Anyone want to chat about "by products, "meal" ... or rather not think about it? ;-)

[ldg]

Here is an analysis of feral cat diets. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22005434 It included 27 studies of only feral domestic cat diets (scat and stomach content analyses), 6,666 data points, and studies where cats had access to more than 5% of a diet from human sources were excluded.

On a DMB basis, the diet was 62.7% protein, 22.8% fat, 11.8% ash, and 2.8% carbs (all "incidental" from stomach contents). The omega 6: omega 3 ratio was 2:1, and the calciumhosphorus ratio was 1.5:1. Most raw food diets target a Ca ratio of 1.2 or 1:1:1. The theory is that the bioavailability of minerals from bones is less than in supplements added to foods. Oh - and the omega 6: omega 3 ratio of most commercial canned/kibble is 17:1

 

[ldg]

OK. I'm looking at the Friskies pates I feed the ferals. Most of them ARE mostly by-products. And this "chicken by products" ingredient is confusing, because there's no AAFCO definition for it. ONLY for chicken by-product meal. So is it chicken by-products with water? Or rendered? :dk:

This one has Turkey as the first ingredient though: http://www.friskies.com/Cat-Food/Wet-Cat-Food/Classic-Pate-Poultry-Platter

This one's interesting - lots of by-products, and then liver listed as a separate ingredient: http://www.friskies.com/Cat-Food/Wet-Cat-Food/Classic-Pate-Liver-Chicken-Dinner :dk:

Funny - they all look like they're different, but they're all almost identical. :lol3: I mean the non-fishy ones, anyway. I didn't look up any of the fishy ones, as I don't feed them.

 

[Willowy]

I would assume "chicken by-products" would be the same as "meat by-products", except from chickens instead of mammals :lol3:. Maybe they figure that goes without saying? :dk:

I thought all the non-fish pate flavors of Friskies have turkey or chicken or some other non-by-product ingredient. Farther down the list, yeah, but in there. I don't have a can here too look at though.

 

[Willowy]

OK, after looking at the ingredients on a few different canned foods, IS there such a thing as "chicken by-products"? All I see is "poultry by-products".

 

[carolina]

Well, here is my take on it.....
I don't trust the AAFCO, so for me their definition of it is a moot point. In fact, because of the AAFCO, the more I looked into it, the more I looked into the control they have (or the lack there of) over our babies' food and health, the scariest I got - which is precisely why I feed raw today.
This thread http://www.thecatsite.com/t/239691/nutritionally-complete-assurances-for-our-pet-food was my final push, coupled with Bugsy's medical needs for a better diet.
So, today I avoid foods that go into a pet food plant at all, and I really don't like rendering
(I do understand the need for pet food though...... I just personally don't like it anymore)
The problem I have with by-products, is the complete lack of control. When the AAFCO already gives us so little control as it is, IMHO, by having unnamed by-products, such as "meat by-products", for example, you have no control whatsoever.
You don't know what is in there, how much of it, from what animal..... and I am not ok with that.

To top it off, I have a very bad experience with it..... It might be a coincidence, but it is too much of a coincidence to disregard..... Hope used to eat all wet, Ziwi-peak. Now, Ziwi-peak does have organs - but those are named organs, in the same proportions as fed in a raw diet, from the same protein/animal as the main meat. So, if Venison, it will contain venison liver, venison kidney, and so on. Also not rendered - it is cooked in the can, in a lower temperature.
Anyways - she ate that and was always fine...... I was looking into cutting costs and was directed to a brand called sophisticat (it's been a while) - a lot of flavors were grain free, sold on Pet Smart - it was very cheap - LOTS of by-products though. I was told by-products would be ok.....
That was it..... She got very very sick. Took quite a bit of work to being her back to her normal self..... And she couldn't digest any new proteins for a long while. Z/D (and medical treatment) saved her - then Ziwi Peak again...... And now raw.
So..... I am not sure..... She suffered quite a bit, and so did I. She was fine before by-products, and got sick when she had it.....
It might been a bad batch of food..... Sure, I can't guarantee what happened, but I rather stay away.....

