Dear Catster reader,

Almost two years ago, we invested numerous resources and rebuilt the Catster community. With new hardware, software and personnel, we did our best to satisfy the many users who shared their thoughts, pictures, questions, and love for and of their pets with us and friends. It was a thriving community with many users. We hoped, however, there would be more like you.

Times and habits have changed and we are sad to announce that the Catster community will be closing down on July 20, 2019.

Catster magazine, www.catster.com and the associated social media sites are NOT shutting down. We encourage you to continue reading the content found in the pages of the magazine and the web sites, commenting through the mechanisms provided and sharing your ideas and comments with us and your fellow readers.

Instructions for accessing pet profiles were shared with everyone in 2017. The instructions can be found elsewhere within the forum. AFTER JULY 20TH, YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ACCESS THIS CONTENT. And, effective immediately, we are no longer able to answer questions about the community.

Thank you for your support and we look forward to serving you through our magazine and website.

Cheers,
Catster






Article on Vet prescribed pet food

Tina BTina B Vancouver IslandMember Posts: 2,238
edited 26 June, 2009 in Food & Nutrition
Came across this article about Vet prescribed pet food. There is also other links in article that appear in red, make sure you read those to Here
«13

Comments

  • Aaron LeeAaron Lee SeattleMember Posts: 251
    edited 15 June, 2009
    Good link, thanks for that. I have heard (unconfirmed) tales of vet-only prescription food being pushed on vet offices just like the slick, well-dressed pharmaceutical reps who come in and chat up your human nurses and doctors and give them pens, special offers on cruises, and other schwag! In many cases I've heard too, of people comparing certain Rx vet-only foods with some less-than-fabulous grocery brands, and it seems that aside from an ingredient or two, some of them aren't much different than something you'd buy on any grocery or petstore shelf.
  • edited 15 June, 2009
    Thanks Shadow! What a great site... lots of interesting articles. =;
  • edited 15 June, 2009
    \".... I have heard (confirmed) tales of Nutro petfood being pushed on gullible customers. The slick, sweet talking Nutro reps come in to your petstores & forums and chat up your human moms and dads and give them pens, special offers, and other schwag! In many cases I\'ve heard too, of people comparing certain Rx vet-only foods with less-than-fabulous Nutro, and it seems that aside from an ingredient or two, some of them aren\'t much different than something you\'d buy on any grocery or petstore shelf.\" FIX\'T
  • Hazel_LucyHazel_Lucy PurrsvilleMember Posts: 6,156 ✭✭✭
    edited 15 June, 2009
    I have friends who went to PetCo and ended up buying Nutro because the Nutro sales agent/rep talked it up so well. This was AFTER problems were being publicized but denied by the company. HL
  • Sharon MurphySharon Murphy SurreyMember Posts: 1,652
    edited 16 June, 2009
    Interesting article. I've never gone to a vet that pushes one particular brand of food, but they have carried several prescription diets. Alaidh lived most of her life on Medi-Cal - 20 years - so I have no complaints about that food, but my new girls have a variety of both Wellness and Medi-Cal (the dental diet), which is what my vet recommended. When I asked if I could stop feeding them their canned to make it easier for me, she discouraged it, saying a good variety is best. She has, by the way, taken seminars on feline nutrition and is a feline only veterinarian. One of the red-link articles was by a Dr. Michael W. Fox. I have a book by him that I got years ago. I'm assuming it's the same guy...lol.
  • Valerie DurhamValerie Durham Member Posts: 8,724
    edited 16 June, 2009
    As you know, I live in Japan and we have yet to get access to \"Premium\" foods. Science Diet and Royal Canin are cutting-edge foods here. Raw is not an option--we have lots of seafood choices, but not much in the way of meat. Anyway, the problem is not just vets. Cat shows tend to push a certain brand of cat food--usually, with the CFA, it\'s Science Diet. Hey, you win a 20-pound bag of cat food, and you use it. Most cat show exhibitors are also breeders--and yet if you ask them, they will tell you that they mostly feed SD and Royal Canin. However, Japanese show cats do well in the international CFA world--check out the various CFA Breed Profiles, and you are almost guaranteed to come across a Japanese cat. I\'m not advocating SD by any means--I know its shortcomings, and were there a better food I could get simply, I would go for it. Regarding vet food, though, I have a feeling that some foods that are aimed at kidney, urinary, or liver problems probably have their use--as expensive as they are. Haven\'t used them, but suspect that there\'s some scientific reason for their existence. However...we\'ve learned through Catster that vets do NOT get enough nutritional training, and that sales representatives can be pretty persistent. Fortunately, there\'s a wealth of information on cat food on Catster--let your fingers do the walking, and you\'ll find all sorts of good information on food. I wish I could act on it--just too complicated at this point in Japan.
