Talk:Cat food

It is interesting to see the hostility towards Vegetarian catfood.

Simply pointing out that Cattle and Chickens are not a natural cat diet seems to provoke reaction from some people.

What is not clear is why the additional Vegetarian cat food links were removed. Nor why the simple fact that meat based cat food *requires* supplementation with synthetic taurine was removed. (The taurine in vegan cat food is the exact same as the supplement used in meat based food) Removal was an extreme POV propaganda move.

The use of the term "danger" in the Vegetarian society link is a POV violation as well - the link itself refers to "concerns", not "danger"(a far more perjorative term) The current POV is heavily slanted against the simple fact that cats are able to live on vegan cat food, and that many do so. --67.81.74.136 09:55, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

"Meat based catfood", if you are talking about commercial catfood has a lot of grain fillers. That's why they must also suppliment taurine. I don't see a POV problem. Cats can live on a vegan diet, and you could live in a 3X3X3 box, that doesn't mean either is a good idea. Cats are carnivorous animals. Some humans having a problem accepting that animals eat other animals in nature isn't a good reason to torture a cat. Gigs 14:40, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

Why is it torture to feed a cat a diet that meets it's nutritional needs? Comparing a nutritious diet with imprisonment in "a 3X3X3 box" is obviously intended as an appeal to emotion, but the statements are not logically connected.

Animal abuse, and I think a vegetarian diet for cats certainly qualifies, is an emotional issue for a lot of people. Here's a better analogy: Man can indeed live on bread alone, if it's supplemented with water and vitamin pills, but it's a treatment to which we do not subject even our most heinous criminals. --phh 17:48, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Just because you "think a vegetarian diet for cats certainly qualifies" as animal abuse is not proof of anything except your own belief. You have given no support for your belief except for throwing out a non sequitor.

Abuse is too strong a word. The issues with vegetarian cat diets are not significantly worse in my opinion than the issues with feeding a mass-produced dry food that has poor ingredients. The main difference being that a vegetarian diet must be examined carefully to ensure that it meets minimum sustainance requirements. In both cases, one should check up on their cat's vitas regularly, inlucing in the case of vegetarian diets pH levels of urine. A decent analysis that goes a bit more in depth than the link posted is available on Little Big Cat[1] but also seems to disfavor the idea (though offers ways to make it potentially work).TAsunder 16:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

There are a lot of other considerations for cat food that might be discussed in this article. There is a link to dry vs canned but no mention of the fact that these two distinct types of cat food even exist in the main article, nor any mention of the main characteristics of each. Another possibility is a bit of discussion on the fact that there are foods that fall in the lines between cat foods with by-products and home made raw diets. Some such foods are listed in the links, but the main article seems to indicate that the only choices are high-grain foods and homemade diets. I'll see if I can come up with some wording. TAsunder 16:56, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

Vegetarian cat food.

I cannot find a vet or article by a vet who "recommend against unsupplemented vegetarian diets for cats". Most vets straight out discourage vegetarian diets for cats[2][3] and only reccomend supplements as a last resort[4]. I'm changing it back to "Veterinarians recommend against vegetarian diets for cats...". --Dodo bird 17:17, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

And the line on vegetarian food + meat being less expensive than single protein allergy products sounds POV/unecessary given the context. It can be included in another paragraph on cost of commercial vs homemade etc. The point on vege food + meat is to give the owner more control over what protein source goes into the food. --Dodo bird 17:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Well my vet, for one. Furthermore, numerous vets ride the line by saying "they don't recommend it" which is different than recommending against it. I imagine you would also find that the veterinarians who tested the AAFCO-approved food would disagree, as would the vets involved in formulating the vegetarian pet foods. Until you can provide a source that ALL veterinarians disapprove of it, I think you should qualify the statement, as it seems excessively POV to me to indicate that every vet on the planet recommends against vegetarian pet food, which I find extremely unlikely.