 

[muezza]

Does anyone here trust how someone else is making your cats food? It seems like making a profit is the top priority of the pet food industry.I feel I can make a less expensive better quality cat food compared to the vast majority of canned foods out there.I does not cost too much to provide my cat top quality poultry or rabbit.LDG Thanks for the stats, I always suspected supplements added to cat food was too much. You all know I am joking about grinding up the frozen mice and birds, right?

 

[ldg]

Why need to joke about grinding up mice and birds? :dk: I wouldn't want to feed wild mice or birds because of parasites (I see no need to be giving my inside cats dewormers because of the food I feed them), but I bought ground mouse for my cats. Only a couple of them liked it.

But supplements added to cat food (commercial kibble/canned) is totally necessary. The processing they go through to become "food" kills so many of the nutrients in them, if they aren't supplemented, they won't provide much nutrition.

Even if you're going to make home made cooked food, you need to supplement. What and how much of what, I have no clue. But raw food has the nutrients they need. IMO, it needs to be adjusted for the difference in the meats we feed vs. the meats they would naturally eat (omega 3 supplement), for not being fresh, transported, most likely frozen, thawed, and potentially refrozen before being fed to them... (potentially Vitamin E and taurine supplements), but the nutrients in raw aren't destroyed.

 

[ldg]

Well, here is my take on it.....
I don't trust the AAFCO, so for me their definition of it is a moot point.

Yeah, I have to agree. In fact, I don't trust the whole "complete and balanced" concept itself. Yeah, the diet I feed my cats has been analyzed and compared to the AAFCO guidelines... and because that "complete and balanced" thing has been drilled into my head, I feel more comfortable because the diet I feed my cats isn't deficient as per AAFCO (well, technically it is in manganese, but that's a whole separate topic LOL).

But I think the concept of advertising that pet foods are "complete and balanced" is a crock. The fact of the matter is that we have no idea of everything cats need, or everything that's in the food they eat.

The AAFCO guidelines are based of the NRC (Nutrition Research Council) guidelines - and "adjusted" for "bioavailability." YET... many of the guidelines are from studies in OTHER ANIMALS - not cats!!! So exactly how does that ensure we know what cats need? We learn new things about human nutrition and needs ALL the time - and we're not conducting that same research on dogs and cats. In the 70s and early 80s, pet food companies were killing cats with their "complete and balanced" foods, because they didn't know cats couldn't synthesize taurine. Fine. It's a guideline. But it isn't the end-all be-all against which home made food should be measured, IMO.

:dk:

 

[ldg]

OK, after looking at the ingredients on a few different canned foods, IS there such a thing as "chicken by-products"? All I see is "poultry by-products".

The AAFCO provides a definition for chicken by-product meal and poultry by-product meal. That's why the ingredient "poultry by-product" is confusing. I THINK it is actually a "meal," because the ONLY AAFCO definition for a non-rendered by-product is "meat by-products." :dk: In chicken and poultry, I'd guess by-products are heads, feet, and maybe viscera. But chicken livers and gizzards get sold into the human meat market :dk:

 

[carolina]

Yeah, I have to agree. In fact, I don't trust the whole "complete and balanced" concept itself. Yeah, the diet I feed my cats has been analyzed and compared to the AAFCO guidelines... and because that "complete and balanced" thing has been drilled into my head, I feel more comfortable because the diet I feed my cats isn't deficient as per AAFCO (well, technically it is in manganese, but that's a whole separate topic LOL).
But I think the concept of advertising that pet foods are "complete and balanced" is a crock. The fact of the matter is that we have no idea of everything cats need, or everything that's in the food they eat.
The AAFCO guidelines are based of the NRC (Nutrition Research Council) guidelines - and "adjusted" for "bioavailability." YET... many of the guidelines are from studies in OTHER ANIMALS - not cats!!! So exactly how does that ensure we know what cats need? We learn new things about human nutrition and needs ALL the time - and we're not conducting that same research on dogs and cats. In the 70s and early 80s, pet food companies were killing cats with their "complete and balanced" foods, because they didn't know cats couldn't synthesize taurine. Fine. It's a guideline. But it isn't the end-all be-all against which home made food should be measured, IMO.
:dk:

