Кот просто шизеет, до того эту еду любит.
Орет дурным голосом и готов всячески унижаться, лишь бы дали ее поесть.
Кошачьи наркотики туда подмешивают что ли?
А что они в MeowMix подмешивают?
-
vaduz
- Уже с Приветом
- Posts: 27652
- Joined: 15 Jul 2002 17:05
- Location: MD
-
Milliardo
- Уже с Приветом
- Posts: 989
- Joined: 11 Dec 2002 06:20
- пакость разную, от которой у кошек подривается здоровйе. Не пожалейте средств, переведите кота на более дорогой корм, а еше лучше качественние консерви (100% мясо) или в лучшем варианте, на "человеческую" еду - мясо, кашку и т.п.
What's Really for Dinner?
The Truth About Commercial Pet Food
by Tina Perry
Cow brains. Sheep guts. Chicken heads. Road kill. Rancid grain. These are a few of the so-called nutritionally balanced ingredients found in the commercial pet food served to companion animals every day.
More than 95 percent of US companion animals derive their nutritional needs from a single source: processed pet food. When people think of pet food, many envision whole chickens, choice cuts of beef, fresh grains, and all the nutrition that a dog or cat may ever need -- images that pet food manufacturers promote in their advertisements. What these companies do not reveal is that instead of whole chickens they have substituted chicken heads, feet, and intestines. Those choice cuts of beef are really cow brains, tongues, esophagi, fetal tissue dangerously high in hormones, and possibly diseased and even cancerous meat. Those whole grains have had the starch removed for corn starch powder and the oil extracted for corn oil, or they are hulls and other remnants from the milling process. Grains used that are truly whole have usually been deemed unfit for human consumption because of mold, contaminants, poor quality, or poor handling practices. Pet food is one of the worlds most synthetic edible products, containing virtually no whole ingredients.
Pet food manufacturers have become masters at inducing companion animals to eat things cat and dogs would normally spurn. Pet food scientists have learned that it's possible to take a mixture of inedible scraps, fortify it with artificial vitamins and minerals, preserve it so that it can sit on the shelf for more than a year, add dyes to make it attractive, and then extrude it into whimsical shapes that appeal to the human consumer. For this, pet food companies can expect to earn $9 billion in sales in 1996.
Scraps and Byproducts
For years, many care givers have tried to avoid feeding their companion animals people food leftovers, having been warned by veterinarians about the heath problems they can cause. Yet much scrap material from the human food industry is ending up in dogs and cats dinner bowls. What the consumer purchases and what the manufacturer advertises are often two entirely different products, and this difference threatens the animals healthy, especially as they age. Learning to read ingredient labels and taking the time to read them carefully is crucial to making an educated choice when purchasing pet food. Ingredients are listed in descending order of weight (heaviest first) under standards established by the Center for Veterinary Medicine for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The name of the product (in most states) is dictated by the regulations of the American Association of Feed Control Officials (AAFCO). The trouble is, AAFCO standards can lead to deceptive product names due to the weight and volume variations between wet and dry ingredients. Also, the average consumer has no idea what the definitions for the listed ingredients mean. Preservatives, vitamins, minerals, flavorings, and cereal make up most of what the companion animal eats.
It is not happenstance that four of the top five major pet food companies in the United States are subsidiaries of major multinational food production companies: Colgate Palmolive (which produces Hills Science Diet), Heinz, Nestle, and Mars )see The Corporate Connection). From a business standpoint, multi-national food companies owning pet food manufacturers is an ideal relationship. The multinationals have captive market in which to dump their waste products, and the pet food manufacturers have a direct source of bulk materials. Both make a profit from selling scraps that originate from places far worse than the dinner table. In his 1986 book Pet Allergies veterinarian Al Plechner sums up what goes into companion animals food: Condemned parts and animals rejected for human consumption are routinely rerouted for commercial pet foods. A similar fate applies to so-called 4-D animals. These are food animals picked up dead, or that are dying, diseased, or disabled, and do not meet human-food qualifications. They are processed straightaway for companion animal consumption. Little goes to waste. Says Plechner, Food processing refuse of all sorts winds up in your animals dinner bowls. Moldy grains. Rancid foods. Meat meal. The latter is ground-up slaughterhouse discards often containing disease-ridden tissue and high levels of hormones and pesticides, the very things that may have contributed to the death of the steer or hog. A decade later, his words still apply. When cattle, swine, chickens, lambs, or other animals meet their ends at a slaughterhouse, the choice cuts -- lean muscle tissue and organs prized by humans -- are trimmed away from the carcass for human consumption. Whatever remains of the carcass (bones, blood, pus, intestines, ligaments, subcutaneous fat, hooves, horns, beaks, and any other parts not normally consumed by humans) is, according to the pet food industry, perfectly fit as a protein source for cat and dog food.
