- Joined
- Dec 3, 2006
- Messages
- 19
- Purraise
- 0
Thank you LDG for the reposting of the links/studies
I hope you and your animals have a wonderful weekend! xo
I think we need to look outside of the U.S., too.I appreciate the effort that many go through feeding their cats a well balanced raw diet. Being a full time working cat mom, I certainly don't have time for the raw diet prep. As well as I like to travel and have friend cat sitters take care of kitties and not have to stress about food details. I respect the efforts everyone makes in taking the very best care of our cats that we can including nutrition. We all love our cats very much, that is why we are here!
Regarding bacteria, I feel that it is actually less risky to feed canned than raw or dry. It seems that cleanliness for a raw diet requires meticulous prep. And dry food keeps getting recalled for Salmonella etc. Perhaps it is a false sense of security, but I feel "safe" feeding wet food.
I would like to see peer reviewed research in support of a raw diet if it is available. Is there a pubMed type site for animal research? I suppose studies will be biased also, as they would be primarily sponsered by corporate giants and big pet food companies.
You know, this is a really interesting point from a number of angles.It's interesting to me that people feeding their animals a balanced raw diet need to defend their position when commercial pet food is only a recent invention.
The article I wrote is here: http://catcentric.org/nutrition-and...y-cat-or-i-can-afford-to-feed-commercial-raw/ )The New York Times article reported that Dr. Nestle (“pronounced NES-sel”) found “the so-called premium pet foods cost three to four times more than supermarket brands. Within the premium brands, there is also a wide price range yet when the ingredients lists are compared, they are strikingly similar [as]…All pet foods are made from the byproducts of human food production. No matter what the package says, your dog is not getting whole chicken breasts, but what remains after the breasts have been removed for human food.” (emphasis added). The NYT article lists the largest manufacturers in the pet food industry: Nestlé, Purina, Mars and Procter & Gamble. But Nestlé owns Purina (having purchased Ralston Purina in 2001), and Del Monte, which holds the #3 market share spot in the pet food industry, is not included in the list. Each of the pet food industry giants is first and foremost a giant in packaged human foods. The pet food industry giants are found in just about every isle of the supermarket – not just the pet supplies isle: pet food puts what would otherwise be profit-draining waste to profit-enhancing use.
Drs. Nestle and Nesheim examined premium versus nonpremium brands and found that there often isn’t much difference in quality. Given most pet foods are manufactured from the human food chain waste products, this shouldn’t be overly surprising. They found that nonpremium (generic or supermarket distribution) pet foods contain more grains and by-products, but that “all contained basically the same ingredients.” Of course there are differences in protein sources, and marketing of “grain-free” foods has altered the pet food industry landscape forever. An apparent step in the right direction for a more species-appropriate diet, and certainly a life-saver for many pets that have developed allergies or other health problems related to consuming grains, sadly “grain-free” is not synonymous with low carbohydrates (see tables). It’s no news to vets and animal nutritionists that cats, as carnivores, have essentially no nutritional requirement for carbohydrates. Yet those grains have been replaced with peas, potatoes, and other “non-grain” carbohydrates. Carrots, peas, and potatoes not fit for human consumption are still cheaper than our waste meat products.
And a very important point:I have repeatedly stated that science doesn't know everything there is to know about feline nutrition; they don't have a complete list of all the nutrients cats need, nor an understanding of the natural combinations in which those nutrients are best utilized.
.The rise in the use of grain and carbohydrate products over the last decade further contributes to the nutritional imbalance in commercial pet foods.[195] “Once considered a filler by the pet food industry, cereal and grain products now replace a considerable proportion of the meat that was used in the first commercial pet foods.”[196] Why the change? Cost. Corn is a much cheaper energy source than meat.[197] But the change in pet food formulas has a real impact on a pet’s health. “Dogs have little evolved need for carbohydrates and cats have no need for this source of energy.”[198] Moreover, although dogs and cats can almost completely absorb the carbohydrates from some grains such as rice, the nutrient availability of wheat, beans, and oats is poor. [199] Other ingredients, such as peanut hulls, have absolutely no significant nutritional value and are used strictly as filler.[200] This news is even more disturbing where two of the top three ingredients in dry pet foods is almost always some form of a grain product.[201] The result of ingredients with low nutritional value is a pet that is slowing starving to death and at the same time consuming more and more food. Also, since cats are true carnivores, one must wonder how pet food manufacturers justify feeding them substantial quantities of corn as part of their “balanced” diet…
…The proof that commercial pet food is not necessarily balanced is found on the packages: consider the high level of carbohydrates (as discussed above) and the “wild card” of the rendering process. Plus, each time regulatory agencies meet, they debate all over again how much of which nutrients will constitute 100% complete.[211] If this is so, then how could the previous balance of nutrients have been 100% complete? The most honest solution would be to cease the “complete and balanced” claims and start to educate the consumers about nutrition and their pets’ specific needs. But this would not sell pet food; the American public is addicted to the convenience of commercial pet foods and judging by the reluctance to eliminate fast food from our own diet, our pets will likely fare far worse.
Today, one simple word can strike fear in the heart of the pet food manufacturer claiming that its product is “100% complete”: taurine. Taurine is an essential amino acid found in most animal protein sources.[212] Taurine regulates the amount of calcium entering the heart tissue. The calcium then triggers each heart beat.[213] Thus, taurine deficiency can cause heart failure.[214] Few mammals are unable to produce taurine, but cats and humans are among them.[215] While the National Research Council did not issue a guideline regarding the minimal amount of taurine to be included in cat food until 1981, taurine was considered an essential nutrient as early as 1976.[216] In August of 1987, researchers at the University of California at Davis, reported in Science Magazine that a taurine deficiency in commercial cat foods had resulted in the deaths of thousands of cats before manufacturers began supplementing their products with taurine.[217]
Upon the discovery of the link between the dying cats and their taurine deficiencies, pet food companies, such as Ralston-Purina and Hill’s Pet Products, began reformulating their products to include additional taurine.[218] Ralston Purina produces Purina Cat Chow, the best-selling brand of cat food.[219] While no one will ever know exactly how many cats died as a result of eating nutritionally-inadequate pet food, there is little doubt that at least one (if not all) of the taurine-deficient brands bore the label “100% complete.”