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

[mschauer]

Sure, better if presented in a more objective manner. But I know you're not saying you don't think it's important that someone understand the difference between the label "Chicken Dinner" and "Cat Dinner with chicken."

Yup, I agree that is some more of the useful information. 

Yes, all of the bits of information can be found elsewhere in a more objective presentation. But I'd rather provide one link and let people decide for themselves what's of value and what isn't, than have to click on 10 links to provide essentially the same information.

Yeah, but it's the "decide for yourself" part that bothers me. How are they supposed to do that when misleading information is provided? People can be easily persuaded to believe what ever the writer wants them to believe by presenting information in a biased manner. If the intent is really to help people made up their own minds then the information must be presented in an objective manner. I can't tell you how many people I have seen write in the forums "I don't trust the AAFCO" but when I ask what they don't trust they can't answer. I think people frequently absorb the tone of a paper even if they don't absorb the content. If the tone is neutral they are truly forced to make up their minds for themselves.

 

[ldg]

And the very topic of this thread is case-in-point.

But as to the paper, there isn't currently a better alternative.

 

[lcat4]

I'm butting in to your two-way conversation to comment on what seems to be a problem these days with any current form of written or verbal communication - everything has a slant.  The point at issue is to determine what the slant is and see beyond it.  Journalism has become persuasive writing.  Scientific research is a means to support future profit.  The reader must develop the skill to identify any hidden politics and/or motive within the communication in order to ascertain what's important and factual. 

As an example, a couple years ago I read an extensive article about probiotics; the article was written by a doctor, seemed quite thorough, referenced info that I was familiar with, cited various science research articles...seemed like the real mccoy.  I was convinced.  When I went searching for product that supported what was said in the article, low and behold, the only product I found that fit the bill happened to be made by a company that employed that doctor.  Does that make everything he stated in the article wrong?  No.  But I didn't buy the product.

It's been awhile since I read the article in question.  I can't comment on what the author's slant was other than wanting to create a reaction against the pet food industry.  That doesn't mean everything he said is wrong or right, but his slant makes it harder to see which is which.  The best way to approach the paper, Laurie, when you pass it on to others, is to acknowledge it's a bit biased, but has pertinent info included.  Then let the reader decide with his eyes open.  My response was to search the internet for other information. 

 

[mschauer]

First, you aren't butting in. Anyone is welcome to join in!

Second, thank you for a very articulate and concise summary of the issue!

The best way to approach the paper, Laurie, when you pass it on to others, is to acknowledge it's a bit biased, but has pertinent info included.  

I would welcome this. The paper is presented as, and I think assumed by most readers to be, a scholarly research paper and it isn't. I think what I view as obvious signs of bias would likely be missed by most readers particularly given the strong anti-pet food industry feelings that are so frequently expressed here at TCS. Is the AAFCO *ever* discussed here in anything other than a disdainful manner?? As a result readers are predisposed to see wrong doing given the flimsiest of evidence.

 

[jmljml19]

I've been seeing a lot of recommendations to avoid by-products in cat food. But cats in the wild don't eat the meat and bones and leave the "by-products." So why the bad rap? And is it actually deserved?

The first thing that had to be tackled was figuring out just what ARE by-products in pet foods?

Well, the answer is two-fold. There are two different kinds. There are "meat by-products," and "XYZ by-product meals."

Searching, the first site I went to was about.com, because their articles about pet food usually aren't that bad. http://cats.about.com/od/catfoodglossary/g/meatbyprod.htm
Wait - what? There's no difference between "meat by-products" and "meat by-products meal?" If both include 4D animals, and that's the issue, then I agree. I wouldn't want a food with by-products in it. And I feed the ferals Friskies. Those have by-products.

Well, it turns out the information in the about.com article is NOT correct. There IS a difference between by-products and by-product meal.

AAFCO definitions: http://www.braypets.com/FRR/aafcodef.htm
Common ingredient definitions: http://www.skaervet.com/documents/Common Pet Food Ingredients.pdf

AAFCO definition of meat by-product:

"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."

Emphasis added.

AAFCO definition of meat meal:

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

Note: no mention of "slaughtered" animals, but the product is rendered.


So" meat by-products" are NOT a rendered product. That's "meat meal," or "chicken by-product meal," or "XYZ protein meal" or "XYZ protein by-product meal."


"Meat by-products" are actually stuff that for the most part is actually good for cats - something they'd be eating if they were hunting, for sure, so at a minimum is a species-appropriate source of nutrition/protein. So why are they considered a sub-standard form of protein to be avoided?