The Pet Food Institute, the trade association of pet food manufacturers, acknowledges in its 1994 Fact Sheet the importance of using byproducts in pet foods as additional income for processors and farmers. The purchase and use of these ingredients by the pet food industry not only provides nutritional foods for pets at reasonable costs, but provides an important source of income to American farmers and processors of meat, poultry, and seafood products for human consumption. Many of these remnants are indigestible and provide a questionable source of nutrition. The amount of nutrition provided by meat byproducts, meals, and digests varies from vat to vat of this animal protein soup. A vat filled with chicken feet, beaks, and viscera is going to make available a lower amount of protein than a vat of breast meat. James Morris and Quinton Rogers, professors with Department of Molecular Biosciences at the University of California at Davis Veterinary School of Medicine, assert that there is virtually no information on the bio-availability of nutrients for companion animals in many of the common dietary ingredients used in pet foods. These ingredients are generally byproducts of the meat, poultry and fishing industries, with the potential for wide variation in nutrient composition. Claims of nutritional adequacy of pet foods based on the current AAFCO nutrient allowances (profiles) do not give assurances of nutritional adequacy and will not until ingredients are analyzed and bioavailability values are incorporated. Meat byproducts, the catch-all term of the pet food industry, is a misnomer because these byproducts contain little if any meat. Byproducts contain little if any meat. Byproduct are animal parts leftover after the meat has been stripped from the bone. Chicken byproducts include heads, feet, entrails, lungs, spleens, kidneys, brains, livers, stomachs, noses, blood, and intestines free of their contents. What the pet food manufactures fail to mention is that most byproducts, digests and meals are also filled with other substances, such as cancerous tissue cut from the carcass, plastic foam packaging containing spoiled meat from supermarkets, ear tags, spoiled slaughterhouse meat, road kill, and pieces of downer animals.
Canned Cannibalism
Another source of meat that isn't mentioned on pet food labels is pet byproducts, the bodies of dogs and cats. In 1990 the San Francisco Chronicle reported that euthanized companion animals were found in pet foods. Although pet food company executives and the National Renderers Association vehemently denied the report, the American Veterinary Medical Association and the FDA confirmed the story. The pets serve a viable purpose by providing foodstuff for the animal feed chain, said Lea McGovern, chief of the FDA's animal feed safety branch. Because of the sheer volume of animals rendered and the similarity in protein content between poultry byproducts and processed dogs and cats, rendering plant workers say it would be impossible for purchasers to know the exact contents of what they buy. In fact, Sacramento Rendering cited by inspectors five times in the past two years for product-labeling violations.
Grease and Grain
The most nutritious dry pet food is no better than the worst if an animals will not eat it. Pet food scientists have discovered that spraying the kibble or pellets with a combination of refined animal fat, lard, kitchen grease, and other oils too rancid or deemed inedible for humans makes an otherwise bland or distasteful product palatable. Animal fat is mainly packing house waste or supermarket trimmings from the packaging of meats. Animals love the taste of this sprayed fat, which also acts as a binding agent to which manufacturers may add other flavor enhancers. The pungent odor wafting from an open bag of pet food is created by this concoction. Restaurant grease has become a major component of feed-grade animal fat over the last 15 years. Often held in 50-gallon drums for weeks or months in extreme temperatures, this grease is usually kelp outside with no regard for its safety or further use. The rancid grease is then picked up by fat blenders who mix the animal and vegetable fats together, stabilize them with powerful antioxidants to prevent further spoilage, and then sell the blended products to pet food companies. Rancid, heavily preserved fats are extremely difficult to digest and can lead to a host of animal health problems, including digestive upsets, diarrhea, gas, and bad breath. Once considered a filler by the pet food industry, the amount of grain products included in pet food has risen over the last decade as the American population has focused its attention away from consuming beef and toward a healthier diet of grains and vegetables. Commonly two of the top three pet food ingredients are some form of grain products. For instance, Alpo's Beef Flavored Dinner lists ground yellow corn, soybean meal, and poultry byproduct meal as its top three ingredients. 9 Lives Crunchy Meals lists ground yellow corn, corn gluten meal, and poultry byproduct meal as its top three ingredients. Of the top four ingredients of Purina's O.N.E. Dog Formula -- chicken, ground yellow corn, ground wheat, and corn gluten meal -- two are corn-based products from the same source. This is an industry practice known as splitting. When components of the same whole ingredient are listed separately (ground yellow corn and corn gluten meal) it appears that there is less corn than chicken, even when the whole ingredient may weigh more than the chicken. Soy is another common ingredient in many pet foods. It is used by the manufacturers to boost the claimed protein content and add bulk so that when animals eat a product containing soy they will fell more sated. Tofu is suitable for humans, but most forms of soybean do not agree with a dog or cat's digestive system. Like many other pet food ingredients, soy is virtually unusable by an animal's body. Being obligate carnivores, cats have little ability to digest any nutrients from soy. The problem is worse for dogs because they lack the essential amino acid to digest soy products. Soy has also been linked to bloat and gas in many dogs.
Additives and Processing
Pet food industry critics note that many of the ingredients (such as corn syrup and corn gluten meal) used as humectants to prevent oxidation also bind water molecules in such a way that the food actually sticks to the animal's colon and may cause blockage. Blockage of the colon may cause an increased risk of cancer of the colon or rectum. Two-thirds of the pet food manufactured in the United States contains synthetic preservatives added by the manufacturer. Of the remaining third, 90 percent includes ingredients already stabilized by synthetic preservatives. Because most pet food contains large percentages of added fat, a stabilizer is needed to maintain the quality of the food. Sodium nitrite, often used as a coloring agent, fixative, and preservative, has the ability to combine with natural stomach and food chemicals (secondary amends) to create nitrosamines, powerful cancer-causing agents, according to A Consumer's Dictionary of Food Additives.