You can have plenty of control over the protein source if you just read the can and look at the ingredients. If people do believe what you state, then they are misguided. Just look at the can. Seriously. If it says chicken, it has chicken in it. If it says lamb, it has lamb in it. What's so difficult about that? Cats are just as likely to be allergic to vegetables and grains as meat, and you have no control over the vegetables in a vegetarian food any more than you have over the meat in a meat-based food. Except with the latter you have an enormous number of options, and the former you have very few. The issue of food allergies has come up a few times with my vet, and each time he has never mentioned vegetarian pet food, and more commonly he mentions eliminating vegetables as much as possible and switching meat sources. Just switching meat sources alone is silly and illogical. If you can provide some additional insight into why someone would use a vegetarian food and supplement with meat over just switching to a different brand, please do. Until then perhaps you should just remove it, as it makes no logical sense unless you are accounting for the cost issue. TAsunder 19:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

We can change it to "do not recommend/do not encourage". Using "recommend against unsupplemented vegetarian diets for cats" suggests that if it is supplemented, it is ok, which misrepresents the general opinion held by vets[[5]]. The only "vegetarian food is ok" sources I can find are from vegetarian pet food company and vegan organizations and The Vegetarian Society actually discourages it[6]. Do you have anything from neutral sources or statements/articles by vets who are neutral/ok with vegetarian cat food?

The useful studies I found are Field study on the nutrition of vegetarian dogs and cats in Europe and Taurine and cobalamin status of cats fed vegetarian diets.

As for AAFCO-approved food, the status is approved by either meeting a nutrient profile or passing a feeding test(see here for difference). Cat food manufacturers claiming to meet AAFCO standards[7][8] do it by the former. There is no vegetarian pet food with feeding tests-approved AAFCO certification. AAFCO trials last 26 weeks[9] while a feeding trial by one of the vegetarian cat food co. which met the AAFCO nutrient profile lasted 20 days[10]. If you look at the standards for the AAFCO feeding trials, it seems so simple and easy to meet, keep 6 out of 8 dogs healthy for 26 weeks, why has no vegetarian food company done it yet?

What I meant was that the owner is not limited to a specific protein source that a manufacturer comes up with. Most manufacturers only come up with one line of allergy food. And there are not many single source protein pet food around. By using a vegetarian and meat mix, the owner is not limited to what few foods manufacturers offer but only limited by the protein sources the pet is allergic to. Apologies for my unclear language. Cats may be as likely to be allergic to veggies and grains, but that's not the point being made here. There are cats allergic to chicken/fish etc. and feeding single protein food, vegetarian mix or not, is useful to single out the culprit(assuming meat protein is the culprit). This product[11] may explain what I was trying to get at.--Dodo bird 22:03, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a source for the claims about allergies? Because all the ones I find say it is more or less debunked. A few sites even note that plant protein is no more allergy-friendly than meat. And like I said, just because it is vegetarian does not mean it is non-allergenic. Foods specifically designed to have small amounts of foods commonly allergenic are a much safe bet. There is an enormous variety of foods with single meat sources and many foods that are specifically manufactured to have few allergenic ingredients. I find no logic behind the allergy argument whatsoever. I find it unlikely that you will have access to meat sources that are appropriate for cats that are not available in many different varieties of pet foods. There are at least a few that have venison, a couple with australian brushtail, etc. Not to mention the huge variety of turkey, chicken, lamb, beef, and duck.

