Best canned food vs. worst

In article .com,
enlightened us with...

kaeli wrote:
(...)

In nature, wild cats eat plenty of protein and as far as I know do
not have
this problem. Does the phosphorus come from the way commercial foods
are
produced?

Bone is high is phosphorous, and high phosphorous is consistent with
meat (meal) that includes relatively more bone. Lean meat is relatively
low in phos (and very low in calcium).

I am learning a TON in this thread.

(...)
In cats, no, it has not been proven (anyone have any data?). In
humans,
excessive carb and sugar consumption DOES cause diabetes and
aggravates
existing pre-diabetes conditions.

I'm not sure a definite causative link has actually been found, has it?

Like many things, diabetes is a complex condition.
Sugar comsumption does not cause diabetes in the sense that anyone who eats
too much sugar will get diabetes. However, people who eat too much sugar (and
[most|all?] carbs are really just broken down to sugars in the body) tend to
be overweight. And being overweight is a large risk factor in diabetes in
both humans and felines.

It HAS been proven that low-carb diets help people who already have diabetes,
but that's a totally different thing with the blood sugar and insulin cycle.
But that's where the whole sugar-causes-diabetes thing came from, I believe.
Dr. Atkins (who may or may not have been a quack) claimed that his low carb
diet *prevented* type 2 diabetes.
http://altmedicine.about.com/od/popu...AtkinsDiet.htm
"Thanks to the work of Dr. Atkins, many people know that restricting
carbohydrates, particularly refined sugar and grains, is the key to
preventing and managing type 2 diabetes."

(links to studies about any of this greatly appreciated -- I prefer to NOT
talk out of my ass, if possible LOL)

--
--
~kaeli~
What do they use to ship styrofoam?
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace

He has been asked many times to post proof or cites that show
phosphorus
is harmful to healthy cats or that it causes kidney failure but
continuously refuses to do so (because there isn't any).


Ya know Megan - ya just can't stop yourself from lying can you?

Please identify ANYTIME where I EVER made the claim that phosphorus
CAUSES kidney disease. We'll all wait with baited breath while you try
to find this one. I have never made such a claim as you well know. What
I have done repeatedly is examine the risks of feeding a high phos diet
to cats. Since there is not one single whit of positive news in feeding
cats a high phos diet it is reasonable and prudent to examine how
nutrients like phos affect risks of common diseases in cats.

Let's take a look at some facts of life.
1. Renal failure can NOT be detected until +70% of the kidney is
destroyed and the animal is on a singular path to death.

2. Excessive levels of phosphorus is cats with undetected renal failure
WILL speed death. Here are the clinical trials to prove that.
Ross LA, Finco DR, Crowell WA. Effect of dietary phosphorus restriction
on the kidneys of cats with reduced renal mass. Am J Vet Res 1982; 43:
1023-1026.
Adams LG, Polzin DJ, Osborne CA, et al. Effects of dietary protein and
calorie restriction in clinically normal cats and in cats with
surgically induced chronic renal failure. Am J Vet Res 1993; 54:
1653-1662.
Adams LG, Polzin DJ, Osborne CA, et al. Influence of dietary
protein/calorie intake on renal morphology function in cats with 5/6
nephrectomy. Lab Invest 1994; 70: 347-357.
Barber PJ, Rawlings JM, Markwell PJ, et al. Effect of dietary phosphate
restriction on renal secondary hyperparathyroidism in the cat. J Small
Anim Pract 1999; 40: 62-70.
Elliott J, Rawlings JM, Markwell PJ, et al. Survival of cats with
naturally occurring chronic renal failu Effect of dietary
management. J Small Anim Pract 2000; 41: 235-242.

3. NOBODY has ever claimed that high phos in a diet has ANY benefit
whatsoever.

4. Renal failure in cats is rising at a much faster rate than anyone
knew. From less than 1% in 1980 to 10% in 2000 is a huge increase in
disease.

5. NOBODY - not even Megan with her crystal ball - can tell you which 1
cat out of 10 will be the next victim of renal failure.

6. Since you cannot detect it until it is too late, you have a risk
factor of unknowingly feeding a high phos food (with NO benefit) to a
cat in sub-clinical renal failure and the results of that are not
debateable. If you own an older cat 12 yrs old, the risks of
undetected renal failure skyrocket.

That seems to be the key phrase here.
I was looking around, and it seems it is only harmful to cats already
IN
renal failure or old enough that their organs aren't in great shape.
CRF cats
seem to be badly affected by it. But one would hope you'd know if you
had a
cat with CRF!

