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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#171
|
|||
|
|||
wrote in message oups.com... I got the info from Purina, so let me suggest an addition unless there is something wrong. You mentioned an occasional .21% AF, so I found another one: Sliced Chicken Hearts & Liver Feast in Gravy: 0.21% (AF) - 0.95% (DMB) 79 kcals I think I added that to the list later. I think its a good diet for stimulating an anorexic cat's appetite. This is .95% DMB, but not too bad? Same specs as "Grilled Turkey or Beef in Gravy" which both which salso have 75 kcals. I'm reluctant to feed beef. Am I being silly or paranoid? Cows are so big and so sad ot kill them and my cat probably won't live long enough to get MAD CAT DISEASE Most of the cats that I offered the beef to didn't like it. The Minced Beef numbers weren't too bad- but many cats don't seem to that diet either. MARINATED Tuna Feast OR Turkey Feast in Savory Juices, 0.22% Phosphorus - 1.00% (DMB), 84 kcals. Too high in phosphorus and kcals, tad too high even for occasional use? Most of the Marinated line is pretty good. The Flaked and Filet & Pate lines are atrocious. Seafood Filets Ocean Whitefish & Tuna Feast in Aspic, 0.22% Phosphorus - 1.00% (DMB) 55 kcals almost same words as the one above, be careful! So although it way over .80% at 1% Phosphorus, the kcals are pretty low 55 kcals. Too high phosphorus? This one is a doozy. Just a reverse of words of the one you really like for overweight diabetic cats: Its a great diet for all diabetic cats- not just overweight cats. Gotta be very careful with the insulin doses- After eating the Seafood Filets most cats don't need any insulin anymore and the ones that do usually need a much lower dose- often less than half. Seafood Filets Tuna & Oceanfish in Aspic: 0.16% (AF) - 0.72% (DMB) 59 kcals LOW KCALS! How do you like that, almost identical words for the label except the order is reversed. The first time I saw the two I had to do a double take, too. Oh, and I got my genuine Purina Fancy Feast little can covers! Marinated Chicken Feast in Savory Juices: 0.09% (AF) - 0.40% (DMB) 78 kcals protein is 11% as with the other Is this really a mistake? So low, .40% DMB, hard to believe but it's still 11% protein as its buddies. Do you think they made a mistake? It's way out of line except for the also Marinated Salmon Feast in Savory Juices at .59% phosphorus. Thanks, Phil P. for all the info. What's the "Revised" date in the lower left hand corner of the analyses? Mine is 3/08/05. |
#172
|
|||
|
|||
troll
"lorijp optonline.net" lorijp wrote: Path: newssvr30.news.prodigy.com!newsdbm03.news.prodigy. com!newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.com!newsco n06.news.prodigy.com!prodigy.net!border1.nntp.dca. giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!elnk-atl-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!stamper.news.atl.earthl ink.net!newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net.POSTED!5b e4e383!not-for-mail From: "lorijp optonline.net" lorijp Newsgroups: rec.pets.cats.health+behav,alt.med.veterinary Subject: Which food for a fat cat? Message-ID: 0u3bi1517fqru6dlkjp7fhacvtbvmr3dkq 4ax.com References: jL6dnanrJcpjAILeRVn-gA giganews.com 1126356030.056327.235670 g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com asGdneLDiv-ke7_eRVn-oQ giganews.com 1126403674.690376.148120 g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com joGdnbgqz9Mj7rneRVn-qA giganews.com Xns96CE9095334E9wisdomfolly 207.115.63.158 J-adne0XYZhcN7neRVn-pg giganews.com Xns96CF23534ACACwisdomfolly 207.115.63.158 YLadnSXJm_VV0rjeRVn-tQ giganews.com Xns96CF3AEDF8478wisdomfolly 207.115.63.158 X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 3.0/32.763 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 40 Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 14:43:23 GMT NNTP-Posting-Host: 151.198.11.30 X-Complaints-To: abuse earthlink.net X-Trace: newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net 1126536203 151.198.11.30 (Mon, 12 Sep 2005 07:43:23 PDT) NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 07:43:23 PDT Organization: EarthLink Inc. -- http://www.EarthLink.net Xref: newsmst01b.news.prodigy.com rec.pets.cats.health+behav:397556 alt.med.veterinary:125560 On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 10:47:31 GMT, John Doe jdoe usenet.love.invalid wrote: "Phil P." phil maxshouse.com wrote: snipped the inconsequential troll judgments Its not every day that I come across sanctimonious morons like you...LOL! Out of 4790 posts under your current ID: 126 LOL! (laughing at your own remarks) 75 stupid 75 idiot 72 ignorant 60 fool 59 paranoid (that's interesting IMO) 55 moron 48 ROTFLMAO! (laughing at your own remarks) 47 troll 45 neurotic 42 ROTFL! (laughing at your own remarks) 31 delusional 30 psychotic 20 psychopath Count them again for me Johnny boy, your numbers are wrong but I'm not going to tell you which. Just keep counting, I'll let you know when you get it right. Next, I want a breakdown of each word into odd and even days. Next, break them down into AM and PM. I'll give you another assignment when you finish those. Hey Johnny boy, did you notice that all those words apply to you, perfectly, or are you normally not that observant? |