Many pet foods advertised as preservative-free do not contain preservatives. Almost all rendered meats have synthetic preservatives added as stabilizer, but manufacturers aren't required to list preservatives they themselves haven't added. Premixed vitamin additives can also contain preservatives. In the 1003 Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, veterinarian Philip Roudebush reported finding low concentrations of synthetic antioxidant preservatives in all analyzed samples of products labeled as chemical free or all-natural. Other types of additives depend on whether the pet food is semi-moist, dry or canned. Because semi-moist food contains 25-50 percent water, antimicrobial preservatives must be used. Propylene glycol was frequently used in cat food until it was pulled in 1992 for causing a variety of health problems. Processing greatly alters the nutritional value of the food ingredients. Veterinarian R. L. Wysong states in Rationale for Animal Nutrition: Processing is the wild card in nutritional value that is, by and large, simply ignored. Heating, freezing, dehydrating, canning, extruding, pelleting, baking and so forth, are so commonplace that they are simply thought of as synonymous with food itself. Because the ingredients that pet food companies use are not wholesome, and harsh manufacturing practices destroy what little nutritional value the food may have had in the first place, the final product must be fortified with vitamins and minerals.
Questionable Nutrition
How, then, can any pet food be guaranteed to be 100 percent complete or nutritionally adequate? As long as it meets the AAFCO minimum standards, such a guarantee can be on the label. Yet in 1994, feed tests conducted by the New York State Agriculture Department showed 7 percent of all pet foods analyzed failed chemical analyses for guaranteed nutrients. Other states report similar findings, with failure of analyzed feed ranging from to 12 percent. Even if a pet food meets AAFCO standards, certain nutritional requirements (for example, lysine) can vary between species by as much as seven-fold. Although manufacturers clam that millions of companion animals can thrive on a diet consisting of nothing by commercial pet food, research and an increasing number of veterinarians implicate processed pet food as a source of disease or as an exacerbating agent for a number of degenerative diseases. For example, kidney disease is on of the top three killers of companion animals. According to Plechner, the extra protein and harsh ingredients of many pet foods place an overload on the kidneys. Left untreated, the toxic buildup leads to vomiting, loss of appetite, uremic poisoning, and death. Wysong adds, In the last few years, large statistical studies have shown the link between the diet (of processed foods) and a variety of degenerative diseases, including cancer, heart disease, allergies, arthritis, obesity, dental disease, etc. After extensive research, the Animal Protection Institute (API) published a Pet Food Investigative Report to educate companion animal care givers about pet food ingredients, ingredient definitions, labeling, and dietary ailments resulting from processed commercial pet food, including the most commonly know brands. Yet, whether such food is purchased at the supermarket, pet store, or from a veterinarian, it makes little difference in terms of the quality -- only in the cost. Since the report was published earlier this year, API has conducted more research on holistic pet care and pet food alternatives, but still claims that the vast majority of pet foods available on the market today provide less that optimum nutrition for companion animals.
It is sad to think that the food provided by animal care givers to their four-legged friends could be hazardous to the animals'; health and longevity. Care givers should assume responsibility for providing as healthful a diet as possible for the animals in the care. Consumers should be informed: speak with a holistic practitioner or herbalist, or consult your veterinarian (but be aware that a veterinarian's knowledge of nutrition may be limited to the two weeks of nutrition he or she had veterinary school 20 years ago). Although the ideal solution would be for companion animals to be fed only wholesome homemade and/or vegetarian diets, this is not an optician for everyone -- the cost and time commitment is sometimes prohibitive. By taking more moderate steps, however, care givers can still greatly improve a companion animals' diet and quality of life.
Tina Perry is an animal advocate with the Animal Protection Institute.
Reprinted from The Animals' Agenda
Nov/Dec 1996
http://www.preciouspets.org/truth.htm
What's Really for Dinner?
The Truth About Commercial Pet Food
by Tina Perry
Cow brains. Sheep guts. Chicken heads. Road kill. Rancid grain. These are a few of the so-called nutritionally balanced ingredients found in the commercial pet food served to companion animals every day.
More than 95 percent of US companion animals derive their nutritional needs from a single source: processed pet food. When people think of pet food, many envision whole chickens, choice cuts of beef, fresh grains, and all the nutrition that a dog or cat may ever need -- images that pet food manufacturers promote in their advertisements. What these companies do not reveal is that instead of whole chickens they have substituted chicken heads, feet, and intestines. Those choice cuts of beef are really cow brains, tongues, esophagi, fetal tissue dangerously high in hormones, and possibly diseased and even cancerous meat. Those whole grains have had the starch removed for corn starch powder and the oil extracted for corn oil, or they are hulls and other remnants from the milling process. Grains used that are truly whole have usually been deemed unfit for human consumption because of mold, contaminants, poor quality, or poor handling practices. Pet food is one of the worlds most synthetic edible products, containing virtually no whole ingredients.
Pet food manufacturers have become masters at inducing companion animals to eat things cat and dogs would normally spurn. Pet food scientists have learned that it's possible to take a mixture of inedible scraps, fortify it with artificial vitamins and minerals, preserve it so that it can sit on the shelf for more than a year, add dyes to make it attractive, and then extrude it into whimsical shapes that appeal to the human consumer. For this, pet food companies can expect to earn $9 billion in sales in 1996.
