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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
In om,
Liz composed with style: I addition to what others wrote, this is an informative page of info on pet food labeling. (yes, Steve, this supports what you said about the ingredient list). http://www.fda.gov/cvm/index/consumer/petlabel.htm And, of course, expect another war to start from this thread! LOL Not from me dear, I'm pooped. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
In om,
Liz composed with style: I addition to what others wrote, this is an informative page of info on pet food labeling. (yes, Steve, this supports what you said about the ingredient list). http://www.fda.gov/cvm/index/consumer/petlabel.htm And, of course, expect another war to start from this thread! LOL Not from me dear, I'm pooped. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
You will not find anywhere in literature anything saying that dietary
phosphorus in the levels used in pet food and properly balanced with calcium is detrimental to kidneys. What you will find is papers saying that phosphorus is detrimental if there is too much phosphorus in blood, a condition called hyperphosphataemia. That is of course utter nonsense. In a dozen studies the level of phosphorus in the FOOD provided the animal, vastly affected the lifespan of the CRF animal. Dozen?! I know of only one and in this one, the author states clearly that it cannot be concluded that restriction of phosphorus increased their lives. Please give me the references of the other 11. A study showed that cutting down on phosphorus did not increase the life expectancy of dogs in the terminal stage of kidney disease. Please provide a source for this wild statement. I already did. Go back to the thread "Chronic Renal Failure" and read my post with all the references. Given that the last four Grade 1 published peer reviewed studies showed exactly the opposite. Give me the reference for those four studies. My guess is that you are once again referring to Finco's much bashed study wherein he fed the group of high phos dogs potassium citrate, did not feed the low phos dogs potassium citrate, took three dogs out of the study without acknowledgeing it, admitted that the dogs on high phos diets had greater and more extensive uremic crisis, and claimed that since the high phos dogs died of uremic crisis and NOT renal failure there was no difference with high phos levels. Most folks consider a dead dog a "negative outcome". Finco chose not to do so. Can you give me proof of what you said above about his study? Did anyone with a PhD bash his study in writing? If so, where is it? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the other thread, you have not answered many things I asked you. To make it easier for you, I´ll bring them over to this thread: What is the percentage of omega 3 and omega 6 in Science Diet Adult Maintenance? Levels of such nutrients are proprietary. While I can not share a specific foods value I will give you some ranges N3's range from 0.57% to 7.29%, N6's range from 2.5% to 5.10% If they are proprietary, how can you claim that Hill´s has more than any other food? And this proprietary thing is bs. A chemist could analyze the food at any moment and tell you exactly how much N3 or N6 is in there with an error margin below 0.005%. My mistake, that should have been metaboic *ketosis*, not acidosis. Once the state of metabolic ketosis is acheived, there is absolutely no value is taking carbs any lower. You are *not* going to reach metabolic ketosis with a 15% carb diet. You won´t get anywhere near it. Tell me, why does metabolic ketosis occur? Absolutely WRONG!!!!!!!! Phos levels above 0.4% in cats and dogs with early renal failure CAUSES early DEATH. No if's no ands, no buts. Reference please. Ricketts - Caused by excessive calcium in the diet. The excessive calcium binds the vitamin D and the aniaml succumbs to ricketts. Although a vitamin D *deficiency* can cause this, there hasn't been a case of vitmain D deficient foods in 40 years. magnesium - excessive magnesium can trigger struvite stone uroliths. calcium - Excessd ietary calcium should be avoided to prevent recrurrence of CaOx crystals. Vitamin A - cervical spondylosis Vitamin D - Hypercalcemia, calcinosis, anorexia, lameness Vitmain E - increased clotting time, Vitamin B1 - Decreased blood pressure, bradycardia, Cobalamin B12 - Altered reflexes, reduction inn vascular reflexes, Leaving aside vitamins A and D, please give me references for the rest. Regarding struvites, I want a study *proving* that magnesium