#173
|
|||
|
|||
Phil P. wrote: I think I added that to the list later. I think its a good diet for stimulating an anorexic cat's appetite. Hmm, anorexia is not our problem here. She has a flap which I think might be ventral. can't tell if it's the side defense flaps. When do they get the defense flaps, at 2 or 3 years of age? I think she just got a belly after someone free fed her dry and wet food and no exercise. Most of the cats that I offered the beef to didn't like it. The Minced Beef numbers weren't too bad- but many cats don't seem to that diet either. Good, I don't like the idea of big cows shop chopped. even for occasional use? Most of the Marinated line is pretty good. The Flaked and Filet & Pate lines are atrocious. Of course that's what I see the most. I am slowly making a list of who carries what locally. Seafood Filets Tuna & Oceanfish in Aspic: 0.16% (AF) - 0.72% (DMB) 59 kcals LOW KCALS! How do you like that, almost identical words for the label except the order is reversed. The first time I saw the two I had to do a double take, too. What's the "Revised" date in the lower left hand corner of the analyses? Mine is 3/08/05. Same, 3/08/05, except for 2 entries for Gourmet Gold, 3/10/05, which is sky-high for phosphorus so irrelevant. I also got 2 coupons. One for dry food, hmmm, which one to get that would be like Science Diet r/d, alhtough I think you prefer m/d? I am using Light. Things will be easier when I get a good and accurate scale. |
#174
|
|||
|
|||
" lorijp@ wrote:
On Mon, 12 Sep 2005 10:47:31 GMT, John Doe wrote: "Phil P." phil maxshouse.com wrote: snipped the inconsequential troll judgments Its not every day that I come across sanctimonious morons like you...LOL! Out of 4790 posts under your current ID: 126 LOL! (laughing at your own remarks) 75 stupid 75 idiot 72 ignorant 60 fool 59 paranoid (that's interesting IMO) 55 moron 48 ROTFLMAO! (laughing at your own remarks) 47 troll 45 neurotic 42 ROTFL! (laughing at your own remarks) 31 delusional 30 psychotic 20 psychopath Count them again for me Johnny boy, your numbers are wrong Bull**** liar just like your mother Philly. |
#175
|
|||
|
|||
Steve Crane wrote: Phil P. wrote: Of course- they don't know any better and the pet food companies like to keep it that way. Why doesn't Hill's state the caloric content on the bags- or cans, for that matter? To what possible end???? Consumers don't even read the feeding guides, let alone take the time to do the math. Any consumer who is that interested merely has to look on the web - where we provide more data than any other company in the business. I see you're still treating your customer base like they're not very smart... |
#176
|
|||
|
|||
PawsForThought wrote:
Steve Crane wrote: Phil P. wrote: Of course- they don't know any better and the pet food companies like to keep it that way. Why doesn't Hill's state the caloric content on the bags- or cans, for that matter? To what possible end???? Consumers don't even read the feeding guides, let alone take the time to do the math. Any consumer who is that interested merely has to look on the web - where we provide more data than any other company in the business. I see you're still treating your customer base like they're not very smart... Yes, no and maybe and I'm no diplomat. Science Diet does publish the info on the website which is outstanding. The other websites are not even close except for perhaps one, or two, maybe three. For example, Science Diet published the pH of their foods. I am not sure the other manufacturers, except for some items from Purina, even monitor pH levels. I would reckon that because of the slightly acidic quality of their foods, this is one major reason that Science Diet might have less urinary problems with their foods, keeping the urine slightly acidic. But is this so or another hidden problem like fiber? I am going by one vet who told me he does not see urinary problems with cats fed Science Diet or Iams. Now take kilocalories. Try to find that on many web sites. Even a solid manufacturer like Purina does not put that out. Purina is confusing to me because of the huge variety of quality and products. You really need to know your math and ingredients to figure out what's very good and what's very not so good with them. A few products are outstanding and few should have warning on them, like sky-high phosphorus for some canned products. I can't even get the information easily from the other sites. I did get a lot of info over the telephone from Royal Canin. And Purina said they would take into account my suggestion for more info and to check the info they are giving out over the telephone which had some errors in it. Of course, if no one asks for this info, then no problem! It was a simple problem but the sort of thing that happens when As Fed is not translated into Dry Matter Basis. It's trivial, just divide the As Fed number by 