  • Tina BTina B Vancouver IslandMember Posts: 2,238
    edited 16 June, 2009
    Alaihd the red link from Michael W. Fox are probably the same, he has written quite a few books. He has a new book out that every vet, and person should read, its called "Not fit for a Dog", By him and Elizabeth Hodgkins and Marion Smart. It really is an eye opener.
  • Valerie DurhamValerie Durham Member Posts: 8,724
    edited 16 June, 2009
    Pet food history is an interesting but under-researched topic (try Googling it--you\'ll get far fewer sites than you\'d suspect--regarding the history of pet food, I mean). What were cats and dogs eating 300 years ago? The cats could catch various small animals, but I suspect that they were also being fed table scraps, including things like veggies and bread. Horse meat was a staple until people decided that horses were too \"noble\" for animal consumption. This happened at about the same time that horses were being phased out of daily life for the average person. You can be guaranteed that Mr. Kitty and Ms. Doggie were being fed the remains of elderly and/or sick horses up until that point. Read up on the history of kibble--it\'s interesting. The good thing is that things are improving all the time; 2007 was a terrible year, but it did make people more conscious of what they feed their pets.
  • Thea PowellThea Powell Member Posts: 852
    edited 16 June, 2009
    Shadow, I checked out the link and read it I also noticed that again here was a person with an agenda and with no education. I've "reasearched" pet foods and have come to dramatically different opinions. I'm not saying that all the info was wrong by no means but I am saying that it had it's own slant and objective. I know that there are tons of web sites out there (I've probably read them all) and believe it or not I've not trused any ofthem unless they were jurnals of vetrinarian medicine and even then taken those with a grain of salt. I understand peoples frustration with petfood I'm living that myself right now but I will not ignor the fact that I am still a lay person and vets have at least some education. In fact in my area there is only one true animal nutritionist and I can't afford thier services. I must base my decisions based on my vet's suggestion and thier reasoning, my personal brood of cats, and my own research (reading) about the topic. I praise you for trying to keep people informed. And warn others question EVERYTHING you read and hear. In the end animal nutrition comes down to a case by case decision. Just my 2 cents worth:?
  • Tina BTina B Vancouver IslandMember Posts: 2,238
    edited 16 June, 2009
    Qoute "I checked out the link and read it I also noticed that again here was a person with an agenda and with no education" I really cant understand how you say that Michael W. Fox is not Educated, and has an agenda:-/ Think you should read his education profile. His only agenda is making sure pets are well, and that us humans are educated about the pet food industry, and everything else to do with pet food. We need all the empowerment and education that we can get. The first page the truthaboutpetfoods.com is not the page I wanted to highlight it was the ones that I noted that were in red that were to be read for good info, (that is what I wrote) If this is the page you were talking about, sure this author feeds Lifes Abundance food, which I personally think is not a good food, but I did not link to that. I wanted people to first see the article on if its ethical for a vet to prescibe prescription food. Guess I better watch what I link to next time. :)) I will also note that I was playing around with the live linky thing, my first time to do it, so I only did the one link, guess I could have put in the other ones seperately, but Im still trying to figure live links all out.:r
  • edited 16 June, 2009
    No sweat, Shadow. I actually took the time to examine all the links within the article that you linked to. It was a good article (regardless of \"bias\"). Not your fault if some folks just can\'t take their blinders off, and instead insist on following the \"biased\" road that vets & pet food companies have paved for them. :? People don\'t seem to realize that \"education\" is subjective. Some of our greatest leaders and scientists have been self educated. They were just as human as the rest of us. There\'s no reason a \"lay person\" can\'t educate themselves as well. Too often, I see people relying on \"experts\" or \"professionals\" to tell them what is what. Discernment seems to be a dying skill these days. :-/
  • Valerie DurhamValerie Durham Member Posts: 8,724
    edited 16 June, 2009
    It\'s the same with human medical care. Time and time again a person will spend hours on the Internet trying to figure out what they have, and sometimes they\'re right when the doctors are wrong. I think vets are more caring than doctors, but they seem to share the tendency to be stubborn about their beliefs. Learned something in vet/med school--will not bend. It took me me five years to convince my doctors to give me fake hips (I was on crutches and in constant pain) simply because they had been taught in med school that they shouldn\'t give hip replacements until the patient is around 70. There\'s a wealth of information on the Internet, and regarding food, it can be very conflicting. Hence food fights on Catster. But there\'s useful information out there, big-time. Discernment IS the key.