is the culprit, not urinary pH. Do you have a study showing that struvites precipitated in acidic urine? Regarding calcium, I want a study *proving* that calcium is the culprit, that is, an oxalate-free (i.e.,plant-free) diet. I also want a study showing that excess calcium *without* excess vitamin D causes rickets. It is not the least bit difficult to *add* anything to a diet you would like to add. Not difficult but expensive, depending on what you´re adding. I could add Vitamin E at toxic levels for pennies. What is the toxic level of vitamin E? And what are the effects of vitamin E toxicity? What is difficult to do is to keep unecessary and possibly harmful things OUT of a diet. It's *cheap* to add things, very expensive to keep them out. Excuse me. What are you keeping out? Phosphorus? Tell me something, which of the following diets has more phosphorus: 1) a diet composed of 25% meat and 35% corn 2) a diet composed of 25% corn and 35% meat Which ingredient is cheaper, corn or meat? Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess, other than obesity. Let's take CRF, as it is one of the most common causes of death in cats. Phosphorus, calcium, sodium excess will speed the animals death. That has been proven is dozens of studies going back many years. While nobody can say that excess of these minerals CAUSE renal failure, there is no questions that excesses of these minerals speed a cat to death much quicker. Give me *one* reference of what you stated above (in the levels used in cat food). Of course I can kill myself right now if I eat a pound of sodium so lets establish limits. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
You will not find anywhere in literature anything saying that dietary
phosphorus in the levels used in pet food and properly balanced with calcium is detrimental to kidneys. What you will find is papers saying that phosphorus is detrimental if there is too much phosphorus in blood, a condition called hyperphosphataemia. That is of course utter nonsense. In a dozen studies the level of phosphorus in the FOOD provided the animal, vastly affected the lifespan of the CRF animal. Dozen?! I know of only one and in this one, the author states clearly that it cannot be concluded that restriction of phosphorus increased their lives. Please give me the references of the other 11. A study showed that cutting down on phosphorus did not increase the life expectancy of dogs in the terminal stage of kidney disease. Please provide a source for this wild statement. I already did. Go back to the thread "Chronic Renal Failure" and read my post with all the references. Given that the last four Grade 1 published peer reviewed studies showed exactly the opposite. Give me the reference for those four studies. My guess is that you are once again referring to Finco's much bashed study wherein he fed the group of high phos dogs potassium citrate, did not feed the low phos dogs potassium citrate, took three dogs out of the study without acknowledgeing it, admitted that the dogs on high phos diets had greater and more extensive uremic crisis, and claimed that since the high phos dogs died of uremic crisis and NOT renal failure there was no difference with high phos levels. Most folks consider a dead dog a "negative outcome". Finco chose not to do so. Can you give me proof of what you said above about his study? Did anyone with a PhD bash his study in writing? If so, where is it? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the other thread, you have not answered many things I asked you. To make it easier for you, I´ll bring them over to this thread: What is the percentage of omega 3 and omega 6 in Science Diet Adult Maintenance? Levels of such nutrients are proprietary. While I can not share a specific foods value I will give you some ranges N3's range from 0.57% to 7.29%, N6's range from 2.5% to 5.10% If they are proprietary, how can you claim that Hill´s has more than any other food? And this proprietary thing is bs. A chemist could analyze the food at any moment and tell you exactly how much N3 or N6 is in there with an error margin below 0.005%. My mistake, that should have been metaboic *ketosis*, not acidosis. Once the state of metabolic ketosis is acheived, there is absolutely no value is taking carbs any lower. You are *not* going to reach metabolic ketosis with a 15% carb diet. You won´t get anywhere near it. Tell me, why does metabolic ketosis occur? Absolutely WRONG!!!!!!!! Phos levels above 0.4% in cats and dogs with early renal failure CAUSES early DEATH. No if's no ands, no buts. Reference please. Ricketts - Caused by excessive calcium in the diet. The excessive calcium binds the vitamin D and the aniaml succumbs to ricketts. Although a vitamin D *deficiency* can cause this, there hasn't been a case of vitmain D deficient foods in 40 years. magnesium - excessive magnesium can trigger struvite stone uroliths. calcium - Excessd ietary calcium should be avoided to prevent recrurrence of CaOx crystals. Vitamin A - cervical spondylosis Vitamin D - Hypercalcemia, calcinosis, anorexia, lameness Vitmain E - increased clotting time, Vitamin B1 - Decreased blood pressure, bradycardia, Cobalamin B12 - Altered reflexes, reduction inn vascular reflexes, Leaving aside vitamins A and D, please give me references for the rest. Regarding struvites, I want a study *proving* that magnesium is the culprit, not urinary pH. Do you have a study showing that struvites precipitated in acidic urine? Regarding calcium, I want a study *proving* that calcium is the culprit, that is, an oxalate-free (i.e.,plant-free) diet. I also want a study showing that excess calcium *without* excess vitamin D causes rickets. It is not the least bit difficult to *add* anything to a diet you would like to add. Not difficult but expensive, depending on what you´re adding. I could add Vitamin E at toxic levels for pennies. What is the toxic level of vitamin E? And what are the effects of vitamin E toxicity? What is difficult to do is to keep unecessary and possibly harmful things OUT of a diet. It's *cheap* to add things, very expensive to keep them out. Excuse me. What are you keeping out? Phosphorus? Tell me something, which of the following diets has more phosphorus: 1) a diet composed of 25% meat and 35% corn 2) a diet composed of 25% corn and 35% meat Which ingredient is cheaper, corn or meat? Please give an example of a disease caused by nutritional excess, other than obesity. Let's take CRF, as it is one of the most common causes of death in cats. Phosphorus, calcium, sodium excess will speed the animals death. That has been proven is dozens of studies going back many years. While nobody can say that excess of these minerals CAUSE renal failure, there is no questions that excesses of these minerals speed a cat to death much quicker. Give me *one* reference of what you stated above (in the levels used in cat food). Of course I can kill myself right now if I eat a pound of sodium so lets establish limits. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"GAUBSTER2" wrote in message ... A study showed that cutting down on phosphorus did not increase the life expectancy of dogs in the terminal stage of kidney disease. Is this a very old study? There was a study done at the U. of Minnesota back in 2001 or 2002 that showed dogs fed a low phosphorus food lived over 3 times as long (on average) and with 1/2 the uremic crisises (sp?) as dogs on a "maintenance" food. (and these were dogs "in the terminal stage of kidney disease). Actually kidney disease is always fatal, so at what point do you believe to be the "terminal stage" of kidney disease? Keep in mind, Liz carefully picks her studies and uses only the studies and/or parts of studies that support her agenda and omits or minimizes the parts of the study and/or entire studies that contradict her agenda. She tries to minimize the potential dangers of phosphorus to rationalize feeding her high phosphorus diets.... and probably because Hill's diets are low in phosphorus... and you know how much she hates Hill's! LOL! Its a well-known *fact* that phosphorus restriction increases survival in dogs and cats. The Finco study - probably the most well-known phosphorus study in dogs showed reduced phosphorus *indeed* increased survival. Here's an exact excerpt from the abstract: "Dog survival was significantly enhanced by 0.4% P diets (vs 1.4% P diets), but survival was not significantly influenced by amount of dietary protein. The 0.4% P diets (vs 1.4% P diets) significantly increased the period that GFR remained stable before it decreased, but dietary protein did not have significant effect." Read the actual abstract yourself: http://tinyurl.com/99w6 In a similar study, GFR was higher and survival was longer in dogs fed lower phosphorus and calcium diets. Here's the other abstract http://tinyurl.com/99w6 Both studies were conducted at the Department of Physiology and Veterinary Pathology - University of Georgia and published in the American Journal of Veterinary Research... but of course Liz knows better! LOL! Like she knew better about dissolving calcium oxalate uroliths with *water* in cats...even though every veterinary university and publication says calcium oxalate uroliths and crystals can't be dissolved... I think there's something seriously wrong with her.... Every vet who read her asinine theories thinks she's a "nut case" (exact quote) LOL! ... |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
