Bob writes
>I hate to accuse Linda of nit picking, but while quibbling about precise
>definitions in a scientific paper has some merit, on the FML it is
>pointless.
 
I don't believe I was nitpicking.  Bob says kibble is "unsound", yet his
definition of "sound" cannot be applied to any diet, even a natural one.
We are left to wonder just what he means by calling kibble unsound.
Given that he has just spent the last several days telling us about all
kibble's problems, we must conclude that it is dangerous, and that we are
all bad ferret mommies and daddies for feeding it.
 
Bob also says
>I think what Linda was trying to say is, and please correct me if I have
>misunderstood, that if the knowledge of a ferret's nutritional needs are
>unknown, how do we know the natural diet is a better one?
 
Correction: I have no doubt that a natural diet is better, I am not
arguing that at all.  But to avoid another wordy post, here are my basic
points:
 
1. Kibble is not evil.  It is not an ideal diet for ferrets, but it is
the best most of us can offer, and we should not be made to feel guilty
for doing so.
 
2. The ferret's natural diet is difficult to quantify, and therefore
difficult to provide, even beyond any inconveniences involved.  Also,
even a natural diet might benefit from supplements (an example might
be omega-3 fatty acids), we just don't know.  That doesn't mean people
shouldn't try to provide a natural diet, just that it isn't easy to know
if you are doing it right.
 
3. Even if we feed a kibble-based diet, there are some fairly easy things
we can do to try to improve its overall quality.
 
Linda Iroff
 
PS Bob is as verbose in person as he is in writing.  If I didn't
interrupt, I would never get a chance to make my points! :-)
[Posted in FML issue 3949]