Hmm - I scoop at least twice a day, feed wet twice a day, worked with a male adoptee with litter box issues, have a pet fountain (don't have new shoes, but they have their new 360), have a surplus of bowls, which are washed in the dishwasher daily, make sure my cats get to the vet for check-ups, shots, blood work, dental and whatever else the vet deems good, read my monthly copies of the Cornell and Tufts cats newsletters (which, BTW, haven't exactly said raw in the only way to go) but don't choose to do raw, partially due to the time I'm away from home - so I'm lazy and shouldn't have adopted? I'm so angry right now about that phrasing, I honestly wish I could slap someone.
I've not yet seen any clinical studies that show that raw food is definitively better than other diets - and in all honesty, am not sure that the risk of salmonella, etc., is as low as some people would have, let alone being able to assure that the quality of uncooked meat I would be feeding would definitely be free of even worse pathogens. And, yes, I have Whole Foods near me - so it's not like I don't have high-quality grocers available.
I have read that if you're going to do raw, you must be totally devoted to doing raw - as Dusty Rainbolt said, quoting Yoda, there's no try, only do. Yay for those who are do-ing - but shame on those who think that people following other diets are 'bad' parents who shouldn't have adopted. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but that's exactly how I feel. Some of the raw food true believers probably turn off more people from researching that diet, than entice people into thinking it's an option. And, IMO, it's not an option, for me, til we get a heck of a lot more research done on it.
I'm looking forward to the results of the Winn study, and wish there was more clinical work in the area. I'm not sure I'm impressed with the 'cats in the wild' theory - most ferals don't live 17-20 years, yet we've seen the rise in longevity in cats, along with the related availability of commercial foods. Connected - hmm, you think?
I've not yet seen any clinical studies that show that raw food is definitively better than other diets - and in all honesty, am not sure that the risk of salmonella, etc., is as low as some people would have, let alone being able to assure that the quality of uncooked meat I would be feeding would definitely be free of even worse pathogens. And, yes, I have Whole Foods near me - so it's not like I don't have high-quality grocers available.
I have read that if you're going to do raw, you must be totally devoted to doing raw - as Dusty Rainbolt said, quoting Yoda, there's no try, only do. Yay for those who are do-ing - but shame on those who think that people following other diets are 'bad' parents who shouldn't have adopted. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but that's exactly how I feel. Some of the raw food true believers probably turn off more people from researching that diet, than entice people into thinking it's an option. And, IMO, it's not an option, for me, til we get a heck of a lot more research done on it.
I'm looking forward to the results of the Winn study, and wish there was more clinical work in the area. I'm not sure I'm impressed with the 'cats in the wild' theory - most ferals don't live 17-20 years, yet we've seen the rise in longevity in cats, along with the related availability of commercial foods. Connected - hmm, you think?