Evidence that "premium" food = healthier cat?

Well, if we're going to list them here...

We lost a renal failure kitty at two months shy of 13...he ate Friskies dry and human-intended tuna for wet (I don't doubt that human food tuna is bad to feed regularly to cats).

Originally Posted by MissKalamata

Honestly, I find it hard to believe that feeding less could possibly cancel out the extra cost of the premium food (let's say dry food; I won't even go into the cost of canned). It costs $15 to feed four cats on Purina for a month. How many premium-feeders pay that little?

Click to expand...

I already pointed out in my post how is cancels it out.
I feed less, I buy less, I also buy less litter because they poop less.


Let me demonstrate, and no, my prices aren't accurate, only examples, though close to what I pay.

I have three cats.
I pay $8 for 40lbs of litter
I pay $19 for 16lbs of mid-premium dry
I buy 40lbs of litter once a month, and 16lbs of food every month and a half.
That's roughly $17.50 a month total.

With one less cat I was paying around $15 for 20lbs of food
And still around $8 for 40lbs of litter.
But, I went through a bag and a half of litter a month, and a full 20lbs of food a month.
That comes out to around $27 a month just for food and litter.

Corn is the number one filler used in cheaper foods, it is also the most indigestible grain there is, cats cannot digest it at all, their metabolism will have them eating more just to maintain energy level while making up for what is basically a hole left by a filler.
That filler goes directly into the litter box

My cats eat Purina, the indoor version...although I'll buy a different indoor cat food if the store is out of the big bags of Purina. They've had no health problems...Chilsa passed a couple months ago but he was active and seemed healthy right up to that day, so I really think it was just his time to go, not a health problem brought on by the food or anything.

I would guess that, in the overall population of pet owners, there's a correlation between premium foods and higher amounts of health problems, because people who are motivated to take care of their cats and have the resources to feed premium foods also have the motivation to get informed about cat care, the resources to take their cats to the vet more often, and that sort of thing, so the cats live long enough that feline old age comes into play. Cats with less responsible owners don't get fixed or kept indoors, so they get hit by cars, or infections from being torn up in fights, or kitten-birthing complications, or sicknesses that they could have been vaccinated against. That pulls the life expectancy down but also rules out health problems that take time to develop. (Yes, some of those things could happen to any pet, given a certain situation--I'm talking about averages and percentages.)

If the survey were limited to people on this site, though, the results would probably be different, since that would be comparing different foods when fed by responsible pet owners.

And if that sounded like a bizarre mishmash of gobbledygook...ignore me, I'm taking statistics this semester, I can't help talking this way

I know food is a huge debate on TCS, and with good reason. I feed a higher quality brand food (RC dry and Authority wet), but I'm sure many many people would still have plenty to say about that choice. But, just think of it this way.

When you figure out the math on how much you're paying per day on a grocery store brand, some come out to less than 25 cents a day! You're feeding your cat for a quarter. Now we as humans can get by on something cheap and full of fillers, let's say Taco Bell. Sure, it's cheap and it fills you up. But how would you feel living on Taco Bell every day for the rest of your life?

I see it everyday as a vet tech. Cats fed a higher quality food simply (whether that's organic, grain free, raw, or even just a high quality dry food) look healthier. Their coats are brighter, their muscle mass is more sturdy, their teeth and gums look better.... As far as life span and it's direct link to food, I couldn't tell you. But, in general, cats fed a better food do seem healthier.

Originally Posted by mschauer

And, just as with humans, there are diseases and disorders that some cats may fall prey to as a result of eating a poor diet.

Originally Posted by MissKalamata

Can you list some of these illnesses and precisely which foods tend to cause them?

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Diabetes. It has been completely reversed in many cats by switching from a high carbohydrate diet to a very low carbohydrate one. It stands to reason that if those cats had never eaten the high carbohydrate diet to begin with they would not have developed diabetes. In my opinion, feeding a high carbohydrate diet to a species of obligate carnivores constitutes feeding a poor diet.

Struvite crystals. When I switched my crystal prone kitty from a standard, commercial processed food to raw her crystal problem disappeared. Many other cat owners have achieved similar results.

My first 2 cats lived to be 18 and 22 eating grocery store food. This was back before "premium" foods existed. Just because they didn't develop any diet related illnesses I don't deny that diet related illnesses exist.