...... I very much today walk the "feed the cat, don't feed the numbers" walk, kind of "treat the cat, don't treat the numbers" concept. In my house for example, what is complete for one, is not for another...... (on the balanced and complete issue)
Of course there are guidelines out there we can follow - the calcium, taurine, so on..... But things -happen along the way - Bugsy and his skin itch - adding Omega3, Krill oil got rid of it, so there was an imbalance there....
Some cats digest some meats better than others..... Some do deal with by-products ok, some live 20+ years on junk dry food just fine..... others develop kidney disease, diabetes, IBD..... It's one of those things.... It depends on the cats, really...... I know for a fact 2 of mine couldn't do well on by-products: Bugsy and Hope. Hope doesn't have IBS..... So.... Is by-products good? :dk: But is it good enough? IMHO no.

 

[muezza]

Oh - and I help other people here on TCS find better food choices, even if they want commercial. I just got to wondering if by-products really were so bad. I conclude they're not. But I also now think rendered products have no business being fed to any animal - just another reason not to feed any dry food.

Sure, poultry by- products are all right with me, if I am the chef doing the quality control.I assume poultry by products use the rendering process to make chicken by product meal, to the best of my knowledge.     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poultry_by-product_meal

 

[muezza]

The sources providing the feeder mice and birds commercially raise them, they are not wild, other sources provide lab research quality mice ETC.

 

[mschauer]

I've always thought that a named "meal" is the same as the named meat, just dried and ground

. Which you have to do to make kibble. I dunno.

In general that is true. Poultry meal is poultry meat, skin and (I think) bone that has been rendered into a meal. Poultry by-product meal is, well, poultry by-products that have been rendered into meal.

Actually, I'm so sure it really is as simple as "named item meal" = "named item" + rendering. It still isn't clear, to me anyway, whether non-rendered  by-products can be composed of 4D animals.

 

[emilymaywilcha]

The AAFCO provides a definition for chicken by-product meal and poultry by-product meal. That's why the ingredient "poultry by-product" is confusing. I THINK it is actually a "meal," because the ONLY AAFCO definition for a non-rendered by-product is "meat by-products." In chicken and poultry, I'd guess by-products are heads, feet, and maybe viscera. But chicken livers and gizzards get sold into the human meat market

I read "byproducts" means things like beaks, feet, and feathers, not the organs you say they are. That is why I always assumed they are bad - they are from the outside of the bird. Sorry, I can't remember the source.

Maybe "poultry byproducts" is an attempt to hide the fact cats are not getting all animal parts from the same bird.

 

[emilymaywilcha]

I went to PetFoodDirect.com to read the ingredient lists for a variety of name brands - chicken flavor only for apples to apples comparison. Some cans do specify chicken byproducts, but the same can has "meat byproducts." Why would they be specific about one type of byproduct and not aonther? Of course not all companies use the same terminology, but that one is a head-scratcher. BTW chicken liver is listed seperately, so it is not part of chicken byproducts.

I found something else that has not been discussed yet: chicken broth. Is the placement of that ingredient important? Is it another way to put less meat in the can? Some companies put chicken broth before real chicken, which has me concerned.

 

[emilymaywilcha]

Article about what really is in pet food: http://www.bornfreeusa.org/facts.php?more=1&p=359

More links coming.

 

[emilymaywilcha]

From about.com:

Meat By-Products
The AAFCO (American Association of Feed Control Officers) defines meat by-products as " The non-rendered, clean parts, other than meat, derived from slaughtered mammals. It includes, but is not limited to, lungs, spleen, kidneys, brain, livers, blood, bone, partially defatted low-temperature fatty tissue and stomachs and intestines freed of their contents. It does not include hair, horns, teeth and hooves." Besides the fact that you don't know what species of animal the "meat" comes from, by-products as a rule are considered an inferior form of the protein which cats need.