Scraps and Byproducts
For years, many care givers have tried to avoid feeding their companion animals people food leftovers, having been warned by veterinarians about the heath problems they can cause. Yet much scrap material from the human food industry is ending up in dogs and cats dinner bowls. What the consumer purchases and what the manufacturer advertises are often two entirely different products, and this difference threatens the animals healthy, especially as they age. Learning to read ingredient labels and taking the time to read them carefully is crucial to making an educated choice when purchasing pet food. Ingredients are listed in descending order of weight (heaviest first) under standards established by the Center for Veterinary Medicine for the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The name of the product (in most states) is dictated by the regulations of the American Association of Feed Control Officials (AAFCO). The trouble is, AAFCO standards can lead to deceptive product names due to the weight and volume variations between wet and dry ingredients. Also, the average consumer has no idea what the definitions for the listed ingredients mean. Preservatives, vitamins, minerals, flavorings, and cereal make up most of what the companion animal eats.
It is not happenstance that four of the top five major pet food companies in the United States are subsidiaries of major multinational food production companies: Colgate Palmolive (which produces Hills Science Diet), Heinz, Nestle, and Mars )see The Corporate Connection). From a business standpoint, multi-national food companies owning pet food manufacturers is an ideal relationship. The multinationals have captive market in which to dump their waste products, and the pet food manufacturers have a direct source of bulk materials. Both make a profit from selling scraps that originate from places far worse than the dinner table. In his 1986 book Pet Allergies veterinarian Al Plechner sums up what goes into companion animals food: Condemned parts and animals rejected for human consumption are routinely rerouted for commercial pet foods. A similar fate applies to so-called 4-D animals. These are food animals picked up dead, or that are dying, diseased, or disabled, and do not meet human-food qualifications. They are processed straightaway for companion animal consumption. Little goes to waste. Says Plechner, Food processing refuse of all sorts winds up in your animals dinner bowls. Moldy grains. Rancid foods. Meat meal. The latter is ground-up slaughterhouse discards often containing disease-ridden tissue and high levels of hormones and pesticides, the very things that may have contributed to the death of the steer or hog. A decade later, his words still apply. When cattle, swine, chickens, lambs, or other animals meet their ends at a slaughterhouse, the choice cuts -- lean muscle tissue and organs prized by humans -- are trimmed away from the carcass for human consumption. Whatever remains of the carcass (bones, blood, pus, intestines, ligaments, subcutaneous fat, hooves, horns, beaks, and any other parts not normally consumed by humans) is, according to the pet food industry, perfectly fit as a protein source for cat and dog food.
The Pet Food Institute, the trade association of pet food manufacturers, acknowledges in its 1994 Fact Sheet the importance of using byproducts in pet foods as additional income for processors and farmers. The purchase and use of these ingredients by the pet food industry not only provides nutritional foods for pets at reasonable costs, but provides an important source of income to American farmers and processors of meat, poultry, and seafood products for human consumption. Many of these remnants are indigestible and provide a questionable source of nutrition. The amount of nutrition provided by meat byproducts, meals, and digests varies from vat to vat of this animal protein soup. A vat filled with chicken feet, beaks, and viscera is going to make available a lower amount of protein than a vat of breast meat. James Morris and Quinton Rogers, professors with Department of Molecular Biosciences at the University of California at Davis Veterinary School of Medicine, assert that there is virtually no information on the bio-availability of nutrients for companion animals in many of the common dietary ingredients used in pet foods. These ingredients are generally byproducts of the meat, poultry and fishing industries, with the potential for wide variation in nutrient composition. Claims of nutritional adequacy of pet foods based on the current AAFCO nutrient allowances (profiles) do not give assurances of nutritional adequacy and will not until ingredients are analyzed and bioavailability values are incorporated. Meat byproducts, the catch-all term of the pet food industry, is a misnomer because these byproducts contain little if any meat. Byproducts contain little if any meat. Byproduct are animal parts leftover after the meat has been stripped from the bone. Chicken byproducts include heads, feet, entrails, lungs, spleens, kidneys, brains, livers, stomachs, noses, blood, and intestines free of their contents. What the pet food manufactures fail to mention is that most byproducts, digests and meals are also filled with other substances, such as cancerous tissue cut from the carcass, plastic foam packaging containing spoiled meat from supermarkets, ear tags, spoiled slaughterhouse meat, road kill, and pieces of downer animals.
Canned Cannibalism
Another source of meat that isn't mentioned on pet food labels is pet byproducts, the bodies of dogs and cats. In 1990 the San Francisco Chronicle reported that euthanized companion animals were found in pet foods. Although pet food company executives and the National Renderers Association vehemently denied the report, the American Veterinary Medical Association and the FDA confirmed the story. The pets serve a viable purpose by providing foodstuff for the animal feed chain, said Lea McGovern, chief of the FDA's animal feed safety branch. Because of the sheer volume of animals rendered and the similarity in protein content between poultry byproducts and processed dogs and cats, rendering plant workers say it would be impossible for purchasers to know the exact contents of what they buy. In fact, Sacramento Rendering cited by inspectors five times in the past two years for product-labeling violations.