0.22, for all their canned products like Fancy Feast. I suspect someone put in the wrong constant in the spread sheet. But basics like target weight versus maintenance weight versus energy requirements would be extremely helpful. If I bug Science Diet, they will fax me this info, but it's not on their web site. Maybe on the vet side of their web site. But vets are busy and we need to help them out and they probably get bored saying over and over and over whatever they say over and over. Yes? Now to get a good scale. And to find a good vet locally. It's rough. One is good for emergencies but not the mundane like food. And another is better for thinking things through. I hate depending on myself but who else cares as much for my little beastie, who cannot fit into her bikini. |
#177
|
|||
|
|||
Lauren, it was so nice w/o you spewing your venom here....I guess
you're back, though. Where you been lately? Worshipping at the altar of the Hill's Haters? If you don't have anything of substance to contribute, then just leave well enough alone, please. PawsForThought wrote: Steve Crane wrote: Phil P. wrote: Of course- they don't know any better and the pet food companies like to keep it that way. Why doesn't Hill's state the caloric content on the bags- or cans, for that matter? To what possible end???? Consumers don't even read the feeding guides, let alone take the time to do the math. Any consumer who is that interested merely has to look on the web - where we provide more data than any other company in the business. I see you're still treating your customer base like they're not very smart... |
#178
|
|||
|
|||
PawsForThought wrote: I have come across people whose cat would have a constipation problem. When I asked them what was being fed, 9 out 10 of those people were feeding a dry food diet. Not sure if any of them were feeding your r/d, but I would imagine the same principle would apply. A dry food diet for an obligate carnivore seems to go against what an obligate carnivore means, yes? Also, in my experience with cats who are overweight, again, a dry food diet is what is predominantly being fed. Is it the dry food as much as the free feeding so the feeder has less work to do? I suspect it's just too easy to give out too much dry food too often. Now the wet food is measured because it's often in much smaller quantities and even if in 14 ounce cans, you have to measure it out with spoons or spoon it out. And you just can't let it out too long as you can with dry food. Portions get out of control with dry food which just accumlates days on end without spoiling, like a lot of snack or junk food. Having said all that, my cat is an obligate carnivore who used to live off the street eating sparrows and mice and she always loved Science Diet dry food even while a stray. Go figure. |
#179
|
|||
|
|||
|
#180
|
|||
|
|||
5cats wrote: wrote: Is it the dry food as much as the free feeding so the feeder has less work to do? I suspect it's just too easy to give out too much dry food too often. Now the wet food is measured because it's often in much smaller quantities and even if in 14 ounce cans, you have to measure it out with spoons or spoon it out. And you just can't let it out too long as you can with dry food. Portions get out of control with dry food which just accumlates days on end without spoiling, like a lot of snack or junk food. Having said all that, my cat is an obligate carnivore who used to live off the street eating sparrows and mice and she always loved Science Diet dry food even while a stray. Go figure. The cats seem to have different eating habits with dry instead of wet. With wet, they are willing to eat all/most of what's put out in a relatively short period of time. With dry they only want to nibble all day long. Is it because canned food smells stronger and increases appetite? I've noticed my cat acts more suspicious and careful with wet food, looking over her shoulder. She treats it almost as prey, in a way. That's if she really likes the wet food. At least with Fancy Feast'a Marinated Chicken Feast in Savory Juices: 0.09% (AF) - 0.40% (DMB) 78 kcals to which I add even more water. Really low phosphorus. Now we'll see with Seafood Filets Tuna & Oceanfish in Aspic: 0.16% (AF) - 0.72% (DMB) 59 kcals, really low kilocalories so good for diet. I know she hated aspic a few years ago. Will be interesting. If she likes this, it's low, even super low in kilocalories. Girl has to watch her figure, you know. Now with dry food, she figures who else is going to fight for Science Diet Light |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
A compelling case for premium pet food | cobalt via CatKB.com | Cat health & behaviour | 3 | April 18th 05 01:51 AM |
What is REALLY in your pet's food? | catsdogs | Cat health & behaviour | 2 | May 12th 04 05:57 AM |
Need suggestions on a New food | Mike | Cat health & behaviour | 46 | March 10th 04 05:27 PM |
feed Nutro? | Tamara | Cat health & behaviour | 90 | November 19th 03 12:57 AM |
Just read about what is really in cat food | kate | Cat health & behaviour | 422 | September 3rd 03 01:18 AM |