  • terri echolsterri echols kalamazooMember Posts: 4,758
    edited 17 June, 2009
    Mr. Delack says in his letter that “….it seems possible that many of the diseases we see are due to the foods we feed our feline friends”. He is right since pet food is causing most of the illness pets get and Vets condone pet food because they make profit from the sale of it and then again from the illness it eventually creates. how did we get from: \"...it seems possible that many\" in the cited source to in bold type: \"He is right since pet food is causing most of the illnesses pets get...\" with my emphasis: \"...it seems POSSIBLE that MANY of the illnesses we see are due to.\" and the webauthor: \"...pet food IS causing MOST of the illnesses pets get...\" and then we have the webauthor merrily assigning motives to the black boxes of vets all over the world! POSSIBLE that MANY becomes: IS causing MOST...and this author KNOWS WHY vets are doing it! not science. shrill propoganda scare tactics. NO ONE knows why ANYONE does anything...and i am QUITE sure that there are VERY few vets who are happy to prescribe foods that make animals sick so they can double-dip-once from the companies and again when the animals \"inevitably\" get sick. you don\'t go into veterinary medicine in order to MAKE ANIMALS SICK. yeah, they make mistakes. but for the webauthor to not just imply but STATE that vets are doing this...morally repugnant.
  • edited 18 June, 2009
    Beg your pardon Keya, but what article are you reading? The article Shadow linked to says nothing about a letter from Mr. Delack. Nor does the author accuse the veterinary profession of \"double dipping\" as you describe it. The question the author does pose is this: \"Do veterinarians know enough about pet food to ethically recommend a particular brand of food to their clients?\" Then the author links to a questionaire posed by the Canadian Veterinary Journal, to which a few vets have responded. The author then quotes those responses (one of which is a response from a Science Diet Rep). The author then rebuts the SD Rep\'s response by pointing out that: (1) it\'s well known that veterinary students receive very little training in animal nutrition (provided by the big commercial food companies, no less), and (2) questioning what \"evidence\" the SD Rep seems to be recommending should be used in determining an animal\'s diet. The author then points out that: \"New European Consumer laws put into effect in June of 2008, veterinarians must not hard sell pet food, vaccinations, or drugs and must not make any health claims for anything they sell, unless they have veterinary research to back it up.\" The author then provides a link to Dr. Fox\'s list of scientific research articles regarding harmful effects of pet food. I will be the first to say that Dr. Fox\'s list is full of subjective commentary, but that doesn\'t disprove the fact that the articles DO exist. Nevertheless, Dr. Fox\'s list is provided merely as a reference within this article.... the author makes no further commentary on it. The author does conclude with her own observation/opinion that the vet/client trust bond is weakened by a lack of education regarding pet food. Perhaps you could provide a link to the article you were reading? Because I certainly don\'t see what you are referring to in this particular article.
  • AshPoGusAshPoGus AlbuquerqueMember Posts: 7,041 ✭✭✭
    edited 18 June, 2009
    *moderated and removed my comment* I dislike the attitude of some in these food and health forums (especially regarding food) but I usually try to abide by the Community Guidelines -- so I'll make a real effort to avoid these forums from hereon.
