|
| 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 |
|
#461
February 4th 04, 11:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
"Yngver" wrote in message ... "Steve Crane" wrote: OK I think I understand what you are saying - were suggestions better or worse than Special Kitty brand pet food? Yes, thank you. It seemed to me that in view of what the OP was feeding, many foods would constitute an improvement--including the ones Lauren recommended. Unfortunately I cannot remember why the OP was using that food in the first place, Cost. nor am I familiar with the brand. If the OP meant Purina Special Care Kitten, No, it's Walmart's private label cat food. It would be interesting to find out who makes it, but I haven't seen that info anywhere. If the only criteria for the food was cost, no disease issues, no special "problems" etc, then it is likely that almost any food would be better than a "generic" food. Most of the time "store brands" are least cost bid foods. ABC Grcoery Chain decides to provide the ABC Cat food. They develop the criteria for the food. In some very rare case the criteria are developed based upon nutritional reasons. In most cases the criteria are cost issues. When you formulate a food based on least cost - you get what you pay for. I cannot comment on the Wal-Mart product. They have two lines of food in Wal Mart. The cheapest Old Roy types and then a "Maxximum Nutrition" line. The Maxximum nutrition group tends to be higher end foods with fair quality. I don't know which line this particualr product belongs to. If it's the price concious Old Roy product, then indeed almost any food would be an improvement. Wal-Marts foods have been manufactured by Doanes for many years. Doanes is the fourth/fifth largest pet food manufacturer in the US and most people have never heard of them. They produce many of the "store brands" like Safeway, Kroger etc generic foods. If cost was a factor then moving the OP to plain old Purina Cat Chow might have been an improvement and one that the OP might have been willing to accept since the cost is not substantially higher. In many cases a premium food can be fed for less cost than a regular cat food because the cat consumes so much less food. In that case IAMS at Wal Mart might have been a good choice. It would have been cheap enough to get the OP to buy it and been better than the Special Kitty product. Suggestion of one food or another are still subject to comment by others on the NG. Even if the suggestions might have been better than the Special Kitty, a discussion of the merits of any particular food serve to enlighten everyone to what those particular foods provide. In the case of the foods originally suggested 2 of 4 were excessive in calcium and phos at the time. Since then I have managed to get a complete analysis of Nature's Variety products and find the majority of those *really* high in calcium and phos, far more so than the other two discussed. While you and Gaubster appear to be fascinated with who said what about whom in these food-related threads, and who ought to apologize to whom, you should realize that for the rest of us it's not of any real interest. So yes, you are right, none of that provides valuable information. Yngver, When I posted the actual values of the foods, I was immediately called a liar. When I posted the calculated values for carbs and the process for calculating DMB values from guarantees on another food I was once again called a liar. Subsequently the facts about the calcium levels were unquestionably proven to be correct and the facts about the carb level in the third food concluded by finding that my calculated values were off and the food actually contained far more carbs than even my calculations predicted. I posted the 800 number for the company who manufactures the high carb canned food for anyone to confirm the values I provided. I'm quite sure that several called the company and found out I was correct. At that point I was instructed to "eat ****". There is some valuable information in learning that some on this NG are opposed to factual information. It gives other readers an opportunity to evaluate the quality of information provided. The complete and total lack of integrity and the immature name calling is illustrative of the poster and again aids in understanding and evaluating the value of whatever that person posts. If the response to a post is always "You're a liar" and "eat ****", others on the NG can make a judgment call on the future contributions of that individual. Had either of the three individuals involved in the discussion on the carb levels ever had the integrity and probity to come back to the boards and admit the mistake, the value of that persons comments would have been greatly elevated. Unfortunately it appears that none of the three have that level of personal integrity. 
