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

Ann MArtin claims debate



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 30th 03, 02:53 PM
Steve Crane
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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.
  #4  
Old August 30th 03, 10:47 PM
Ann Martin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

(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.
  #5  
Old August 30th 03, 10:47 PM
Ann Martin
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

(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.
  #6  
Old August 31st 03, 05:49 AM
Phil P.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"PawsForThought" wrote in message
...

I believe there was a food made with all the correct nutrient levels from

shoe
leather.


Which one? Post the reference... or are you manipulating and putting your
own spin on a statement (again) that I made?

I said "shoe leather would analyze as a protein source but it wouldn't be
very digestible".... I didn't say a diet was made of shoe leather....



  #7  
Old August 31st 03, 05:49 AM
Phil P.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"PawsForThought" wrote in message
...

I believe there was a food made with all the correct nutrient levels from

shoe
leather.


Which one? Post the reference... or are you manipulating and putting your
own spin on a statement (again) that I made?

I said "shoe leather would analyze as a protein source but it wouldn't be
very digestible".... I didn't say a diet was made of shoe leather....



  #10  
Old August 31st 03, 05:53 AM
Phil P.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"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.

..



 




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
Vaccinations The great Debate *~*SooZy*~* Cat health & behaviour 50 August 26th 03 07:22 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:16 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.