Grease and Grain
The most nutritious dry pet food is no better than the worst if an animals will not eat it. Pet food scientists have discovered that spraying the kibble or pellets with a combination of refined animal fat, lard, kitchen grease, and other oils too rancid or deemed inedible for humans makes an otherwise bland or distasteful product palatable. Animal fat is mainly packing house waste or supermarket trimmings from the packaging of meats. Animals love the taste of this sprayed fat, which also acts as a binding agent to which manufacturers may add other flavor enhancers. The pungent odor wafting from an open bag of pet food is created by this concoction. Restaurant grease has become a major component of feed-grade animal fat over the last 15 years. Often held in 50-gallon drums for weeks or months in extreme temperatures, this grease is usually kelp outside with no regard for its safety or further use. The rancid grease is then picked up by fat blenders who mix the animal and vegetable fats together, stabilize them with powerful antioxidants to prevent further spoilage, and then sell the blended products to pet food companies. Rancid, heavily preserved fats are extremely difficult to digest and can lead to a host of animal health problems, including digestive upsets, diarrhea, gas, and bad breath. Once considered a filler by the pet food industry, the amount of grain products included in pet food has risen over the last decade as the American population has focused its attention away from consuming beef and toward a healthier diet of grains and vegetables. Commonly two of the top three pet food ingredients are some form of grain products. For instance, Alpo's Beef Flavored Dinner lists ground yellow corn, soybean meal, and poultry byproduct meal as its top three ingredients. 9 Lives Crunchy Meals lists ground yellow corn, corn gluten meal, and poultry byproduct meal as its top three ingredients. Of the top four ingredients of Purina's O.N.E. Dog Formula -- chicken, ground yellow corn, ground wheat, and corn gluten meal -- two are corn-based products from the same source. This is an industry practice known as splitting. When components of the same whole ingredient are listed separately (ground yellow corn and corn gluten meal) it appears that there is less corn than chicken, even when the whole ingredient may weigh more than the chicken. Soy is another common ingredient in many pet foods. It is used by the manufacturers to boost the claimed protein content and add bulk so that when animals eat a product containing soy they will fell more sated. Tofu is suitable for humans, but most forms of soybean do not agree with a dog or cat's digestive system. Like many other pet food ingredients, soy is virtually unusable by an animal's body. Being obligate carnivores, cats have little ability to digest any nutrients from soy. The problem is worse for dogs because they lack the essential amino acid to digest soy products. Soy has also been linked to bloat and gas in many dogs.
Additives and Processing
Pet food industry critics note that many of the ingredients (such as corn syrup and corn gluten meal) used as humectants to prevent oxidation also bind water molecules in such a way that the food actually sticks to the animal's colon and may cause blockage. Blockage of the colon may cause an increased risk of cancer of the colon or rectum. Two-thirds of the pet food manufactured in the United States contains synthetic preservatives added by the manufacturer. Of the remaining third, 90 percent includes ingredients already stabilized by synthetic preservatives. Because most pet food contains large percentages of added fat, a stabilizer is needed to maintain the quality of the food. Sodium nitrite, often used as a coloring agent, fixative, and preservative, has the ability to combine with natural stomach and food chemicals (secondary amends) to create nitrosamines, powerful cancer-causing agents, according to A Consumer's Dictionary of Food Additives.
Many pet foods advertised as preservative-free do not contain preservatives. Almost all rendered meats have synthetic preservatives added as stabilizer, but manufacturers aren't required to list preservatives they themselves haven't added. Premixed vitamin additives can also contain preservatives. In the 1003 Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, veterinarian Philip Roudebush reported finding low concentrations of synthetic antioxidant preservatives in all analyzed samples of products labeled as chemical free or all-natural. Other types of additives depend on whether the pet food is semi-moist, dry or canned. Because semi-moist food contains 25-50 percent water, antimicrobial preservatives must be used. Propylene glycol was frequently used in cat food until it was pulled in 1992 for causing a variety of health problems. Processing greatly alters the nutritional value of the food ingredients. Veterinarian R. L. Wysong states in Rationale for Animal Nutrition: Processing is the wild card in nutritional value that is, by and large, simply ignored. Heating, freezing, dehydrating, canning, extruding, pelleting, baking and so forth, are so commonplace that they are simply thought of as synonymous with food itself. Because the ingredients that pet food companies use are not wholesome, and harsh manufacturing practices destroy what little nutritional value the food may have had in the first place, the final product must be fortified with vitamins and minerals.
Questionable Nutrition
How, then, can any pet food be guaranteed to be 100 percent complete or nutritionally adequate? As long as it meets the AAFCO minimum standards, such a guarantee can be on the label. Yet in 1994, feed tests conducted by the New York State Agriculture Department showed 7 percent of all pet foods analyzed failed chemical analyses for guaranteed nutrients. Other states report similar findings, with failure of analyzed feed ranging from to 12 percent. Even if a pet food meets AAFCO standards, certain nutritional requirements (for example, lysine) can vary between species by as much as seven-fold. Although manufacturers clam that millions of companion animals can thrive on a diet consisting of nothing by commercial pet food, research and an increasing number of veterinarians implicate processed pet food as a source of disease or as an exacerbating agent for a number of degenerative diseases. For example, kidney disease is on of the top three killers of companion animals. According to Plechner, the extra protein and harsh ingredients of many pet foods place an overload on the kidneys. Left untreated, the toxic buildup leads to vomiting, loss of appetite, uremic poisoning, and death. Wysong adds, In the last few years, large statistical studies have shown the link between the diet (of processed foods) and a variety of degenerative diseases, including cancer, heart disease, allergies, arthritis, obesity, dental disease, etc. After extensive research, the Animal Protection Institute (API) published a Pet Food Investigative Report to educate companion animal care givers about pet food ingredients, ingredient definitions, labeling, and dietary ailments resulting from processed commercial pet food, including the most commonly know brands. Yet, whether such food is purchased at the supermarket, pet store, or from a veterinarian, it makes little difference in terms of the quality -- only in the cost. Since the report was published earlier this year, API has conducted more research on holistic pet care and pet food alternatives, but still claims that the vast majority of pet foods available on the market today provide less that optimum nutrition for companion animals.