Franny Syufy in the about.com article says they're potentially from 4D animals. But given that meat by-products are not rendered and ARE from slaughtered animals, they most likely can't be from 4D animals (dead, dying, diseased, disabled (downed)).* These 4D animals are considered unfit for human consumption and are not allowed in the human food chain, but do go to rendering plants, and they are allowed in pet food. I can totally understand why "xyz MEAL" is an ingredient to be avoided. (More on that and rendering later), but I'm still curious why meat by-products are considered an issue.

*I still haven't been able to determine if 4D animals can go to into non-rendered pet foods. Is "chicken" in a pet food by definition NOT a 4D animal? Is it just the rendered ingredients that have 4D animals in them? No answer to this question yet.


This paper on the AAFCO and the Pet Food Industry written in 2006 does a decent job of explaining. http://leda.law.harvard.edu/leda/data/784/Patrick06.html "Deconstructing the Regulatory Façade: Why Confused Consumers Feed their Pets Ring Dings and Krispy Kremes."
OK - but even THIS discussion doesn't address the meat by-products, JUST the rendered stuff (meat by-product meal). But it provides a point that I haven't found discussed elsewhere as re: meat by-products: batch consistency. Whose to say that batch of by-products isn't mostly intestines or stomach as opposed to lung and liver? So far, that's really the only downside I'm finding to non-rendered by-products. Of course, feeding a food with non-rendered by-products over time means you get different batches, so you get different nutritional profiles of the differing ingredients.

IMO, so far I think the non-rendered meat by-products are species-appropriate for cats, and I'm not yet sure they're not as good a source of protein as "meat."

**************************
Meat meal, chicken meal, by-product meals, etc. are a different story. From the same paper,
OK. Even though the former AAFCO President is on video saying "Fluffy" may be in pet food, forget the dead cats and dogs being in XYZ meal (and their collars, tags, and flea collars, that are not removed prior to rendering). They're not in chicken meal.

But saran wrap, etc. is. And I question the nutritional value of what's left after the processing required to make "meal." And, of course, there's the same "batch consistency" problem. Is it mostly chicken backs or heads and feet?

Does this batch have more saran wrap (expired meats from the supermarket/butcher) than another one?

Sadly, there isn't a dry food out there without some kind of meal in it. At least I haven't found it yet. But it seems to me that "meal" (rendered products) are the main non-grain ingredient that should be avoided in pet food, not the meat by-products (non-rendered) due to the toxin-potential, and because they contain animals not considered fit for human consumption.

Why is it OK for our pets to eat diseased animals - because the disease is rendered somehow "inert" by the process it goes through before it becomes food for our cat or dog?

Just thinking out loud here....

I feed my cats Now! Grain Free Cat Food and it doesn't list any by-product, or by-product meals at all

 

[dan32]

I couldn't stop thinking about boiled down zoo animals and roadkill this afternoon after reading all of this.

 

[dan32]

One would think that rendering plants would be located in close proximity to slaughterhouses, out in Nebraska or Kansas somewhere.  I can't imagine them sending zoo animals or roadkill any distance to be rendered.  Grizzly, nonetheless.

 

[peaches08]

I don't know about zoo animals, but horses that are rendered often have a lot of chemicals in them. Including of course euthanasia chemicals.

 

[dan32]

I know this is an ancient old post, but pardon me while I come up to speed.  The content of this thread has gotten me thinking in a big way.   I was reading the FDA's guidelines for pet food yesterday, as well as what goes on in rendering from the National Renderers Association.  So very frightful.  I am sure the pet food mfrs. just outsource their "meal" needs and probably have very little idea of how each individual batch is made - even the higher quality mfrs.  All it would take is just a few not-so-great batches of meal to sour everything.

I think most pet owners truly want to be doing the right thing..  Poor us as we stand in the pet food aisles trying to read tiny printing on the sides of packaging.

 

[peaches08]

I know this is an ancient old post, but pardon me while I come up to speed.  The content of this thread has gotten me thinking in a big way.   I was reading the FDA's guidelines for pet food yesterday, as well as what goes on in rendering from the National Renderers Association.  So very frightful.  I am sure the pet food mfrs. just outsource their "meal" needs and probably have very little idea of how each individual batch is made - even the higher quality mfrs.  All it would take is just a few not-so-great batches of meal to sour everything.

I think most pet owners truly want to be doing the right thing..  Poor us as we stand in the pet food aisles trying to read tiny printing on the sides of packaging.