  • terri echolsterri echols kalamazooMember Posts: 4,758
    edited 18 June, 2009
    loki-your link, sir! it\'s in the dr. fox \"article\", sorry can\'t be more specific but that link-which WAS provided by the OP-should take you there. what i copied and pasted is a direct quote from that page. and i suspect that \"mr. delack\'s\" quote might be out of context...haven\'t been able to chase it down yet, all i get are a series of \"oops! this link is broken!\" replies so far.:? but yes...there is a quote from a mr. delack. i did not dream it up, i copied & pasted, see for yourselves. it is not mr. delack who has this demonic idea about veterinarians, though...that came from whoever is making bold-face editorial comments all over the page...sigh.
  • Thea PowellThea Powell Member Posts: 852
    edited 18 June, 2009
    Here is my greatest issue with these websites (other than them pushing their point of view and not giving an unbiased assessment). Even if these Drs are doctors how many individuals who advocate them have gone, to verify that they are doctors? To verify that they are still in good standing with the governing body of their practice of their area? Verified that they are actually still doctors? I have always lived by the adage “don’t believe every thing you read, see, or hear.” Going strictly with what is written on a website make me personally a little very wary. I am an extremely discerning person and that is why I mentioned in my previous comment that the information is not wrong per say, the information is DEFFINATLY biased and that is what gets me to question its validity. I've also mentioned that nutrition is a very case by case issue. You could have 2 litter mates living in the same house and one MUST eat home cooked and the other MUST eat commercial, this does and has happened. So for a doctor to be so blatant and say "The Only Way" is what gets my goat. I don't like it and don't appreciate it, because, I AM an educated lay person and through my extensive reading and extensive questioning and extensive reasoning/discerning, I was able to filter through all the back and forth and recognize that in nutrition what is good for the goose is not necessarily good for the gander.
  • edited 18 June, 2009
    I see, Keya. Your commentary was in reference to Dr. Fox\'s List.... which was NOT the article the OP linked to for discussion. Thanks for clarifying that. Perhaps you should start a different thread to address your concerns regarding Dr. Fox\'s List, so as not to muddy the waters in regards to Susan Thixton\'s article. Again, I will be the first to agree with you that the Fox List is full of subjective commentary. However, if a discerning person were to peel away the commentary, that still leaves the sources & materials in evidence. GOSMOT, if you want to go through Dr. Fox\'s List and verify all the sources of the materials he\'s listed, all the power to ya. For me, it\'s enough to know that the European Authorities have examined Dr. Fox\'s materials & found them to be credible enough to pass legislation with regards to how veterinarians \"prescribe\" foods, drugs & vaccinations (which, I believe, was the point Susan Thixton was trying to make in her article). Again, Susan Thixton provided Dr. Fox\'s list merely as a reference within her article. The article was not about Dr. Fox\'s List. Let\'s try not to confuse the two. Susan\'s article was in regards to the question posed by the Canadian Veterinary Journal: Do veterinarians know enough about pet food to ethically recommend a particular brand of food to their clients? I think it\'s a valid question.
  • terri echolsterri echols kalamazooMember Posts: 4,758
    edited 18 June, 2009
    Loki: just thought that since the poster had made the link live...think they said they had made two of them red...that it was open for discussion. and you yourself listed what i quoted from as part of what the poster provided...so, actually...yeah, i think i\'m in the right thread. it certainly seems on topic.
  • terri echolsterri echols kalamazooMember Posts: 4,758
    edited 18 June, 2009
    shadow\'s original post: Came across this article about Vet prescribed pet food. There is also other links in article that appear in red, make sure you read those to Here notice that shadow advised us to read what was linked in read, in fact said \"make sure\" you do. Dr. Fox\'s list was linked in red. so i read it. again...yep, i\'m in the right thread. still wondering if it bugs anyone else that veterinarians are being demonized in this way...:?