It is sad to think that the food provided by animal care givers to their four-legged friends could be hazardous to the animals'; health and longevity. Care givers should assume responsibility for providing as healthful a diet as possible for the animals in the care. Consumers should be informed: speak with a holistic practitioner or herbalist, or consult your veterinarian (but be aware that a veterinarian's knowledge of nutrition may be limited to the two weeks of nutrition he or she had veterinary school 20 years ago). Although the ideal solution would be for companion animals to be fed only wholesome homemade and/or vegetarian diets, this is not an optician for everyone -- the cost and time commitment is sometimes prohibitive. By taking more moderate steps, however, care givers can still greatly improve a companion animals' diet and quality of life.
Tina Perry is an animal advocate with the Animal Protection Institute.
Reprinted from The Animals' Agenda
Nov/Dec 1996
http://www.preciouspets.org/truth.htm
-
Milliardo
- Уже с Приветом
- Posts: 989
- Joined: 11 Dec 2002 06:20
Which commercial pet food do I recommend? That's the one question I am asked most frequently in my practice. My standard answer is "none." But let me clarify. There is no government agency setting quality standards and guidelines, so there are no assurances of quality in pet food.
I am certain at some time you have noticed a change in your dog after feeding him or her different batches of the same brand of pet food. Your pet may have diarrhea, increased flatulence, a dull hair coat, intermittent vomiting, or may scratch more often. These are the most common symptoms I have observed over the years, and they are all associated with commercial pet foods.
In 1981 while Martin Zucker and I wrote the first of my two books, How to Have a Healthier Dog, we discovered the full extent of the negative effects of commercial pet foods of that time. Much more recently, San Francisco Chronicle staff writer John Eckhouse went even further with a two-part exposé entitled "Pet-Food Labels Baffle Consumers," and (a good candidate for a horror movie title) "How Dogs and Cats Get Recycled Into Pet Food."
In the second article, published on February 19, 1990, Mr. Eckhouse, an investigative reporter, writes: "Each year, millions of dead American dogs and cats are processed along with billions of pounds of other animal materials by companies known as renderers. The finished products -- tallow and meat meals -- serve as raw materials for thousands of items that include cosmetics and pet food." There were the usual denials by pet food executives. Yet federal and state agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration and medical groups such as the American Veterinary Medical Association and the California Veterinary Medical Association, confirm that pets, on a routine basis, are rendered after they die in animal shelters or are disposed of by health authorities, and the end product frequently finds its way into pet food.
Government health officials, scientists, and pet food executives say such open criticism of commercial pet food is unfounded. James Morris, a professor at the School of Veterinary Medicine at Davis, California, says, "Any products not fit for human consumption are very well sterilized, so nothing can be transmitted to the animal. And to say products are unwholesome because we Americans don't like to eat them is incorrect. There's nothing wrong with eating spleen, which we don't do, but some Arabs [do]." In my opinion, it is obvious that individuals who make such statements know nothing of the meat and rendering industries.
Hold on to your hats -- I am going to take you on a bumpy ride through the meat-packing industry. For seven years I was a veterinary meat inspector for the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the State of California -- in carrying out this office I had to wade through blood, water, pus, and fecal matter; inhale the fetid stench from the killing floor; and listen to the death cries of the animals being slaughtered.
Prior to World War II, most slaughterhouses were all-inclusive; that is, the livestock was slaughtered and processed into fresh meat in one location. There was a section for smoking meats, a section for processing meats into sausages, and a section for rendering. During the years after World War II, the meat industry became more specialized. A slaughterhouse just slaughtered and dressed the carcasses; the making of sausages was done in a separate facility; and the rendering of slaughter waste also became a separate specialty -- and no longer within the jurisdiction of government meat inspectors.
Now that the rendering companies are entities unto their own they can service many slaughterhouses, plus process any other animal remains that can be rendered. But first, to prevent the condemned meat from being rerouted and used for human consumption, government regulations require that the meat must be "denatured" before it is removed from the slaughterhouse. The denatured carcasses and other waste can then be transported to the rendering facility.
In my time as a veterinary meat inspector, we denatured with carbolic acid (phenol, a potentially corrosive disinfectant) and/or creosote (used to preserve wood or as a disinfectant). Phenol is derived from the distillation of coal tar, creosote from the distillation of wood. Both substances are very toxic. Creosote was used for many years as a preservative for wood power poles. Its effect on the environment proved to be so negative that it is no longer used for that purpose. According to federal meat inspection regulations, fuel oil, kerosene, crude carbolic acid, and citronella (an insect repellent made from lemon grass) are the approved denaturing materials.
The condemned livestock carcasses treated with these toxic chemicals can then become meat and bone meal for the pet food industry. Worse yet, since rendering facilities are not government-controlled, any animal carcasses can be rendered, including those of cats and dogs. Eckhouse quotes Eileen Layne of the California Veterinary Medical Association: "When you read pet-food labels and it says meat or bone meal, that's what it is -- cooked and converted animals, including some dogs and cats."