And that is precisely the point - you don't know. Your cat could have
65% renal failure and the blood tests etc available at the local vet
clinic will NOT diagnose the problem. You have to wait until the cat
has lost +70% fo the kidney before the typical blood/chem/urinalysis
tests in clinic will diagnose a CRF cat. By that time - it is too late
- all you can do now is manage the disease. If on the other hand you
caught that cat at 50% failure and began feeding a renal diet the
extension of the lifespan of that cat would be huge. At present Heska
manufactures a test called the ERD test (Early Renal Detection) It is
capable of testing for renal failure and picking it up much much
earlier. Unfortunately nobody is using it. So far they haven't sold
enough of these kits to test the cats in East Nowhere Montana, let
alone the country or even those cats over age 12 at much higher risk.

Kaeli - I am stuck with Google so trying ot reply with the proper
etc is a pain.

Kaeli Apr 19, 8:54 am show options
enlightened us with...

Dr. Hofve's comments border on the ridiculous.

Who's that? You didn't quote to whom you were replying.

This was the source quoted by the person I responded to. The poster I
responded to had listed this website as a source.

Along with that
protein comes phosphorus.

Why is that assumed?
Meat meals of any kind contain fairly high levels of phosphorus.
Chicken 113 mgs/ 100 grams, beef 212 mgs/100grams, salmon 233 mgs/100
grams. Further if you look at foods that claim to be "all meat" or "low
carb" the phos levels are almost always very high. Some products like
the Pro Plan example which is a zero carb food contains 2.07% phos for
example - way above the maximum 0.9% phos level recommended for an
adult cat.


In nature, wild cats eat plenty of protein and as far as I know do not
have
this problem.
In nature a cat's lifespan is nothing we would want to impose upon our
pets.

Does the phosphorus come from the way commercial foods are produced?
No, it's intrinsic to the ingredient used to make up the food. Phos
comes in with the ingredients. Like many nutrients it is always more
difficult to restrict excessive levels of nutrients than it is to add
nutrients. In other words removing phos from a meat meal is much
tougher (technically impossible actually) than adding a bunch of
vitamin E. No talent or technology required at all for the latter.

Would a raw (or organic, all natural, etc) diet eliminate this
problem?
Yes and No - if the person developing the food takes a good look at the
nutrients being added with the ingredients that are chosen it would be
very easy to construct a raw or "organic" food that is low in phos. Dr.
Rebecca Remillard does this every day for cats and dogs who need such a
special diet that they cannot use any commercially prepared diet.

Can it be elimated from commercial foods? If so, why the hell isn't
it? If not, why not?
You don't want to "eliminate it"- like all things there is a need for X
amount of any nutrient for normal body functions. Can it be kept within
limits that are considered safe? - definitely yes. It's simply a matter
of choosing ingredients that do not intrinsically contain high levels
of phos in the first place. That means the ingredients have to be
chosen based on science and not on marketing driven Madison Ave
concerns or the latest and greatest fad in feeding. It also means the
meat meals used will cost more. The cheaper the meat meal used - the
higher the levels of "ash" in those meat meals. More expensive meat
meals contain lower amount of "ash" which is composed primarily of
calcium and phosphorus. (There is no "ash" is a pet food - this is lab
term that describs what's left of any given food when it is burned at
very high temperatures during lab analysis. All the fats, proteins,
fibers etc burn away and what is left are the minreals that do not burn
- macro minerals like sodium, phosphorus, calcium, magnesium, potassium
etc and micro minreals like selenium to even gold, silver and
chromium.)

There is ZERO data that
supports the nonsensical claim that dry foods "cause" diabetes.


It's not the food's wetness or dryness. It's what's IN the food.
That is unknown - there is no data that suggests an given nutrient can
*cause* diabetes in cats.

That is
merely conjecture and hypothesis and has yet to be proven in any way

shape or form.


In cats, no, it has not been proven (anyone have any data?). In
humans,
excessive carb and sugar consumption DOES cause diabetes and
aggravates
existing pre-diabetes conditions. Considering the fact that humans
were meant
to be omnivores and cats were meant to be carnivores, it simply stands
to
reason that their biochemistry is maladapted to excessive carb intake
and
well-adapted to a high protein, high fat diet. I would love to see
real
studies, though.

So would I - but that's not likely because nobody in the world of
nutrition science is buying the theory yet. Cats are not humans and the
physiology is vastly different. We can't extrapolate what happens in
humans with cats or dogs. A good example is calcium. How many times
have you read that human females need to be adding a calcium supplement
to their diet? Almost every day you get this message. If you as a human
female don't pay attention to this and ingest sufficient calcium you
will experience severe problems as you age. You've all seen the awful
results in an elderly woman with a severe hunch in her back due to
minor fractures accumulated over decades. So why isn't this an issue in
cats? Because in our pets we feed foods with very high levels of
calcium all the time. Remember that most meat meals contain a
significant level of ground up bones in the meat meal - thus cats get
more than enough calcium every day.