Also, you have to be very careful with the term "premium food". As others have noted everyone has their own idea of what constitutes a "premium food". Actually I don't use that term at all. I don't claim to feed "premium foods". I simply feed whatever foods I think will maximize the probability of long term good health for my cats.

Originally Posted by mschauer

Diabetes. It has been completely reversed in many cats by switching from a high carbohydrate diet to a very low carbohydrate one. It stands to reason that if those cats had never eaten the high carbohydrate diet to begin with they would not have developed diabetes. In my opinion, feeding a high carbohydrate diet to a species of obligate carnivores constitutes feeding a poor diet.

Struvite crystals. When I switched my crystal prone kitty from a standard, commercial processed food to raw her crystal problem disappeared. Many other cat owners have achieved similar results.

Click to expand...

Premade raw is STILL a COMMERCIAL and processed diet just not heat treated ( for the most part).. the only way not to is if you are the rancher / butcher/ owner and have been on the land at least 25 yrs

Originally Posted by sharky

Premade raw is STILL a COMMERCIAL and processed diet just not heat treated ( for the most part).. the only way not to is if you are the rancher / butcher/ owner and have been on the land at least 25 yrs

Click to expand...

I think you're getting into the official definition of "organic" here, as opposed to "natural." Extreme natural might be characterized as organic, but presumably there would be benefits from a more natural as opposed to less natural food, as long as the foods being compared are otherwise similar (cats will probably get more out of a highly processed steak than an organic corn on the cob, for example).

Originally Posted by ebrillblaiddes

I think you're getting into the official definition of "organic" here, as opposed to "natural." Extreme natural might be characterized as organic, but presumably there would be benefits from a more natural as opposed to less natural food, as long as the foods being compared are otherwise similar (cats will probably get more out of a highly processed steak than an organic corn on the cob, for example).

Click to expand...

No .. I am not I have VERY stringent definitions .. And have studied all the major types of food ... Raw commercial is still more highly processed than what I get from the local farmer and you know less about it ... Many commercial raws add supplements , but that is another thread

Organic is a $$$ label.... I prefer natural I can trace , which 90% of the meat I eat I know what cow/ chicken it came from... try getting the name of the processing plant of most commercial foods raw or cooked

very true on the corn cob vs steak/// I have yet to find a kibble animal

Originally Posted by sharky

Organic is a $$$ label.... I prefer natural I can trace , which 90% of the meat I eat I know what cow/ chicken it came from... try getting the name of the processing plant of most commercial foods raw or cooked

Click to expand...

Alright, but that's not really reasonable for most of us. Would be nice, but not gonna happen. Really anything except setting up a breeding colony of mice and penning your cat and a mouse in together at dinnertime is a compromise, but there are still compromises that work in the direction of being more natural and healthy. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

Just wanted to say how much i spend on food per month. I pay roughly $200 per month on food....however devide that by 26 cats and it is pretty cheap. Also, they have no health problems except for the occasianal cold.

I feed for the most part wet food and then raw meat. Percentage wise they get 25% dry, 25% wet, and 50% dry. I'd do no dry if i could feed them more than once a day. I can't because of school, and the fact that they live on a farm that is a mile away.

The dry is 45% kirkland, than the other 55% percentage is Instinct, Wellness, and Taste of the Wild (TOTW).

Wet is friskies and sophistacat because that is the wet than i can afford.

Raw is raw meat, mainly chicken but some beef and turkey as well.

Originally Posted by ebrillblaiddes

Alright, but that's not really reasonable for most of us. Would be nice, but not gonna happen. Really anything except setting up a breeding colony of mice and penning your cat and a mouse in together at dinnertime is a compromise, but there are still compromises that work in the direction of being more natural and healthy. It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

Click to expand...

All a company needs is 5000$ and they can put organic in their name or trademark...