  • terri echolsterri echols kalamazooMember Posts: 4,758
    edited 18 June, 2009
    quote (from the OP, shadow): Qoute \"I checked out the link and read it I also noticed that again here was a person with an agenda and with no education\" ********************************************************* well, here shadow quotes someone else, but needed it for context... ********************************************************** I really cant understand how you say that Michael W. Fox is not Educated, and has an agenda Think you should read his education profile. His only agenda is making sure pets are well, and that us humans are educated about the pet food industry, and everything else to do with pet food. We need all the empowerment and education that we can get. ********************************************************** when i read a study, i look at who made it. ditto with articles. Michael W. Fox styles himself a \"petsumer\". this makes him an advocate of sorts, and we NEED advocates. however, advocates by definition ARE biased, and do have an agenda. when i read a study or an article from, say, Cornell? or an article by an animal nutritionist with a diverse background? that\'s not what we\'re reading, here. and in case Loki is worried again that i\'m talking about Fox, not the \"original article\" and thus hijacking the thread, veering off the OP\'s topic, here\'s the OP once again: *********************************************************** The first page the truthaboutpetfoods.com is not the page I wanted to highlight it was the ones that I noted that were in red that were to be read for good info, ********************************************************** and, one of the ones highlighted in read that were to read for good info, was the very page i was discussing. thanks. now would someone care to discuss the topic instead of lashing out at anyone who doesn\'t agree with the obvious bias-or simply states that there IS bias?
  • edited 18 June, 2009
    Kaya, in your initial comments, you did not specify which author you were referring to. Consequently, it seemed as though you were attributing Dr. Fox\'s commentary to Susan Thixton. I was simply trying to clarify that there is a separation between the two. quote (from Shadow, that seems to have been missed) I wanted people to first see the article on if its ethical for a vet to prescibe prescription food. THIS is what I believe was the intended focus, especially considering the title of the thread. You have consistently pulled quotes out of context in this discussion, muddying the waters, which is an injustice to everyone.
  • terri echolsterri echols kalamazooMember Posts: 4,758
    edited 19 June, 2009
    loki: pot calling kettle? i was not quoting anything out of context. in the original post shadow said what shadow said. so i read everything shadow indicated we should read. and we had already brought up Fox. i thought everyone had read it, since we were actually talking about it. sorry if you thought i was talking about thixton...but why did yourself include a link to Fox and say what i copied and pasted wasn't in any of the links the OP had provided? and why when i provided the link did you then say we weren't actually talking about that? do you just want me to go away or something? why is that, if so? (reply privately, this back and forth between you and i is getting stupid and tiresome) i thought we were going to talk ABOUT something in other words, not just pick apart people who don't happen to be talking about our particular hobbyhorse within a mass of material? shadow is the OP. if shadow did not want us to discuss what she put there in red for us to read...never mind. you have a problem with me, god knows why. meanwhile, does anybody else want to talk about the actual subject? you know...veterinarians? i'll try to get us started...do you trust YOUR vet to prescribe food for your pet? do you believe there are vets out there as DR. FOX opines, that are deliberately prescribing food that makes your pet sick so they can make money off of the food companies and you when they get sick from this poison they have given them?:-O how many vets do you think actually ARE animal haters? and...do you think vets should have to concentrate much, much more on nutrition in vet school? I DO!:D let's talk about it! (not about me, the SUBJECT. i'm not the subject. refer to the beginning of the thread and start over if you wish to learn in entirety what the subject is.) kthxbai! %:D%:-h%:D%
  • Teresa ConcannonTeresa Concannon Member Posts: 7,378
    edited 19 June, 2009
    Responding to Kaya's question and trying to stay away from any arguing, FWIW, here’s my opinion. Veterinarians are getting a bad rap and I can't figure out why! There's a position out there that says that veterinarians are in league with pet food companies and have an agenda where they knowingly push foods they know are unhealthy so that they can make money. It's claimed that either vets know these foods are not optimal nutrition for cats and will cause long term health problems and diseases or the vets blindly swallow whatever pet food companies tell them even if the evidence before their eyes tells them something different. All of this just to make more money! Personally, I find that incredibly difficult to believe and have seen no evidence of this from my own experience. Almost every veterinarian I've encountered has shown he or she does care about animals and have their best interests at heart. Why else would they become a veterinarian? Certainly not to get rich! Do I think veterinarians need more training in nutrition? Yes! In fact, over the years when I’ve asked about the best food or diet to feed my cats, most veterinarians have told me they are not experts in feline nutrition and can’t give me advice on the best diet or food for my cats other than recommending commercially prepared cat foods which can be bought anywhere. They were not talking about diets for cats who are sick but diets for HEALTHY cats. Not one veterinarian I’ve gone to over the past 30 years has EVER pushed any food or pressured me to buy any food from them. Some sell cat food in their offices -- usually Science Diet, Royal Canin or Eukanuba -- and some don’t. The ones who do sell food have never pushed it on me. More scientific studies do need to made on the nutritional needs of cats and dogs and what is the best diet for them. There are very few such studies which is one reason there's so much controversy. I do think veterinarians need more education in what is currently known about animal nutrition. Veterinarians do prescribe special foods and diets for cats who are sick or have chronic diseases. There aren’t many options available other than these prescription foods, which have supposedly been studied and tested and found to help cats with the disease that the food is prescribed for. People do say their cats do well on these diets. Some cats may not do well on these foods. (Some cats won’t even eat these foods!) I guess I would trust my vet to prescribe a prescription food if my cat had a chronic illness that could be controlled by the prescription diet. I’d at least give the food a try and have done so in the past with good results. If we're talking about pet food companies and their lack of quality control over the foods they make, that's another issue altogether!
