Q: "Hi Boob!  Welcome home!  You may have noticed you've returned in the
middle of a controversy about the change in formula of Iams kitten (and
cat) food....At least one vet...believes this is a change for the better.
He suspects blood sugar spikes from rice may contribute to causing
insulinoma...."
 
A: One should always welcome boobs....I know I do.....
 
It may and the vet could well be right.  But that doesn't mean long term
exposure to high concentrations of blood sugar won't do the same thing.
Ok, think of it this way; ALL scientific studies show an increase in
cardiovascular disease, increases in cancers and lung disease, and ashtray
breath regardless if the smoker uses filtered cigarettes.  So which is
better to smoke?  Filtered or unfiltered?  Strange that studies show almost
NO difference in disease rates between the two.  The real problem in ferret
diet studies is a lack of concise and directed research in the carbohydrate
problem.  Ferret diet and the influence of plant sugars is an area which
desperately needs scientific research and none has been published to date
which DIRECTLY addresses this issue.
 
Q: Do you know of any studies in ferrets that show relative rates of blood
   sugar changes for different carbohydrate sources?
 
A: You ask this question as if I might actually know the answer....
   strange.....
 
I know of NO published studies where blood sugar changes for different
carbohydrates have been done, but even if they were, and even if such
changes were found, it doesn't mean a correlation exists between blood
sugar and pancreatic disease.  They are different questions and require
different research.  Ok, consider these 4 different possibilities;
a) blood sugar levels do not cause disease in ferrets,
b) long-term blood sugar levels cause disease in ferrets,
c) cyclic spikes in blood sugar cause disease in ferrets, and
d) both long-term and cyclic spikes in blood sugar cause disease in
ferrets.  Now, HOW can blood sugar changes from different carbohydrates
PROVE or DISPROVE any of the four?  Obviously, they cannot.  Thus, blood
sugar levels have little or no bearing on disease contractability UNTIL
you can first prove the disease is caused by the exposure to the sugars.
Ooooooo!  Isn't science fun?
 
The only "evidence" I can come up with (since NO studies on the question
have been published) is circumstantial at best; I have NO direct evidence.
Again, using the smoking analog, we are at that point in the 1950s-60s
where one could make an intuitive connection between smoking and disease,
but proving it required substantial research.  We can look at history and
make an intuitive connection between starchy carbohydrates and increased
pancreatic disorders, but we still NEED research to prove the links.
 
Q: "Is it reasonable to extrapolate data from other animals?"
 
A: Isn't that done on one of those "forbidden" news groups?
 
Sure; it is done all the time but there are dangers.  I simply do not want
to embark on a long discussion of the philosophy of analog and homolog
comparisons, so all I will say is the best studies come from those models
closest to the original.  In other words, comparing the ferret to a mink or
weasel would be more powerful than comparing it to a cat, which is more
powerful than comparing it to a dog, human, bison, elephant, etc.  Closest
wins in terms of homolog modeling.
 
Q: "Given that ferrets don't really need much in the way of carbohydrates,
might one that is digested more slowly actually be better than one that is
easily digested?"
 
A: I find that is the way with toxic poisons.  The more digestible ones are
always better.
 
First you have to prove the link, THEN figure which ones are better than
others.
 
Q: "For me and most other ferret owners, kibble is the primary food of
choice.  How do we figure out what kibble is best????"
 
A: Get a huge piece of cardboard, divide it into equal size squares--each
representing a particular food--and wait to see which square the ferret
poops in.  Ferret bingo!  Better than the lottery!
 
Rather than repeating a lot of stuff already repeated at length, look back
on the Diet 101 posts for the detailed answer.  There is no answer a kibble
lover will like.  The better kibbles stink and cause stinky poop because
they use less carbohydrates and more fish meal, or they are expensive.  Or
both.  All I can say is you get what you pay for, and if you buy cheap food
(excepting in emergency situations), you get a cheap result.  Why do you
think they are cheap to begin with?  Ok, ever eat a "broke food?" You know,
food you eat when you are broke?  What are they?  Lots of cheap starches
and fats and low grade proteins.  If you had a choice, would you consider
this diet as benificial to your children as one filled with top of the line
products?  I suggest you pick your kibble with quality in mind (see the
Diet 101 posts) and damn the cost.
 
Bob C and 16 Mo' Broke Food Barfers
[Posted in FML issue 3008]