I agree it is not an all or nothing but in most areas of the US and Canada you can get most info ( how grown , what feed , where grown ).. Truely it was easier for me to find out where and how my meat is grown and slaughtered than for me to go get the frozen raw ... half of my meat is delivered to my door by the rancher himself , I do live in a sub rural area .. I for one will not be getting a aviary or a mouse colony anytime soon

back to the topic ... Studies with double blinds are next to impossible to do with cat food .... and there arent many companys doing anything more than the std feed trials, my guess is $$$$ to do said study and third parties to conduct them and fourth to certify that the third party did as told would be hard to get ... ti date only one raw company has EVEN ATTEMPTED the Affco( feed studies in the US) trials and the results of said trial are unknown

There's a difference between the question and the results. As has been pointed out, premium food doesn't necessaily translate to longer life and crappola food doesn't mean early death. The question though was if there is proof that better food or premium food makes a diffeence and the proof is all over the place.
Go to feline diabetes.com and see what happens with cats when they are switched to better foods. Go to the yahoo ibd group and the crf group. In all of these groupos you can actually see the proof in the numbers. The glucose numbers the creatinine and bun numbers
Oh and as far as the posts on this site from people eating premium food whose cats have health problems?
Not too many people are going to post 'Hey I feed good food and my cat is healthy!'
People usually only post when they are having problems with their cats so you are not getting a true example,
One more. Everyone can give an example. it is when you take the examples oif thousands that it starts to mean something

My first cat (she adopted ME when she was a year old) was almost 20 when she died. I knew nothing about what to feed, and she ate Fancy Feast wet and Friskies dry throughout her life and never had any illness until near the end.

When I adopted my current cat, I was determined to feed him better, but he has rejected every premium wet food I've tried (every one that my high-end pet shop carries). He prefers Fromm dry, but he eats mainly wet and will only eat Fancy Feast and Meow Mix--much to my disappointment.

At his recent wellness check, I told me vet about this, and he said that the best food to feed him is what he'll eat and not to worry.

Naturally, if he were ill, I'd investigate better food if needed. My former pet sitter told me that her two diabetic cats got off all meds when she fed them a better diet, so I know that food can make a difference.

Originally Posted by sharky

back to the topic ... Studies with double blinds are next to impossible to do with cat food .... and there arent many companys doing anything more than the std feed trials, my guess is $$$$ to do said study and third parties to conduct them and fourth to certify that the third party did as told would be hard to get ... ti date only one raw company has EVEN ATTEMPTED the Affco( feed studies in the US) trials and the results of said trial are unknown

Click to expand...

My understanding is that the AAFCO feeding trials are fairly short term -- only 6 months or so -- so all they really reveal is that the diet isn't going to kill the animal in the very short run. Unless the food is just terrible, most major long-term health issues like diabetes, CRF, urinary crystals, etc probably won't occur in statistically meaningful numbers during that time.

As for the study itself, I'm not sure that it's necessary or even possible for it to be a double blind in all cases. How does one set up a test so that the feeders don't know whether the cat is getting wet or dry food? I know that the double blind is the gold standard in medicine because it helps rule out the placebo effect, I doubt it's an issue with cat food trials IF they are being conducted by an impartial 3rd party.

Maybe an ideal setting for such a feeding trial would be a no-kill shelter in a large city. They presumably get dozens of kittens each year, so the ones that don't get adopted out could be housed for life and form the basis of a cohort which is divided into groups that get different foods. The shelter would take care of these cats just as they would have anyway and the group conducting the research could provide food and possibly other support over the lives of the cats.

Here's a quick discription of some AAFCO feeding study protocols.

Examples of AAFCO feeding protocols

Minimum testing protocol for proving an adult maintenance claim for a dog/cat food

A minimum of 8 healthy adult dogs/cats (at least 1 year old) are exclusively fed with the test diet. The test runs for a minimum of 26 weeks. An individual physical examination takes place before and after the test. Though, each animal is evaluated as to general health, bodyweight, and some blood parameters (including taurine in cats). Only small changes are tolerated. The diet fails if any animal shows clinical or pathological signs of nutritional deficiency or excess.

Minimum testing protocol for proving a growth claim for a dog/cat food

8 weaned puppies/kittens from 3 different bitches/queens are required to start the test. They must not be older than 8 weeks of age, and an equal sex distribution is recommanded. They are exclusively fed with the tested diet during 10 weeks minimum. At the same time, 8 puppies/kittens chosen according the same criterions form a concurrent control group. This last group receives a diet that already demonstrated that it meets the growth requirements as determined by AAFCO protocols. The same observations that in the first example are recorded. The average body weight gain is compared to the growth of the control group.