  • Tina BTina B Vancouver IslandMember Posts: 2,238
    edited 19 June, 2009
    Sorry I was away from all of this today. I just hope that we can all agree that we disagree, and there is nothing wrong with sharing your opinions and having a debate, its more fun that way, we dont need to argue. Next time I do a post I will make sure I do the right links and so forth. Now I will say that if you get this book it will explain everything Im trying to get out to people. I am definately not here to Bash vets at all, they love animals and try and help us with them. Its only about the lack of pet nutrition that I am concerned about, and the responsibility that they take on when prescribing a food. In my opinion Michael W. Fox's agenda is to educate us on the pet food industry, etc. my agenda is hoping that you read this book "Not fit for a dog" (its about cats and dogs) Then I will discuss this more, as there are just to many small details that would take forever to write on here. |^|
  • terri echolsterri echols kalamazooMember Posts: 4,758
    edited 19 June, 2009
    when my finances straighten out a bit one thing i definitely plan to drop a little change on is research on kitty health and good kitty nutrition-since you can\'t have one without the other, and there is so much contradictory stuff on the net, and my vet basically says: :?(well, he says make sure it\'s AAFCO approved. he says try to make sure meat is the number one ingredient. and he says most importantly know your cats and trust your instinct...i like my vet!=; ) so, i\'ve started a \"kitty research books\" file on my computer-and i have added \"not fit for a dog\" to the list...maybe later i\'ll start a thread asking for other suggestions, with a list of what i\'ve got so far?
  • edited 19 June, 2009
    For the third and final time, I will say I AGREE that Dr. Fox\'s commentary on his list of research is overly subjective. HOWEVER, stripping away the commentary still leaves us with the research materials to consider. Lots of material from a variety of sources. To ignore such a collection of research would be irresponsible... which is unfortunately what many in the veterinary profession have done. By turning a blind eye, many veterinarians may be unwittingly perpetuating a cycle of sickness in our pets. I DO NOT think they are doing this purposely or vindictively. Rather, I think it\'s a prevalent attitude in the field that stems from the seriously lacking (and very biased) education in pet nutrition.... which brings me (for the third time) to the question at hand: \"Do veterinarians know enough about pet food to ethically recommend a particular brand of food to their clients?\" My answer is, in agreement with Thixton, a resounding \"no they don\'t, and no they shouldn\'t \".
  • Valerie DurhamValerie Durham Member Posts: 8,724
    edited 19 June, 2009
    Vets, for the most part, are not idiots. They did go to vet school, after all--and yes, they didn\'t get enough nutritional education. Vets love animals--have you ever had one who didn\'t? Regarding food, think of this. If you are diabetic, have high blood pressure, etc., your doctor will tell you what to eat and what not to eat. Certainly cat food science needs improvement. But if your cat has a certain medical condition, I would choose to go with the vet\'s opinion. Kitty died at 15 of kidney failure, and I\'m sure that if my vet had told me about commercial foods for kidney disease, she would have lived longer. At that time, I had no clue. As for vets pushing Science Diet or Royal Canin for perfectly healthy cats--I have issues with that. But if you\'re talking about a cat with a definite medical condition, at the present time, I would go with the vet\'s recommendation. Pet food is becoming healthier and healthier all the time--partly due to 2007--and at the very least, foods for certain medical conditions probably do more good than harm.