"GAUBSTER2" wrote in message ... A study showed that cutting down on phosphorus did not increase the life expectancy of dogs in the terminal stage of kidney disease. Is this a very old study? There was a study done at the U. of Minnesota back in 2001 or 2002 that showed dogs fed a low phosphorus food lived over 3 times as long (on average) and with 1/2 the uremic crisises (sp?) as dogs on a "maintenance" food. (and these were dogs "in the terminal stage of kidney disease). Actually kidney disease is always fatal, so at what point do you believe to be the "terminal stage" of kidney disease? Keep in mind, Liz carefully picks her studies and uses only the studies and/or parts of studies that support her agenda and omits or minimizes the parts of the study and/or entire studies that contradict her agenda. She tries to minimize the potential dangers of phosphorus to rationalize feeding her high phosphorus diets.... and probably because Hill's diets are low in phosphorus... and you know how much she hates Hill's! LOL! Its a well-known *fact* that phosphorus restriction increases survival in dogs and cats. The Finco study - probably the most well-known phosphorus study in dogs showed reduced phosphorus *indeed* increased survival. Here's an exact excerpt from the abstract: "Dog survival was significantly enhanced by 0.4% P diets (vs 1.4% P diets), but survival was not significantly influenced by amount of dietary protein. The 0.4% P diets (vs 1.4% P diets) significantly increased the period that GFR remained stable before it decreased, but dietary protein did not have significant effect." Read the actual abstract yourself: http://tinyurl.com/99w6 In a similar study, GFR was higher and survival was longer in dogs fed lower phosphorus and calcium diets. Here's the other abstract http://tinyurl.com/99w6 Both studies were conducted at the Department of Physiology and Veterinary Pathology - University of Georgia and published in the American Journal of Veterinary Research... but of course Liz knows better! LOL! Like she knew better about dissolving calcium oxalate uroliths with *water* in cats...even though every veterinary university and publication says calcium oxalate uroliths and crystals can't be dissolved... I think there's something seriously wrong with her.... Every vet who read her asinine theories thinks she's a "nut case" (exact quote) LOL! ... |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
"Liz" wrote in message om... Still trying to manipulate the facts in an attempt to minimize the potential dangers of high phosphorus diets in order to rationalize feeding the high phosphorus diets you feed and promote, eh? This is one of the reasons why vets and ACVIM Diplomates think you're a "nut case" and "dangerous" (exact quote)... and that was before they read your utterly asinine and extremely dangerous theory of dissolving calcium oxalate uroliths water in cats.... I shudder at the thought of cats dying of acute renal failure because their owners accepted your asinine theory as fact... And now, *again*, you're trying to put still more cats at risk of early death by attempting to minimize the danger of high phosphorus diets simply to support your fanatical fundamentalist agenda and asinine theory that are also in direct opposition to mainstrean veterinary practice just as your utterly *stupid* and asinine theory of dissolving calcium oxalate uroliths with *water* in cats! You will not find anywhere in literature anything saying that dietary phosphorus in the levels used in pet food and properly balanced with calcium is detrimental to kidneys. Of course that's pure manipulated bullsh!t... as usual. Even the study you tried to manipulate showed cats fed reduced phosphorus diets survived more than *twice* as long as cats fed normal phosphorus diets. You remember the study, don't you? "median survival times of 264 days (interquartile range of 190 to 535 days) and 633 days (interquartile range of 338 to 950 days) for the maintenance diet and phosphate-restricted groups" Its also the study that you *deliberately* and *deceitfully* omitted "Plasma phosphate and PTH (parathyroid hormone) concentrations were assessed at the mid-survival time point in each group. A significant increase in PTH had occurred with time in the group that were not phosphate restricted, whereas PTH