Some of these dead pets -- those who were euthanized by veterinarians -- already have sodium pentobarbital in their bodies before being treated with the denaturing substances. In veterinary offices most cats and dogs are put to sleep with this chemical. According to Eckhouse, veterinarians at the University of Minnesota warned that the sodium pentobarbital used to put pets to sleep "survived rendering without undergoing degradation," but they concluded that the residue amount would be too small to cause problems if the carcasses of euthanized pets were mixed with other raw materials during a day's production run. No mention was made of the cumulative effects on a cat or dog from ingesting this small amount daily for years. Thus far we have come across the denaturing chemicals and the sodium pentobarbital, and I have only just begun.
In the finished rendered product, a fat stabilizer is introduced to prevent rancidity. The common chemicals used are BHA (butylated hydroxyanisole) and BHT (butylated hydroxytolulene), both known to cause liver and kidney dysfunction. Some European countries prohibit the use and importation of these preservatives. Another fat stabilizer often used is Ethoxyquin, suspected of being a cancer-causing agent. Propylene glycol, first cousin to ethylene glycol (antifreeze), is found in many semimoist dog foods. It causes the destruction of red blood cells.
Lead also shows up frequently in pet foods, even if they are made from livestock meat and bone meal, simply as a result of our environment. A paper from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, titled "Lead in Animal Foods," had two frightening conclusions. First, a 9-pound cat is ingesting more lead daily than what is considered potentially toxic for children. Second, since some commercially prepared pet and laboratory animal foods routinely contain lead, feeding these preparations to laboratory animals could add a significant, uncontrolled variable to experiments and may lead to uncertain experimental results (James G. Fox, et al., Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Vol. 1, 1976).
You are providing a chemical feast to your pet when you feed it the meat and bone meal in pet foods. In the absence of any government inspection programs or any rules and regulations on standards and origins of the ingredients in these foods, my recommendation would be to feed your pets only food that you would eat, such as scraps from the table or from the butcher.
Any veterinary nutritionist, government health official, or scientist who says feeding the aforementioned chemicals daily to our pets will not have a deleterious effect on them is living in a fool's paradise. Just look at the track record of government health officials and scientists over the years. Remember DDT? It took the life of a young boy before it was banned. Thalidomide? It was almost approved for use in America before it was found to cause severe deformities in unborn babies. The use of DES to fatten food-producing animals posed no threat to human life, said the health officials and scientists; but they were wrong. Even today, the government has given its approval to a feline leukemia vaccine which is not giving protection against the virus. In some instances, it is actually causing feline leukemia.
I have been practicing small animal medicine for more than 30 years. Every day I have seen the casualties of the propaganda by the pet food industry. Yet the professors in the teaching institutions of veterinary medicine generally support an industry that has little regard for the quality of health in our companion animals. The question has never been whether or not pets are contracting diseases from pet food, but rather, what is the status of our pets' health when they are fed a steady diet of toxic chemicals?
One last word of caution, not for pets this time but for their owners: meat and bone meal from sources not fit for human consumption has found its way into poultry feed. This means that the animal products rendered under questionable conditions are being fed to birds that may wind up on your table. Remember this when you are eating your next piece of chicken or turkey. I have to add, however, that the bone meal sold as a calcium supplement is from carcasses graded for human consumption; it is not from condemned animals.
This article was originally published in Let's Live magazine.
Dr. Wendell O. Belfield
I am certain at some time you have noticed a change in your dog after feeding him or her different batches of the same brand of pet food. Your pet may have diarrhea, increased flatulence, a dull hair coat, intermittent vomiting, or may scratch more often. These are the most common symptoms I have observed over the years, and they are all associated with commercial pet foods.
In 1981 while Martin Zucker and I wrote the first of my two books, How to Have a Healthier Dog, we discovered the full extent of the negative effects of commercial pet foods of that time. Much more recently, San Francisco Chronicle staff writer John Eckhouse went even further with a two-part exposé entitled "Pet-Food Labels Baffle Consumers," and (a good candidate for a horror movie title) "How Dogs and Cats Get Recycled Into Pet Food."
In the second article, published on February 19, 1990, Mr. Eckhouse, an investigative reporter, writes: "Each year, millions of dead American dogs and cats are processed along with billions of pounds of other animal materials by companies known as renderers. The finished products -- tallow and meat meals -- serve as raw materials for thousands of items that include cosmetics and pet food." There were the usual denials by pet food executives. Yet federal and state agencies, including the Food and Drug Administration and medical groups such as the American Veterinary Medical Association and the California Veterinary Medical Association, confirm that pets, on a routine basis, are rendered after they die in animal shelters or are disposed of by health authorities, and the end product frequently finds its way into pet food.
Government health officials, scientists, and pet food executives say such open criticism of commercial pet food is unfounded. James Morris, a professor at the School of Veterinary Medicine at Davis, California, says, "Any products not fit for human consumption are very well sterilized, so nothing can be transmitted to the animal. And to say products are unwholesome because we Americans don't like to eat them is incorrect. There's nothing wrong with eating spleen, which we don't do, but some Arabs [do]." In my opinion, it is obvious that individuals who make such statements know nothing of the meat and rendering industries.
Hold on to your hats -- I am going to take you on a bumpy ride through the meat-packing industry. For seven years I was a veterinary meat inspector for the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the State of California -- in carrying out this office I had to wade through blood, water, pus, and fecal matter; inhale the fetid stench from the killing floor; and listen to the death cries of the animals being slaughtered.