  • Tina BTina B Vancouver IslandMember Posts: 2,238
    edited 19 June, 2009
    This is the point I am trying to get across here, not about if Vets love pets or not, that is not what this thread was about, its about the food they prescribe. First point the AAFC O is a loose group of state feed regulators who look to the the pet food industry for guidance on how to regulate the food. So this is like "the fox guarding the henhouse" When us humans see the AAFCO stamp on pet foods we are being mislead that the food has been tested, which it really has not, and there is no scientific foundation. You have to understand the definitions that the AAFCO use are not easily understood by the consumer. They dont want us to know how to decipher. The pet food companies are controlled by huge corporations, this in turn is all to do with sales and marketing, not the quality of a product. AAFCO rules are so lax and unscientific that any pet food today is not tested properly, and is only tested on a few animals for a brief time. Now prescription based diets are really "drugs" the FFDCA is who governs this. The FDA is stretched so thin with human food and drug concerns that they dont have the resources for enforcing the FFDCA about pet food. When drugs for humans are tested there is a clinical study done, millions of dollars are spent, and the patients consent and are paid for the tests to be done on them. The only real pet food testing is done on peoples pets,and people unknowingly are paying for this clinical study. There is no regulated clinical trials of prescription pet food, and Vet offices are not told about reactions to products, etc because that info is not available yet, so they have no idea what to look out for. One example (and there are more) is that when the first pet food company came out with UTI prescription diet to cure crystals, this food was only available through the Vet office. Many of the cats put on this acidifying diet, did not cure but actually brought on a new problem far worse than the original and that was oxalate crystals. So why did this have to happen? There were no clinical trials done, no approval by FDA and Vets not informed about adverse reactions. Now this company has brought out a new product to counteract both oxalate and struvite crystals, this food has the same amount of testing as the one before:-/ This new diet may cause a whole other set of problems. Prescription food , or any dry commercial food is all made the same with extrusion (this is how breakfast cereal is made) All these foods are made with sugars and simple starches, and these are toxic to cats in high levels. We and vets should be a little skeptical about these diets because of lack of claims and just as the FDA needs testing and scientific proof about human drugs, we must demand it for our pets too. Hopefully this makes sense to you, but this is only the tip of the iceberg.
  • Valerie DurhamValerie Durham Member Posts: 8,724
    edited 19 June, 2009
    Shadow has provided us with a lot of scientific data, which we appreciate. But I truly believe that Kitty would have lived longer if my vet had prescribed/recommended a food for kidney problems. At the time, I had no Internet, no Catster. The vet in question is a lovely person who has always \"been there\" for me. But he simply failed to recommend ANY treatment for Kitty at all, even though her regular blood tests showed that she had kidney disease (and yes, this probably came from kibble, but that\'s my fault and not the vet\'s). She died at 15; her brother/littermate died at 18, partly because of poor liver function, and partly because he was simply OLD. Guess what? You grow old, you die. Had I been feeding them better foods through their years, yes, I suspect that they would have lived longer. But not forever. Someday, someday, the average age for a cat will be between 20 and 30, but that day is yet to come. What we need is more nutritional research--and it\'s sure to come, since more and more Humans are discovering that cats are a good substitute for Human babies. And--an OT observation--the increase in female vets probably also means that cat nutrition studies will continue to increase. Take Human females--the increase in women doctors in the past 30 or so years has meant great advances in gynecology and other female health issues. Vets should not push certain brands of kibble, but at the same time, if your cat has a certain medical condition, feeding it a food specific for that condition may--or may not--work. But it\'s willing a try, and the vet in question is either going by textbook orthodoxy, or otherwise simply clueless--I doubt he gets the kickbacks from the cat food companies that you think he does. And if you know better, let me know. We always want to be educated.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Welcome to the new Catster Community!

Introduce the community to your pet with our Pet Profiles and discover how to use the new community with our Getting Started pages!


Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!