concentrations were lower than at the time of entry to the study in 69% of the group receiving phosphate restriction.". ....because it contradicted your asinine agenda and theory/ You were nice enough to include: "Although this study was non-randomised and open rather than double blind and placebo controlled, the cats that accepted the phosphate-restricted treatment regimen lived considerably longer than those that were fed standard maintenance diets. It cannot be concluded that phosphate restriction was the only factor responsible for this finding but it seems likely to have played a major part given the evidence from other species,including the dog.' But you *deliberately* omitted the last sentence because it contradicted your asinine theory and fanatical agenda! :To wit: "Based on the results of this study and the evidence from experimental studies, phosphate restriction should be a standard part of any treatment regimen for CRF in cats". Gee, how did you miss the last sentence and very important sentences concerning the reduction of PTH with phosphorus restriction???? This is clear and incontrovertible *fact* that you *intentionally* and *deliberately* and worst of all, **deceitfully** misinterpret, misrepresent, and manipulate statements and studies to suit your fanatical agenda and utterly asinine theories that are in absolute opposition to mainstream veterinary literature and practice. What you will find is papers saying that phosphorus is detrimental if there is too much phosphorus in blood, a condition called hyperphosphataemia. Another one of your manipulations... or delusions... Studies in cats with CRF showed that cats with normal dietary phosphorus intake had microscopic renal mineralization and fibrosis and that mineralization and fibrosis were prevented by decreasing the dietary phosphorus intake. Mineralization and fibrosis leads to inflammation and destruction of renal tissue.... Hyperparathyroidism is very common in cats with CRF, even in cats that are ***normophosphatemic*** and phosphorus restriction results in a reduction in plasma PTH (parathyroid hormone) concentration... and hyperparathyroidism certainly *is* detrimental to the kidneys. Thus, phosphorus restriction *is* beneficial - even in cats that are ***normophosphatemic***. . Read it and weep: Journal of Small Animal Practice 1998;39:108-116 ....or you'll find similar findings in the paragraphs you *deliberately* and *deceitfully* omitted from your post in the CRF thread.... That is of course utter nonsense. In a dozen studies the level of phosphorus in the FOOD provided the animal, vastly affected the lifespan of the CRF animal. Dozen?! I know of only one and in this one, the author states clearly that it cannot be concluded that restriction of phosphorus increased their lives. That's because you only cite and/or use the studies and/or parts of studies that support your agenda and omit or minimize the parts of the study and/or entire studies that contradict your agenda. Its a well-known *fact* that phosphorus restriction increases survival in dogs and cats. Are you trying to re-write veterinary literature about CRF like you tried to do with your asinine theory of dissolving calcium oxalate uroliths with water in cats? The Finco study - probably the most well-known phosphorus study in dogs showed reduced phosphorus *indeed* increased survival. Here's an exact excerpt from the abstract American Journal of Veterinary Research 1992; 53: 157-163 Effects of dietary phosphorus and protein in dogs with chronic renal failure "Dog survival was significantly enhanced by 0.4% P diets (vs 1.4% P diets), but survival was not significantly influenced by amount of dietary protein. The 0.4% P diets (vs 1.4% P diets) significantly increased the period that GFR remained stable before it decreased, but dietary protein did not have significant effect." In another study, GFR was also higher and survival was also longer in dogs fed lower phosphorus and calcium diets. Read it and weep: American Aournal of Veterinary Research 1992; 53: 157-163. Sure looks like phosphorus restriction certainly does *increase* survival and GFR, doesn't it? huh? Both studies were conducted at the Department of Physiology and Veterinary Pathology - University of Georgia and published in the American Journal of Veterinary Research... But of course you, a backwoods, stump-jumping au natural fanatical fundamentalist without any veterinary medical training, knows more about CRF than veterinary pathologists LOL! I've thought all along that there's something seriously wrong with you.... Please provide a source