If the wording is going to be accurate, it should say something to the effect that vegetarian diets are generally discouraged, but when fed to cats despite this, most veterinarians encourage the cat owner to make sure that the meals are properly supplemented. Some vets even suggest that the cat should have regular examinations to make sure the pet is healthy, with urine ph being of particular importance. It is important to merely state the facts as what other people say and not use language that would indicate wikipedia is giving veterinary advice, which I think you were doing by implying that all veterinarians recommend against it without giving adequate and logical reasons. As I mentioned in my edit, all of the nutrients cats require can be added to vegetarian meals. TAsunder 14:23, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not disputing your claim that plant protein are more likely causes of allergy than meat protein.(I don't know much about that.) My original sentence on that, "Vegetarian cat food is also used by some pet owners to manage food allergies by adding a meat source that is non-allerginic to the specific animal to the cat food." certainly don't imply that. Using vegetarian cat food that way is as useful as single protein cat food is, only useful if meat protein is cause of allergy. Plant protein being more likely causes of allergy is not an issue in the statement. That issue can be touched upon elsewhere.

So you don't have a source for the allergy theory? It seems odd to me that you are willing to stipulate that it is a valid approach without any evidence but unwilling to stipulate that a vet exists somewhere on the planet that thinks vegetarian diets are ok. This is quite a double standard. When considering what information to place in this article, it is important to consider that some people might take way from the article that it is a GOOD idea to feed vegetarian plus some meat to combat allergies, something which I believe is false except in extreme circumstances. I find it rather unlikely that it will yield any noticeable benefit over simply switching brands except in the case of a cat who is allergic to chicken, turkey, beef, lamb, and duck, but no vegetables or vegetable proteins. If we are to keep it in the article, I think it would be wise to note that the approach is unnecessary except in extreme circumstances where very rare meat-based products (e.g. brushtail or venison products) are too expensive. TAsunder 18:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The statement is not claiming any noticable benifits over other single source food. The whole paragraph is about vegetarian cat food. And that statement just says vegetarian cat food can also be used this way. There is no allergy theory involved. I can't understand your objections. It really is not an important point. I'm removing it. -Dodo bird 06:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

My worry is over a potential cat owner reading that and deciding to try a vegetarian diet with meat supplements. In particular I think of them cooking the meat and using an incomplete vegetarian meal, or making the situation worse by increasing allergenic vegetable matter. I don't believe that there is much reason to choose the course of vegetarian food + meat unless the cat is allergic to all common meat types but no vegetables and the owner can't afford to feed a rare-meat based product. This is rather uncommon. I also think that the idea of using vegetarian cat foods for this is actually something that might have first been proposed by the vegetarian manufacturers themselves to help market their foods, despite the fact that they do not include all hypo-allergenic foods. Comparing with Innova, for example, who specifically avoid all common allergenic ingredients (aside from turkey/chicken), I imagine that it is no more valuable. TAsunder 13:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I found the previous version misleading as it suggest vets consider vegetarian food ok if fed with supplements. My edits at that time were mainly to correct that rather than expand on the details. I do not see anything wrong with saying vets recommend against feeding vegetarian. I cited sources here in the talk page. I couldn't find opposing views by vets, not that I didn't try. The veterinarian position, as implied from the sources I found is "We discourage feeding vegetarian, but if you decide to ignore the recommendation, here are the steps to take...." While there are pet food company and vegan organizations and who are "pro" vegetarian, those are minority views and shouldn't be given undue weight. I'm all for expanding on the finer details, arguments and reasoning. --Dodo bird 17:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

