer feeds. Don't
waste our time with bogus claims of pentobarb, that's already been
proven to be nothing more than scare tactics. Give me a nutrient in
excess or a nutrient that is too low and then prove some harm has
occurred. This needs to be factual, not opinion. Show us what disease,
what deaths, etc have directly occurred because of this supposed
contamination. Don't waste our time with Internet Fantasy from the
lunatic fringe - provide us with some factual proof.

Try zinc with a level of 1150 ppm? I could also state that three
mycotoxins were also found in this "premium" pet food.

My Father worked in a big well known bakery in the UK a few years back, once
a week Waltham came to collect all the waste/out of date, cakes, bread etc
to add to their feed, which was returned from the major super markets.
Whiskers and Pedigree where made by Waltham, which is meant to be a good
well know brand... terrible to then how many people are wasting their money
on feeding their cats doughnuts!