for this wild statement. I already did. Go back to the thread "Chronic Renal Failure" and read my post with all the references. Steve works for a living, so he doesn't have as much free time to waste as you have to go digging through previous threads all day.... Besides, you're certainly not a credible source.... You have clearly proven that you *intentionally* and *deliberately* and worst of all, **deceitfully** misinterpret, misrepresent, and manipulate statements and studies to suit your fanatical agenda and utterly asinine theories that are in absolute opposition to mainstream veterinary literature and practice. You are beyond the shadow of a doubt, the *worst*, deceitful, and most *dangerous* sleazy character that has ever posted to this group. You are a clear and present danger to cats and their owners. The world for cats would be a *better* and *safer* place without you in it. the remainder of your bullsh!t snipped due to nausea |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
"Liz" wrote in message om... Still trying to manipulate the facts in an attempt to minimize the potential dangers of high phosphorus diets in order to rationalize feeding the high phosphorus diets you feed and promote, eh? This is one of the reasons why vets and ACVIM Diplomates think you're a "nut case" and "dangerous" (exact quote)... and that was before they read your utterly asinine and extremely dangerous theory of dissolving calcium oxalate uroliths water in cats.... I shudder at the thought of cats dying of acute renal failure because their owners accepted your asinine theory as fact... And now, *again*, you're trying to put still more cats at risk of early death by attempting to minimize the danger of high phosphorus diets simply to support your fanatical fundamentalist agenda and asinine theory that are also in direct opposition to mainstrean veterinary practice just as your utterly *stupid* and asinine theory of dissolving calcium oxalate uroliths with *water* in cats! You will not find anywhere in literature anything saying that dietary phosphorus in the levels used in pet food and properly balanced with calcium is detrimental to kidneys. Of course that's pure manipulated bullsh!t... as usual. Even the study you tried to manipulate showed cats fed reduced phosphorus diets survived more than *twice* as long as cats fed normal phosphorus diets. You remember the study, don't you? "median survival times of 264 days (interquartile range of 190 to 535 days) and 633 days (interquartile range of 338 to 950 days) for the maintenance diet and phosphate-restricted groups" Its also the study that you *deliberately* and *deceitfully* omitted "Plasma phosphate and PTH (parathyroid hormone) concentrations were assessed at the mid-survival time point in each group. A significant increase in PTH had occurred with time in the group that were not phosphate restricted, whereas PTH concentrations were lower than at the time of entry to the study in 69% of the group receiving phosphate restriction.". ....because it contradicted your asinine agenda and theory/ You were nice enough to include: "Although this study was non-randomised and open rather than double blind and placebo controlled, the cats that accepted the phosphate-restricted treatment regimen lived considerably longer than those that were fed standard maintenance diets. It cannot be concluded that phosphate restriction was the only factor responsible for this finding but it seems likely to have played a major part given the evidence from other species,including the dog.' But you *deliberately* omitted the last sentence because it contradicted your asinine theory and fanatical agenda! :To wit: "Based on the results of this study and the evidence from experimental studies, phosphate restriction should be a standard part of any treatment regimen for CRF in cats". Gee, how did you miss the last sentence and very important sentences concerning the reduction of PTH with phosphorus restriction???? This is clear and incontrovertible *fact* that you *intentionally* and *deliberately* and worst of all, **deceitfully** misinterpret, misrepresent, and manipulate statements and studies to suit your fanatical agenda and utterly asinine theories that are in absolute opposition to mainstream veterinary literature and practice. What you will find is papers saying that phosphorus is detrimental if there is too much phosphorus in blood, a condition called hyperphosphataemia. Another one of your manipulations... or delusions... Studies in cats with CRF showed that cats with normal dietary phosphorus intake had microscopic