And I am saying that some vets DO consider it ok if fed with supplements and with proper veterinary examinations. I consider excluding a qualifier to be giving undue weight to the argument against vegetarian products. The rest of the article is worded with qualifiers, and to have this one statement be unqualified lends undue weight to its significance. "Most pet owners" "Many veterinarians" "Some pet owners", etc. If the rest of the article had not been written intentionally in this style, this would not be an issue. But the disparity between the statement and the rest of the article is likely to be misleading. Frankly, I find the obligate carnivore wording misleading as well. It is not because cats are obligate carnivores that vets recommend against it. It is because of the potential malnourishment. I don't know any veterinarian who bases their recommendations solely on what a cat would do in the forest. TAsunder 18:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Point taken and qualifier added. A cat being an obligate carnivore is precisely the reason for potential malnourishment, isn't it? Not that herbivores can't get malnourished. --Dodo bird 06:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I guess that's hard to determine. I would say that the cat in the wild is an obligate carnivore because in the wild it offers the healthiest nutritional value of the dietary choices available. In the home, with an owner who is willing to closely care for the cat, I would guess that the cat doesn't necessarily need to be as carnivorous. Even non-vegetarian foods often have as primary ingredients numerous vegetables and filler ingredients, which obviously do not remotely match a standard in-the-wild diet. I read about a study where a lab vet who was previously feeding only cooked strips of meat to the cat tried an experiment with raw food, and noticed a lot of benefits. To the naked eye it would seem that cooked food leads to malnourishment in the same way that it seems that way with vegetarian food. However, as we know now, cooked strips of food lack adequate taurine and similar. Commercial cat foods, which cook the meat, must supplement with taurine anyway. If the market were really there for mass produced vegetarian food, I would guess that it would not lead to malnourishment as some of the existing brands might. TAsunder 13:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Also, you should be careful not to mix up dogs with cats. You refer to dog feeding trials which are completely irrelevant in an article about cats. The link you provided that shows an "analysis of vegetarian" pets does not meet any test of scientific validity I can think of. It is a survey given to owners who may or may not have done proper research or consulted with a veterinarian. From what I can gather, you have a strong anti-vegetarian bias. I would not feed my cats vegetarian food, nor would I feed them garbage like hill's science diet. But that does not mean that either sources are nutritionally inadequate, and certainly it is unlikely that a vegetarian diet is significantly more dangerous than junk cat foods. Nor is there any point in attempting to demonstrate that all vets disprove of vegetarian diets by providing a few examples. Like I said, stating that veterinarians do something without qualifying it is a dangerous blanket statement which is extremely unlikely to be true. Whether or not AAFCO's own vets were involved in the feeding trials, it is a requirement by the AAFCO to have animals tested by veterinarians, and those tests include taurine level monitoring. So there are at least a few vets who believe that the food was nutritionally sound, unless you wish to propopse a conspiracy theory. TAsunder 14:35, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Do you mean this? The cat trials are on the bottom of the page. The two links I posted as useful studies are not intended as sources for any POV. I'm just saying those are the only vaguely scientific studies on effects of vegetarian cat food I found. I put it there for your, or any interested parties' reference. Yes, I have a bias, but I also understand the NPOV policy. It's justified to say that vets oppose feeding vegetarian when all my search for veterinarian opinion on it takes that position. Try finding a link/source/quote from a vet that takes the opposing position. Re: AAFCO, did you read the links I provided? A pet food claiming to meet the AAFCO nutrient profile do not need to have any animal tested by veterinarians. All it needs is a lab technician to analyse the nutrient content of the food. That's how the vegetarian pet food company do it. No feeding trials took place. No animals tested by vets under requirement by AAFCO. --Dodo bird 17:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

You really think no veterinarian was ever involved in any process of manufacturing any vegetarian pet food? Really? So let's be clear here, is it your opinion that every single vet on the planet recommends against vegetarian cat food? Or is it that some vets probably do exist and are in the minority? From the wiki NPOV link I discern that assuming that all vets recommend against something is a more gross violation than assuming some vets do not. This link [12] quotes numerous veterinarians who find vegetarian pet foods ok. TAsunder 18:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Of course, at that point you're stepping into the animal testing area, which is also another controversial subject when it comes to pet foods and I think you will find that many people who would choose a vegetarian cat food are also of the persuasion that animal testing should not be done, some may even choose such a food specifically for that reason. Anyway, I think a simple qualifier to say that -most- veterinarians recommend against feeding vegetarian diets should be enough to admit that there are studies and vets which argue otherwise, but the most vets don't agree - which is the case. Perhaps a clarifying line mentioning that cat owners should speak with their vet before starting any such diet would also be appropriate, so no one can get the idea that a wiki article is the definative resource, despite citations. -Dawson 18:15, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Of course I don't, I just expect a source. I have to say I'm not convinced of the validity of the source. The quote by Davd H. Jagger is re: a book on cats and dogs and it gets truncated in parts(may be taken out of context?). And the other quote mentions pets in general, no specific mention of cats. Compare those quotes against specific articles refuting vegetarian diets for cats. But I agree it's fair to add the qualifier. --Dodo bird 06:16, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm not really convinced that a vegetarian cat is a good idea either. In fact I would recommend against it (as I would recommend against cheap dry foods that you might find in a petco or petsmart). However, my main issue is that I did not want the article to express a bias which I am not certain is as strongly supported as was indicated. I find it likely that a properly formulated vegetarian diet would be adequate in the same way that a properly formulated non-vegetarian diet with a lot of vegetable filler is. TAsunder 13:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Dry foods

