FERRET-SEARCH Archives

Searchable FML archives

FERRET-SEARCH@LISTSERV.FERRETMAILINGLIST.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Ilena E. Ayala" <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 6 Feb 1998 21:02:59 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
The February issue of Consumers Reports magazine has an excellent article on
pet foods.  While aimed at dog and cat foods, it includes a thorough review
of what the label ingredients and other claims actually mean.
 
Terms such as "beef food" "beef dinner" "with beef" have very different
meanings: "beef food" must be at least 95% beef, while "with beef" only
requires 3% beef!  Don't even ask about 'beef flavor'.  I think that means
the food passed within six feet of a cow at some time during the
manufacturing process.  (That's my definition of course, not theirs!)
 
Guaranteed analysis: surprisingly, they often found MORE fat and protein
than implied by the numbers on the bag.  ("Not less than...") (SInce protein
and fat are expensive components, the expectation is for the mfr to try and
stay very close to the number they list on the package.)
 
The ratings weren't as analytical as I expected; basically all the foods of
similar type (ie, all dry cat and kitten foods) were lumped together and
ranked by cost (rather than the excellent to poor "bullet" style ratings
they frequently use).  Cost, protein and fat (by their analysis, not the
mfrs bag label) were listed, and any unusual things found in the nutritional
analysis were noted as comments; the most common ones found were low
potassium and high magnesium.  High magnesium is thought to contribute to
the formation of some stones in cats (urinary tract disease).  Iams Kitten
wasn't ranked; Iams for normally active cats (?do they have a forumula for
hyperactive cats?) was; no deficiencies were noted.  Taste tests showed cats
tend to go for the cheaper brands.  Go figure ;-).
 
The end conclusion was that some of the more expensive foods (including
iams, Hills and Eubanka) were marked up quite a bit (up to 40% profit for
the retailer!), that the more expensive foods had more consistant ingredient
content and therefore were more consistant nutritionally *but* that they
didn't necessarily think that consistancy was necessary for good health.
(Meaning the food can vary as long as it is at or over the minimum
requirements.)  I'm inclined to agree:
 
heck MY diet isn't consistant from day to day!  =
 
If you are at all curious about food labels or food choices, I'd highly
recommend checking out a copy.
 
-Ilena Ayala
[Posted in FML issue 2210]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2