Prior to World War II, most slaughterhouses were all-inclusive; that is, the livestock was slaughtered and processed into fresh meat in one location. There was a section for smoking meats, a section for processing meats into sausages, and a section for rendering. During the years after World War II, the meat industry became more specialized. A slaughterhouse just slaughtered and dressed the carcasses; the making of sausages was done in a separate facility; and the rendering of slaughter waste also became a separate specialty -- and no longer within the jurisdiction of government meat inspectors.
Now that the rendering companies are entities unto their own they can service many slaughterhouses, plus process any other animal remains that can be rendered. But first, to prevent the condemned meat from being rerouted and used for human consumption, government regulations require that the meat must be "denatured" before it is removed from the slaughterhouse. The denatured carcasses and other waste can then be transported to the rendering facility.
In my time as a veterinary meat inspector, we denatured with carbolic acid (phenol, a potentially corrosive disinfectant) and/or creosote (used to preserve wood or as a disinfectant). Phenol is derived from the distillation of coal tar, creosote from the distillation of wood. Both substances are very toxic. Creosote was used for many years as a preservative for wood power poles. Its effect on the environment proved to be so negative that it is no longer used for that purpose. According to federal meat inspection regulations, fuel oil, kerosene, crude carbolic acid, and citronella (an insect repellent made from lemon grass) are the approved denaturing materials.
The condemned livestock carcasses treated with these toxic chemicals can then become meat and bone meal for the pet food industry. Worse yet, since rendering facilities are not government-controlled, any animal carcasses can be rendered, including those of cats and dogs. Eckhouse quotes Eileen Layne of the California Veterinary Medical Association: "When you read pet-food labels and it says meat or bone meal, that's what it is -- cooked and converted animals, including some dogs and cats."
Some of these dead pets -- those who were euthanized by veterinarians -- already have sodium pentobarbital in their bodies before being treated with the denaturing substances. In veterinary offices most cats and dogs are put to sleep with this chemical. According to Eckhouse, veterinarians at the University of Minnesota warned that the sodium pentobarbital used to put pets to sleep "survived rendering without undergoing degradation," but they concluded that the residue amount would be too small to cause problems if the carcasses of euthanized pets were mixed with other raw materials during a day's production run. No mention was made of the cumulative effects on a cat or dog from ingesting this small amount daily for years. Thus far we have come across the denaturing chemicals and the sodium pentobarbital, and I have only just begun.
In the finished rendered product, a fat stabilizer is introduced to prevent rancidity. The common chemicals used are BHA (butylated hydroxyanisole) and BHT (butylated hydroxytolulene), both known to cause liver and kidney dysfunction. Some European countries prohibit the use and importation of these preservatives. Another fat stabilizer often used is Ethoxyquin, suspected of being a cancer-causing agent. Propylene glycol, first cousin to ethylene glycol (antifreeze), is found in many semimoist dog foods. It causes the destruction of red blood cells.
Lead also shows up frequently in pet foods, even if they are made from livestock meat and bone meal, simply as a result of our environment. A paper from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, titled "Lead in Animal Foods," had two frightening conclusions. First, a 9-pound cat is ingesting more lead daily than what is considered potentially toxic for children. Second, since some commercially prepared pet and laboratory animal foods routinely contain lead, feeding these preparations to laboratory animals could add a significant, uncontrolled variable to experiments and may lead to uncertain experimental results (James G. Fox, et al., Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Vol. 1, 1976).
You are providing a chemical feast to your pet when you feed it the meat and bone meal in pet foods. In the absence of any government inspection programs or any rules and regulations on standards and origins of the ingredients in these foods, my recommendation would be to feed your pets only food that you would eat, such as scraps from the table or from the butcher.
Any veterinary nutritionist, government health official, or scientist who says feeding the aforementioned chemicals daily to our pets will not have a deleterious effect on them is living in a fool's paradise. Just look at the track record of government health officials and scientists over the years. Remember DDT? It took the life of a young boy before it was banned. Thalidomide? It was almost approved for use in America before it was found to cause severe deformities in unborn babies. The use of DES to fatten food-producing animals posed no threat to human life, said the health officials and scientists; but they were wrong. Even today, the government has given its approval to a feline leukemia vaccine which is not giving protection against the virus. In some instances, it is actually causing feline leukemia.
I have been practicing small animal medicine for more than 30 years. Every day I have seen the casualties of the propaganda by the pet food industry. Yet the professors in the teaching institutions of veterinary medicine generally support an industry that has little regard for the quality of health in our companion animals. The question has never been whether or not pets are contracting diseases from pet food, but rather, what is the status of our pets' health when they are fed a steady diet of toxic chemicals?
One last word of caution, not for pets this time but for their owners: meat and bone meal from sources not fit for human consumption has found its way into poultry feed. This means that the animal products rendered under questionable conditions are being fed to birds that may wind up on your table. Remember this when you are eating your next piece of chicken or turkey. I have to add, however, that the bone meal sold as a calcium supplement is from carcasses graded for human consumption; it is not from condemned animals.
This article was originally published in Let's Live magazine.
Dr. Wendell O. Belfield
-
Svetat
- Уже с Приветом
- Posts: 955
- Joined: 02 Oct 2000 09:01
- Location: USA