One would think that because commercial dry foods are "scientifically" tested and very "precise" in its ingredients as they are designed specifically for cats, that they are actually more healthy for a cat as opposed to the other types of feed (homemade or raw); dry foods just seem to be specifically made for cats, with the right ammount of everything they need, while home made cat foods require less ingredients (and therefore, is less deisgned for a cat). Wouldn't this make sense? Yet, most cat owners say that the dry type is the least healthy of the types.—This unsigned comment was added by 24.23.6.222 (talk • contribs) .

A proper raw diet would consists of added vitamins and minerals too. How 'balanced and complete' it is would depend on the specific recipe that the home owner follows. Deciding if a certain recipe is 'trustworthy' is probably the key issue, but so is deciding if a certain pet food company 'got it right'. I think the general objection to dry food is that, the heat processing kills off enzymes/vitamins/nutrients etc(those are added back to the food as supplements), dry food contain a high proportion of plant material as compared to canned/raw/natural cat diet and that dry food may put extra strain on the digestive/excretory system[13].--Dodo bird 05:07, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't think this is true at all. Dry foods are not just formulated to include what a cat needs, they are formulated to do so cheaply and to be appetizing to a cat who otherwise would not think of eating a kibble, and also formulated to last a while. A canned or raw food lasts hours (or a day or so if refridgerated). A dry food lasts months or years. While dry foods are typically tested to meet a minimum nutritional value for cats, many still contain formulations that can present serious problems later in life. A high quality canned food might meet the statements above, but there is still the issue that canned foods are heat-processed and must be supplemented with the nutrients that get cooked out. There is some evidence that cooking and then supplementing is not as nutritionally sound as not cooking in the first place. A homemade diet certainly has many risks, not the least of which is the possibility of not being nutritionally complete. However, there are so many reputable sites with recipes that I would think the greater risk is simply in mishandling meat or not following the recipes properly. [14] [15] TAsunder 13:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Section to Help Decide

As a recent cat owner; I was frustrated that the article didn't help me in choosing which brand of cat feed to purchase. It gave me a general idea of which TYPE of cat food I personally want to buy; but does not recommend which brands are often considered "the best".

I think it's a good idea to have a seperate section which lists what most vets / cat enthusiasts / cat nutritionists prefer in terms of the brands (or ingredients) for a type of food. For example, in this section, you could list all 4 of the cat food types generally fed (home made, dry type, wet type (canned), frozen raw); and under that type of cat food, you would write what cat enthusiasts/vets generally prefer and the reasons why (what brand they prefer; or, if it's homemade, what ingredients and the cooking method they prefer). If there isn't a consensus on one brand or recipe, then list the top recipes and brand.

Now, if this can't be done without disrupting the NPOV or whatever Wikipedia policy/guideline there is, can someone recommend for me on this discussion what they prefer and the reasons why (particularly for wet-canned type and dry type foods (I'm including wet-type because there are probably some places online where I could purchase in bulk for cheap)). But of course; if this can be done, I don't see how it can't be done in the article.—This unsigned comment was added by 24.23.6.222 (talk • contribs) .