Minimum testing protocol for proving a gestation/lactation claim for a dog/cat food

A minimum of 8 pregnant bitches/queens over 1 year old are required to start the test. (For dog breeding, the male must belong to the same breed as the female). A concurrent control group of 8 pregnant females receives a diet that already passed successfully this specific AAFCO protocol. The feeding of the test diet starts at or before estrus, and is completed when the puppies are 4 weeks old, 6 weeks for kittens. For larger litters, puppies/kittens may be transferred to females with smaller litters. For example, a bitch under 13 kg should not suckle more than 5 puppies, and 5 kittens should be a maximum for a queen.

- observations concerning females: general health, food consumption, body weight evolution, blood parameters ;

- observations concerning the litters: litter size, stillbirths and congenital abnormalities, body weight gain and general health. Data recorded for the control group are used as references to interprete the results of the test.

A manufacturer desiring to prove an unqualified claim for nutritional adequacy must use the litters obtained from performing the gestation/lactation protocol for the growth protocol. If both tests are positive, the diet is qualified as "complete and balanced for all stages of life".

<Go to feline diabetes.com and see what happens with cats when they are switched to better foods. Go to the yahoo ibd group and the crf group. In all of these groupos you can actually see the proof in the numbers. The glucose numbers the creatinine and bun numbers>

Are there any clinical studies supporting this out of any of the vet schools at all?

Originally Posted by HappilyRetired

When I adopted my current cat, I was determined to feed him better, but he has rejected every premium wet food I've tried (every one that my high-end pet shop carries). He prefers Fromm dry, but he eats mainly wet and will only eat Fancy Feast and Meow Mix--much to my disappointment.

Click to expand...

I understand - I have a fussy pants too She will gladly eat quality dry food of any kind but the "better" the wet food the more she rejects it. I wasted a lot $$ before just giving up. (I do like the FF can size though, works perfect for us so for that alone I'm pleased with it). I worry about her getting enough water so I get it mostly b/c she lickes the juices up. She's not big on eating it

Regardless of "proof" or not, I know my cat's poo doesnt smell nearly as bad as when she was on Iams and Purina (before I knew better). She also would eat and eat and eat and rarely seem satisfied. Now she eats a higher quality food and eats a normal portion and is pretty happy with it. I'm better able to control her weight now.

I had a 22 year old who ate meow mix her whole life. Knowing what's in the food I really dont care if it isn't proven to cause health problems. I cant in good conscious feed my babies stuff like that.

Originally Posted by darlili

<Go to feline diabetes.com and see what happens with cats when they are switched to better foods. Go to the yahoo ibd group and the crf group. In all of these groupos you can actually see the proof in the numbers. The glucose numbers the creatinine and bun numbers>

Are there any clinical studies supporting this out of any of the vet schools at all?

Click to expand...

Vet schools are usually the "3rd" party in the AFFCO tests, that is why most do want a 4th party involved ... I know of three big schools that do the tests for the basic and then the more extensive tests for claims like UTI health .. Yes diet in the already ill will show easily but it is harder to prove in the healthy group of animals in their lifespans ... I would love some long studies so I felt less like a guinea pig with my kids... Now some companies run trials like you suggest and one is on going to date they are not giving up any info .... Others run tests thru breeding programs , obvious issue there is the "truth " factor and the limited gene pools

It's just so hard getting well designed studies and hard data - you can have all the anecdotal info in the world, and there may well be more than a grain of truth in it, but when you don't have the hard studies, you really have no proof and it's hard to design protocols without good data.

Interesting that the raw companies haven't been more into going through certification studies, as was indicated above - any particular reason for that, other than perhaps not having deeper financial pockets? I'd think it'd be a good marketing tool, if nothing else.

Originally Posted by darlili

It's just so hard getting well designed studies and hard data - you can have all the anecdotal info in the world, and there may well be more than a grain of truth in it, but when you don't have the hard studies, you really have no proof and it's hard to design protocols without good data.

Interesting that the raw companies haven't been more into going through certification studies, as was indicated above - any particular reason for that, other than perhaps not having deeper financial pockets? I'd think it'd be a good marketing tool, if nothing else.

Click to expand...

My guess is the $$$ issue as even the basic AFFCO is a lot of $$$$$....The company that did them thou is a VERY VERY small Northwest company so it could be the "holier" than thou thinking?

Maybe we should submit a protocol design ?