|
|
#462
February 4th 04, 11:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Yngver" wrote in message ... "Steve Crane" wrote: OK I think I understand what you are saying - were suggestions better or worse than Special Kitty brand pet food? Yes, thank you. It seemed to me that in view of what the OP was feeding, many foods would constitute an improvement--including the ones Lauren recommended. Unfortunately I cannot remember why the OP was using that food in the first place, Cost. nor am I familiar with the brand. If the OP meant Purina Special Care Kitten, No, it's Walmart's private label cat food. It would be interesting to find out who makes it, but I haven't seen that info anywhere. If the only criteria for the food was cost, no disease issues, no special "problems" etc, then it is likely that almost any food would be better than a "generic" food. Most of the time "store brands" are least cost bid foods. ABC Grcoery Chain decides to provide the ABC Cat food. They develop the criteria for the food. In some very rare case the criteria are developed based upon nutritional reasons. In most cases the criteria are cost issues. When you formulate a food based on least cost - you get what you pay for. I cannot comment on the Wal-Mart product. They have two lines of food in Wal Mart. The cheapest Old Roy types and then a "Maxximum Nutrition" line. The Maxximum nutrition group tends to be higher end foods with fair quality. I don't know which line this particualr product belongs to. If it's the price concious Old Roy product, then indeed almost any food would be an improvement. Wal-Marts foods have been manufactured by Doanes for many years. Doanes is the fourth/fifth largest pet food manufacturer in the US and most people have never heard of them. They produce many of the "store brands" like Safeway, Kroger etc generic foods. If cost was a factor then moving the OP to plain old Purina Cat Chow might have been an improvement and one that the OP might have been willing to accept since the cost is not substantially higher. In many cases a premium food can be fed for less cost than a regular cat food because the cat consumes so much less food. In that case IAMS at Wal Mart might have been a good choice. It would have been cheap enough to get the OP to buy it and been better than the Special Kitty product. Suggestion of one food or another are still subject to comment by others on the NG. Even if the suggestions might have been better than the Special Kitty, a discussion of the merits of any particular food serve to enlighten everyone to what those particular foods provide. In the case of the foods originally suggested 2 of 4 were excessive in calcium and phos at the time. Since then I have managed to get a complete analysis of Nature's Variety products and find the majority of those *really* high in calcium and phos, far more so than the other two discussed. While you and Gaubster appear to be fascinated with who said what about whom in these food-related threads, and who ought to apologize to whom, you should realize that for the rest of us it's not of any real interest. So yes, you are right, none of that provides valuable information. Yngver, When I posted the actual values of the foods, I was immediately called a liar. When I posted the calculated values for carbs and the process for calculating DMB values from guarantees on another food I was once again called a liar. Subsequently the facts about the calcium levels were unquestionably proven to be correct and the facts about the carb level in the third food concluded by finding that my calculated values were off and the food actually contained far more carbs than even my calculations predicted. I posted the 800 number for the company who manufactures the high carb canned food for anyone to confirm the values I provided. I'm quite sure that several called the company and found out I was correct. At that point I was instructed to "eat ****". There is some valuable information in learning that some on this NG are opposed to factual information. It gives other readers an opportunity to evaluate the quality of information provided. The complete and total lack of integrity and the immature name calling is illustrative of the poster and again aids in understanding and evaluating the value of whatever that person posts. If the response to a post is always "You're a liar" and "eat ****", others on the NG can make a judgment call on the future contributions of that individual. Had either of the three individuals involved in the discussion on the carb levels ever had the integrity and probity to come back to the boards and admit the mistake, the value of that persons comments would have been greatly elevated. Unfortunately it appears that none of the three have that level of personal integrity.
|
|
#464
February 4th 04, 11:32 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: (GAUBSTER2)
Lauren, you are a liar and I'm STILL WAITING for you to apologize for your lies about me on the issue of declawing! I posted that your name seemed very familiar as a troll on the AOL declawing board, but since AOL only archives posts for 30 days there was no way to prove it. My memory is not flawless and I could be wrong and I do apologize if I am. However, I have asked a few regular posters on AOL and they too recall you on that board and your very trollish behavior. That seems to fit from what everyone has seen of you here and what your reputation is in the dog groups. Again, since AOL doesn't archive more than 30 days, this can't be proven - one way or the other. Lucky for you I guess, huh? LOL 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
|
|
#465
February 4th 04, 11:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: (GAUBSTER2)
From: Cheryl Date: 2/3/04 6:11 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: PawsForThought wrote in on 03 Feb 2004: I notice Crane changed his email addy. Really? I use Xnews and reg. expressions for username to killfile people. If so, it just shows how manipulative he is. shrug You've NEVER changed your email address before for one reason or another?? At least he doesn't try to hide who he is. You're both pathetic, you know? But of course he hides who he is. He will only admit to working for Hill's Science Diet if he's called on it, and only then. If he truly was honorable and upfront, he would have a permanent disclaimer in his siggy. ________ 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
|
|
#466
February 4th 04, 11:34 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: (GAUBSTER2)
From: Cheryl Date: 2/3/04 6:11 PM Pacific Standard Time Message-id: PawsForThought wrote in on 03 Feb 2004: I notice Crane changed his email addy. Really? I use Xnews and reg. expressions for username to killfile people. If so, it just shows how manipulative he is. shrug You've NEVER changed your email address before for one reason or another?? At least he doesn't try to hide who he is. You're both pathetic, you know? But of course he hides who he is. He will only admit to working for Hill's Science Diet if he's called on it, and only then. If he truly was honorable and upfront, he would have a permanent disclaimer in his siggy. ________ 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
|
|
#467
February 5th 04, 01:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#468
February 5th 04, 01:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#469
February 5th 04, 01:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#470
February 5th 04, 01:17 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Science Diet question... | Joe Canuck | Cat health & behaviour | 188 | December 12th 03 12:30 AM |
| Reply for Phil | -L. | Cat health & behaviour | 8 | October 23rd 03 12:30 PM |
| Follow-up question about canned cat food | Jerold Pearson | Cat health & behaviour | 34 | August 8th 03 01:52 AM |
Linear Mode