Opinions can't really be included in an article, per WP:NPOV, and any list of what is considered 'best' would invariably fall into that as no concensus could ever be agreed upon. That aside, I have a preference for Nature's Variety Prairie for my cats. -Dawson 04:52, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I felt that NPOV would be violated if I stated my preferences, however I did try as much as possible to offer a compelling argument for wet food (canned or raw) in that the potential negatives of dry are certainly more debilitating and scary than the positives. Unfortunately, many veterinarians still believe that dry food is best despite a rather large volume of evidence against this. My mother's veterinarian, for example. Many vets also disprove of raw diets, even though there is some evidence that they may be beneficial. So to state with any certainty which form is best would be to trivialize a rather heated debate. These are the brands I would recommend, each having different tastes, textures, and ingredients that the cat might enjoy. In each case I would recommend the canned food. The only dry food I recommend is Innova Evo, although I believe Nature's Variety also has a grain-free dry food. For canned, I have had good results with Innova and Innova Evo, Nature's Variety Prarie, Addiction, Wellness, Merrick, and Petguard (which has by far the most calories of those listed). If you are thinking of trying a raw diet, nature's variety makes an excellent pre-packaged form. TAsunder 13:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the speedy response guys! I'll try some of what you have all suggested. 24.23.6.222 20:52, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Veggie Food Redux (this will be short)

I was thinking, one reason why someone would feel that vegetarian cat food is torture for the cat is that although the food offers the same ammount of nutrients found in non-veg. cat food, the veg. cat food is not as appetizing for the cat. The "living on bread" alone analogy is a bad one; but, I could understand why someone would consider feeding veg. cat food to their pets as "torture" -- you're forcing the cat to eat something that POTENTIALLY (not sure if it does) taste crappy to the cat, because of your own beliefs. Perhaps a better analogy would be like feeding a human prison bread (with all the correct ammount of nutrients for a healthy life) and water. This is done as a punishment in some prisons, and actually works quite well -- prisoners hate eating bread, even if it is nutritious. Of course, this is all assuming cats don't LIKE veg. food. Not sure. I was also thinking that maybe products with meat inside it could be recognized by the cat; which would bring out a more "primal" side of the cat out -- sort of like feeding dogs dry food and fresh cooked chicken. TAsunder, you've mentioned that you personally wouldn't recommend feeding veg. cat food -- my question is, why? You seem to support it in that it has all the nutrients required. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.6.222 (talk • contribs)

One could make the same palatability argument for any kind of kibble/dry food as most types rely on various added flavorings and scents to make them more palatable, and even colorings to make them look vaguely meat colored. Some companies use artificial ingredients, while some use natural ingredients to achieve the same effect, but in the end, its a dry, crunchy chunk, not tasty meat slices of real meat that a "normal" carnivore would be consuming. :) I think the fundamental issue comes down to is: Is diet merely the sum of the vitamins and other nutritional components or is there something else to it? We're just getting to the point where vegan pet diets have been in use long enough to get a proper statistical analysis. AMÍ Cat has been undergoing an extensive study with its vegan cat food since 2002, and intends to have the results sometime next year, which I think will clear up a lot of misconceptions. -Dawson 21:21, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

You have a point. But at least dry food with meat in it actually retains some of that meat flavor; the veg. stuff needs to be completely reflavored for an even more unrealistic taste. It's sort of like eating immitation crab meat, which still uses "meat" from other animals; whereas imitation crab meat made of veg. products like tofu wouldn't be as appealing. But your description does make me not want to feed any of the dry crap to my cat... well, almost. Cat doesn't seem to care. One way to simply test this is to let the cat choose which it prefers (let it taste both kinds); hey, I'd bet the cat would go for the meat based dry food (as long as the cat hasn't gotten use to one or the other; maybe by using a cat who eats raw or wet-food all it's life). That "experiment" would basically test which of the 2 the cat finds most appealing and/or closest match to it's original diet (in this case, good wet nutritious meat).