renal mineralization and fibrosis and that mineralization and fibrosis were prevented by decreasing the dietary phosphorus intake. Mineralization and fibrosis leads to inflammation and destruction of renal tissue.... Hyperparathyroidism is very common in cats with CRF, even in cats that are ***normophosphatemic*** and phosphorus restriction results in a reduction in plasma PTH (parathyroid hormone) concentration... and hyperparathyroidism certainly *is* detrimental to the kidneys. Thus, phosphorus restriction *is* beneficial - even in cats that are ***normophosphatemic***. . Read it and weep: Journal of Small Animal Practice 1998;39:108-116 ....or you'll find similar findings in the paragraphs you *deliberately* and *deceitfully* omitted from your post in the CRF thread.... That is of course utter nonsense. In a dozen studies the level of phosphorus in the FOOD provided the animal, vastly affected the lifespan of the CRF animal. Dozen?! I know of only one and in this one, the author states clearly that it cannot be concluded that restriction of phosphorus increased their lives. That's because you only cite and/or use the studies and/or parts of studies that support your agenda and omit or minimize the parts of the study and/or entire studies that contradict your agenda. Its a well-known *fact* that phosphorus restriction increases survival in dogs and cats. Are you trying to re-write veterinary literature about CRF like you tried to do with your asinine theory of dissolving calcium oxalate uroliths with water in cats? The Finco study - probably the most well-known phosphorus study in dogs showed reduced phosphorus *indeed* increased survival. Here's an exact excerpt from the abstract American Journal of Veterinary Research 1992; 53: 157-163 Effects of dietary phosphorus and protein in dogs with chronic renal failure "Dog survival was significantly enhanced by 0.4% P diets (vs 1.4% P diets), but survival was not significantly influenced by amount of dietary protein. The 0.4% P diets (vs 1.4% P diets) significantly increased the period that GFR remained stable before it decreased, but dietary protein did not have significant effect." In another study, GFR was also higher and survival was also longer in dogs fed lower phosphorus and calcium diets. Read it and weep: American Aournal of Veterinary Research 1992; 53: 157-163. Sure looks like phosphorus restriction certainly does *increase* survival and GFR, doesn't it? huh? Both studies were conducted at the Department of Physiology and Veterinary Pathology - University of Georgia and published in the American Journal of Veterinary Research... But of course you, a backwoods, stump-jumping au natural fanatical fundamentalist without any veterinary medical training, knows more about CRF than veterinary pathologists LOL! I've thought all along that there's something seriously wrong with you.... Please provide a source for this wild statement. I already did. Go back to the thread "Chronic Renal Failure" and read my post with all the references. Steve works for a living, so he doesn't have as much free time to waste as you have to go digging through previous threads all day.... Besides, you're certainly not a credible source.... You have clearly proven that you *intentionally* and *deliberately* and worst of all, **deceitfully** misinterpret, misrepresent, and manipulate statements and studies to suit your fanatical agenda and utterly asinine theories that are in absolute opposition to mainstream veterinary literature and practice. You are beyond the shadow of a doubt, the *worst*, deceitful, and most *dangerous* sleazy character that has ever posted to this group. You are a clear and present danger to cats and their owners. The world for cats would be a *better* and *safer* place without you in it. the remainder of your bullsh!t snipped due to nausea |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
I´m not going to go over the whole thing again. The only thing I will
say is that if what you and Hill´s state were in fact substanciated, cats in zoos would not be fed such a rich phosphorus diet and those two cats fed eggs and bacon for breakfast (remember bacon has a lot of sodium) would never have lived that long. I also suggest you read more on metabolic acidosis and how it affects proteins, bones and kidneys. In one of your posts you said your cats died at 19, 20 and 22. What did they die of? What did you feed them? How often did you vaccinate them? Did they have any health problems? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
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 |