Logic or "stands to reason" will get us in trouble if we don't question
it. I can remember when every vet sold calcium supplements for large
breed dogs and insisted that any large breed bitch be fed a calcium
supplement during gestation and lactation. It made logical sense. Large
breed dogs grow extremely fast - far faster than their small and medium
breeds counterparts. It made logical sense to add calcium to the diet
for growing bones. It wasn't until the late 80's and the early 90's
that we did the clinical trials that proved precisely the opposite
effect from feeding calcium supplements to large breed dogs. What made
logical sense fooled us. I believe the downside of the carbophobic fad
- which indeed makes "logical sense" and "stands to reason" is going to
be one of those slap yourself on the forehead things like feeding
calcium supplements to large breed dogs was 20 years ago.

See, there is no data on the frequency of diabetes in cats who don't
eat
commerical foods. In fact, as far as I know, there aren't even any
studies on
wet vs dry food.
Just like any other study, it would have to be funded. And what
commercial
pet food company would want to encourage people to NOT buy their
product? No
one else has the time or funds for a large enough study. So, none are
done.

True as far as commercial versus home made. There have been some
studies which examined the nturients in home made diets and found them
to be full of error - either deficient or excessive in one nutrient or
another. (Roudebush P, Cowell C, Evaluation of home made diets..
Veterinary Dermatology 1992; 3:23-28)

Probably not true as far as canned versus dry. In fact more clinical
studies are done on canned foods than on dry foods for one reason or
another. For manufacturers there is a clear advantage to selling a
canned food instead of a dry food - profit is higher for cans than for
dry foods.


All I'm suggesting is that before we leap off the cliff after the
carbophobic fad, we stop ourselves and examine the downsides to the
change in diet. When we have carbohydrate free foods that do not
contain high levels of minerals known to be a risk, then the risk of
following an unproven hypothetical dietary idea is lessened. At the
moment the carbophobics are so intense and focused on hypothetical and
unproven supposed advantages that they are totally ignoring the
downside. For every action there is a reaction - my fear is that in
reacting to the carbophobics unoproven claims and hypothetical
advantages we are ignoring the "reaction" of feeding high phos foods to
a very at risk population of cats.

There is another downside to the carbophobics diet suggestion. Recent
studies on causative factors in hyperthyroid cats have indicated that
high protein levels and high levels of iodine may be linked as a
causative factor to hyperthyroid kitties. The patent on this discovery
was released last December so there are no secrets here. If we go down
the carbophobic pathway and heavily increase proteins in the diets that
almost always heavily increased phos, we are also at risk for increased
factors that appear to be causative factors in hyperthyroid cats. Meats
contain much higher levels of iodine than veggies or grains. For every
action there is an equal re-action.

Steve Crane wrote:

Why is that assumed?
Meat meals of any kind contain fairly high levels of phosphorus.
Chicken 113 mgs/ 100 grams, beef 212 mgs/100grams, salmon 233
mgs/100
grams. Further if you look at foods that claim to be "all meat" or
"low
carb" the phos levels are almost always very high. Some products like
the Pro Plan example which is a zero carb food contains 2.07% phos
for
example - way above the maximum 0.9% phos level recommended for an
adult cat.


In nature, wild cats eat plenty of protein and as far as I know do
not
have
this problem.
In nature a cat's lifespan is nothing we would want to impose upon
our
pets.


Oh, that's just silly. Every captive animal should be fed a diet that
is as close to the natural diet as possible. What do you think they do
at zoos and such? Even for humans, a natural diet comprised of plant
matter supplemented by occasional meat is optimal.

This whole argument is ridiculous.

-L.

Regarding Funaba's study -

"Compared with the control group, water intake was lower in the starch
group and urine volume was lower in the starch group and the fiber
group" (page 139 of the study)

This makes the study hard to draw conclusions from. If the three groups
had each consumed the same levels of water - which everyone recognizes
as a critical element in controlling uroliths and crystals in the diet
- then the differences between the three groups could have been
allocated to the increase in starch, fiber etc. Unfortunately this
wasn't done.