This is why I switched to a homemade diet. That and seeing 3 otherwise healthy cats with constant diarrhea.

Maybe I'm a half empty glass, but I think the pet food manufacturers are very aware of what goes into those rendering vats.

 

[sarahliz]

I think I'm officially scared of any food with the word "meal" in it now.  On the other hand, I'm not so sure how I feel about by-products anymore.  I was sure I was 100% against them, but maybe they're okay in some food in moderation.

 

[ldg]

I think I'm officially scared of any food with the word "meal" in it now.  On the other hand, I'm not so sure how I feel about by-products anymore.  I was sure I was 100% against them, but maybe they're okay in some food in moderation.

That was my conclusion after doing all the research. You couldn't pay me to feed dry food to my cats, but I have no hesitation (at this point) in providing the ferals with Friskies pates and Fancy Feast classics (and I feed the one indoor pet cat of mine that goes on homemade food strikes from time-to-time), even though they both have quite a bit of by products in them. They're not by-product meal, being canned food, so not a rendered product. At least they're animal-based protein! And if there are batch inconsistencies? Just means that over time they get a rotation of which organ garbage was being used.

 

[ldg]

This is why I switched to a homemade diet. That and seeing 3 otherwise healthy cats with constant diarrhea.

Maybe I'm a half empty glass, but I think the pet food manufacturers are very aware of what goes into those rendering vats.

Of course they are. Those that make pet food are - for the most part - those that make human food. Making pet food just puts all that garbage they can't otherwise use to work, rather than down the drain.

 

[sarahliz]

That was my conclusion after doing all the research. You couldn't pay me to feed dry food to my cats, but I have no hesitation (at this point) in providing the ferals with Friskies pates and Fancy Feast classics (and I feed the one indoor pet cat of mine that goes on homemade food strikes from time-to-time), even though they both have quite a bit of by products in them. They're not by-product meal, being canned food, so not a rendered product. At least they're animal-based protein! And if there are batch inconsistencies? Just means that over time they get a rotation of which organ garbage was being used.

I actually went out and got a single can of Friskies classic pate today, mainly because I had a coupon for one free can with no purchase needed.  I know it's not the healthiest option, but it's also not horrible, so if Chowder will eat it I could maybe rotate it in around once a week just to keep some costs down.

The only thing I was torn about was which flavor would be better.  The Poultry Platter kind has Turkey as the first ingredient, which I like, but the Mixed Grill flavor contains no fish and does list real chicken later down in the list.  I wonder which is the lesser of the evils?  I guess this is a whole other topic of which is worse, by-products vs. fish.

 

[ldg]

I use both. I also use some of the ones with rice, though I don't use any with fish as the main ingredient.

For people looking to switch to canned food, but need to keep the costs down, I see nothing wrong with feeding Friskies pates exclusively. But if you can afford some canned foods that don't contain by-products (or peas or potatoes or grains or etc.), I also always suggest including the less expensive Friskies pates or Fancy Feast classics in the rotation. :nod:

FYI, it costs less to make your own food - which is what swayed me in the end. Control, human quality food, and it costs less. :lol3: Of course, some people just include homemade food (raw or cooked) as part of the rotation, and not the sole diet.

A number of us that have been feeding raw have been discussing the fact that the food doesn't even *need* to be raw. One of the raw feeders just made a batch of cooked food, in fact, to give it a try: http://www.thecatsite.com/t/263374/my-first-cooked-chicken-cat-food And have been helping figure out best ways to make/balance cooked foods in this thread (along with recommending canned foods for IBD kitties, which is the title of the thread) : http://www.thecatsite.com/t/263127/...-have-worked-have-you-tried-for-your-ibd-cats

 

[catlover58]

hi, I was wondering about the fancy feast classic chicken which is what i give my cats plus blue buffalo dry adult indoor cat food. I was told that ff has way too high in phosphorus..Is this true? I have three boys who have flutd.

 

[ldg]

Well, FLUTD is actually a rather complicated thing. Yes, the FF classics, compared to many foods, are rather high in phosphorus. But the biggest factors in FLUTD are hydration and urine pH. If a kitty has problems with FLUTD, it is best to feed them a wet food only diet, and add extra water at each meal. Animal-based proteins produce the proper pH. The Fancy Feast classics have no grains and no starches (both of which raise urine pH). IMO, the best change you can make to the diet to help prevent further problems is to stop feeding the dry food.

For more information, this is written by a vet: http://www.catinfo.org/?link=urinarytracthealth