Meat Meal, Meat By-Product Meal
"Meal" is generally produced by rendering, a process which raises a red flag to cat enthusiasts. I would definitely recommend avoiding cat foods containing these ingredients.

See also the FAQ on ingredients to look for in cat food. And for a more complete discussion of how to read cat food labels, check out Understanding Cat Food Labels.

From Natura Pet:

 

Meat Meal

 

Meat meal is the rendered product from mammal tissues, exclusive of any added blood, hair, hoof, horn hide trimmings, manure, stomach and rumen contents except in such amounts as may occur unavoidably in good processing practices.

 

[ldg]

In general that is true. Poultry meal is poultry meat, skin and (I think) bone that has been rendered into a meal. Poultry by-product meal is, well, poultry by-products that have been rendered into meal.

Actually, I'm so sure it really is as simple as "named item meal" = "named item" + rendering. It still isn't clear, to me anyway, whether non-rendered by-products can be composed of 4D animals.

mschauer, I know a number of my posts are really long with a lot of links. :anon: But this earlier post has a link to the FDA site, which makes it clear 4D animals are in rendered products (well, as clear as the FDA makes anything ).

I've been working on this for a while, left it, and ran errands. So if I address anything that's been posted since I started, sorry. :anon:

.....

From the FDA discussion on rendering: http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/ComplianceManuals/CompliancePolicyGuidanceManual/ucm074717.htm

BACKGROUND:

Rendered animal feed ingredients include the various poultry, meat and marine products which result from the rendering of these animal tissues. Rendering of poultry and other animal tissues has been practiced for over a hundred years as a means of salvaging valuable protein and fat content from otherwise waste material. For many years end products from rendering have been used to feed animals. The rendering industry utilizes packinghouse offal, meat processing waste, restaurant waste and animal tissues from other sources including animals that have died otherwise than by slaughter.

.....Different standards have historically existed for human and animal food concerned with aesthetics. The Center has permitted other aesthetic variables in dealing with animal feed, as for instance the use of properly treated insect or rodent contaminated food for animal feed.

I bolded different stuff in this post than in the first one.

 

[mschauer]

In general that is true. Poultry meal is poultry meat, skin and (I think) bone that has been rendered into a meal. Poultry by-product meal is, well, poultry by-products that have been rendered into meal.

Actually, I'm so sure it really is as simple as "named item meal" = "named item" + rendering. It still isn't clear, to me anyway, whether non-rendered by-products can be composed of 4D animals.

mschauer, I know a number of my posts are really long with a lot of links.

But this earlier post has a link to the FDA site, which makes it clear 4D animals are in rendered products (well, as clear as the FDA makes anything

).

I know there can be 4D animals in *rendered* ingredients. I said it isn't clear to me whether there can be 4D animals in *non-rendered* ingredients.

 

[ldg]

Emilly, I'd already posted the official AAFCO definitions, the link to about.com started this thread, and I already posted a link to bornfree's discussion of what's really in pet foods (same post as I just requoted myself for mschauer as re: 4D animals in rendered products).

I find NO definition for chicken by products OR poultry by-products, ONLY chicken by-product meal or poultry by-product meal. So I don't know if the cans/foods are mislabeled, or ???????????????

Again, here is the link to AAFCO definitions of ingredients: AAFCO definitions: http://www.braypets.com/FRR/aafcodef.htm

And the link to a broader list of ingredients: Common ingredient definitions: http://www.skaervet.com/documents/Common Pet Food Ingredients.pdf

As to why some have a protein source listed (chicken by-product meal) and others don't (meat by-products OR meat meal), that's because it's much easier (cheaper) to throw everything together ("meat" being beef, goat, pork, lamb; and "poultry" being birds) than making individual batches of rendered specific protein. I assume a rendering plant has to specialize in that. (e.g. a rendering plant near a large group of poultry farms probably makes chicken meal or chicken by-product meal).