Further Funaba notes that the urine pH of the three groups was as
follows: Control group (no carbs) 6.95, starch group 7.24, fiber group
7.08. (again page 139 at the bottom)

The urine pH of 7.24 is way outside of norms for a cat food. Hill's
products for adult cats are always tightly held to a range between
6.2-6.4. Most other major manufacturers are in a similar range. Thus
the urine pH value Funaba attained is greatly outside of the norms for
any commercial cat food. In the second group study similar urine pH
values were attained. Control group 7.06, starch group 7.35, fiber
group 7.18. Again the urine pH values which Funaba reported are all
considerably outside any commercial food values I have ever seen.
Ordinarily we would not see urine pH this high even in a renal failure
diet. (Feline k/d generates uirne pH of 6.6-6.9)

The magnesium levels in the three groups varied as well. The control
group (no carbs) contained 0.08%, starch group 0.10% and fiber group
0.09%. Essentially the strarch group ingested 20% more magnesium than
did the control group. Magnesium is a major mineral in struvite
crystals.

Funaba notes in his own conclusions that "Many factors affect
crystallization of struvite. One of the factors is urine volume,
increasing urine volume causes dilution and accelerated excretion of
struvite constituents, which are beneficial for the prevention of
struvite crystallization"

Thus the disparity between water intake and magneisum levels in the
three groups is a significant factor and makes this study less about
starch and fiber and more about water and magneisum.

It is interesting to note that feeding commercial pet foods to wild
canids is the recommendation of the American Zoo and Aquarium,
Nutritional Advisory Group. This same group also suggests raw meat in
"carnivore logs" should only be used for the purposes of
administering medication like wormers, enticing animals to move through
cages or doorways, and getting the wild canid accustomed to eating
commercial diets.

For the most part zoos feed a commercial diet. The biggest exceptions
are zoos with funding problems who can't afford to do so.

On 20 Apr 2005 08:59:40 -0700, "Steve Crane" wrote:

Kaeli - I am stuck with Google so trying ot reply with the proper
etc is a pain.

Just a short off topic post here about replying in Google ....

Instead of clicking the "Reply" link at the bottom of the post, click
on "Show Options" up at the top of the post by the author's name. Then
click on "Reply" from the new set of links shown under the header
information. Then you will find everything quoted for you and you can
delete the non-pertinent information, and add your own. An extra click,
but easier in the long run.

HTH.

Lorraine wrote:
On 20 Apr 2005 08:59:40 -0700, "Steve Crane"
wrote:

Kaeli - I am stuck with Google so trying ot reply with the proper
etc is a pain.

Just a short off topic post here about replying in Google ....

Instead of clicking the "Reply" link at the bottom of the post,
click
on "Show Options" up at the top of the post by the author's name.
Then
click on "Reply" from the new set of links shown under the header
information. Then you will find everything quoted for you and you
can
delete the non-pertinent information, and add your own. An extra
click,
but easier in the long run.

HTH.

Outstanding - thank you very much for that tip. It was driving me nuts
trying to copy past and then type in the darn as needed.

In article .com,
enlightened us with...
That seems to be the key phrase here.
I was looking around, and it seems it is only harmful to cats already
IN
renal failure or old enough that their organs aren't in great shape.
CRF cats
seem to be badly affected by it. But one would hope you'd know if you
had a
cat with CRF!

And that is precisely the point - you don't know. Your cat could have
65% renal failure and the blood tests etc available at the local vet
clinic will NOT diagnose the problem. You have to wait until the cat
has lost +70% fo the kidney before the typical blood/chem/urinalysis
tests in clinic will diagnose a CRF cat. By that time - it is too late
- all you can do now is manage the disease. If on the other hand you
caught that cat at 50% failure and began feeding a renal diet the
extension of the lifespan of that cat would be huge. At present Heska
manufactures a test called the ERD test (Early Renal Detection) It is
capable of testing for renal failure and picking it up much much
earlier. Unfortunately nobody is using it. So far they haven't sold
enough of these kits to test the cats in East Nowhere Montana, let
alone the country or even those cats over age 12 at much higher risk.



Wow.
Just...wow.

Explains why so many mature formula foods are low phosphorus. I was kind of
wondering about that.

I wonder if vets know about this new test. If not, why not? If so, why don't
they use it? I wonder if it costs a lot more or something. I'd be very
interested in yearly testing for my furry kids, especially Rowan, since she's
had health problems already. Better safe than sorry, IMO. And it's not like
it's an invasive test.

Maybe I should ask mine when I bring Maddie in for her yearly vacc. She's
next up in a couple weeks.

If anyone wants to check it out, here's their site.
http://www.heska.com/erd/
Unfortunately, even though it's a urine test, it doesn't appear you can order
it for home use. Looks like vets only. I didn't see prices.

--
--
~kaeli~
Frisbeetarianism (n.), The belief that, when you die, your
soul goes up on the roof and gets stuck there.
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/wildAtHeart
http://www.ipwebdesign.net/kaelisSpace