Thread: Whats actually in Cat Food?

Continuation ... and I now have a laptop back so this is going to be easier, first post was made on a mobile phone so apologies for the lack of paragraphs and spacing, I will try and correct it.

Waltham who make Whiskers website states that they add more nutrients into their food than the minimum recomendations to compensate for the losses in the processing of the food. However, this itself can cause problems and be potentially dangerous to cats and leads to hypervitaminosis.

Vets have also found a link between canned foods, particularly fish varieties, and hyperthyroidism in cats.

Some contaminents may survive the rendering process, therefore a tin of cat food can conttain antibiotics, hormones, the chemicals used at the slaughterhouses and barbituates. Even more less desirable contaminents can be found as well.

To make thhe naturally bland kibble appealing to cats it is sprayed with fat mixed with flavour enhancers. This fat will have been treated with ethoxyquin to stabilise it. This product has never been certified as safe for cats. Antioxidants are also added - yeah more chemicals. High wheat content kibble is known to cause vomitting and diahroea in cats, Persians appear to be most susceptable to this.

Have a look at the ingredients in cat food, do you find cellulose or cellulose pulp, any idea what it is? Blood soaked sawdust. So your feeding your cat wood. Sawdust is a by-product and the timber will have been treated with chemicals.

(As I keep getting logged out I will coninue in another reply, cheating this time going to type it in Word and copy and paste it as I've lost about five times whats here)

Originally Posted by catslave

Waltham who make Whiskers website states that they add more nutrients into their food than the minimum recomendations to compensate for the losses in the processing of the food.

So what they are basically saying is: they process the meat to such an extent that they need to add lost nutrients.
Or they use so little meat that they need to add nutrients that weren’t there in the first place.

Wouldn’t it be simpler to just feed the cat the … ehmmm… meat?

I really should have put this as the start of the thread but I am not posting this to try and get everyone to raw feed, I am posting it as information that is not easy to come by so people can make informed choices and draw their own conclusions.

Candes I appreciate your input and agree you too have done your homework and made your own ddecisions. I really am not trying to start an arguement, as above this thread is for information that took me many years to find. Both the kibbles that you recommend contain chicken meal / turkey meal. These are the rendered bits that I mentioned earlier. Out of curiosity I will e-mail both companies and ask them for details of the "meal" and the proccessing of it, or have you already done this during your own research? Again not wishing to argue just want info as if these are manufactured in a different way I would give consideration to using them.

Cats evolved to eat bacteria. They dig about in soil etc. Also they have a nasty habit of grooming themselves, including their bottoms, and occasionally other cats bottoms; I don't care how clean your cat is, its going to get bacteria from there.

There are a number of factors that prevent pathogenic bacteria from taking a foothold in thecat’s body. The first defense is saliva which kills bacteria entering with the food. Saliva is often referred to as a gatekeeper because of its protective role against harmful pathogens.

The stomach is highly acid (pH 1-2) and contains strong hydrochloric acid (HCL). HCL creates the right pH for enzymes to work efficiently and it kills bacteria that have escaped the protective enzymes in the saliva. Bacteria that survive the high acid content of the stomach then pass into the small intestine. Compared to the stomach, the small intestine is a relatively hospitable environment. The first section of the small intestine is called the duodenum. The pancreas and liver deposit their digestive enzymes, bicarbonate and bile salts, respectively, in this part of the small intestine.

The digestive enzymes from the pancreas digest the cells walls of harmful bacteria. The bile salts from the liver are primarily used for fat digestion and transportation and also potent antimicrobial agents. In addition, lysozyme is secreted by cells that line the digestive tract. Lysozyme is a potent enzyme that attacks bacterial cell walls, and is believed to be another primary control preventing bacterial overgrowth in the upper gastrointestinal tract.

Bacteria that are able to survive need to be able to stick to the lining of the intestinal wall. To hold on they must contain adhering proteins, have their own means of locomotion, and be able to multiply rapidly enough to overcome the forward peristaltic movements of the small intestine. Bacteria that fail to meet the criteria for attachment, motility and propagation will pass on into the fecal matter and into the large intestine. The large intestine collects and processes undigested material that passes through the small intestine. The bacterial population of the large intestines is much greater than that found in the small intestine, with a higher number of gram-negative bacteria. These bacteria are very important to normal large intestinal physiology.

Enough already !!!!!!!!!

Thanks, this thread is balanced and has lots of factual info instead of hysterics. Both Catslave & Candes apear to have a good grounding in both factual info and research.
It shows both sides in a non emotional discussion giving info in a easy to read way (once Catslave was on a laptop!).

Edit: I have now discovered that this is a cleaned up thread (for want of a better phrase) I know this is an emotive subject but each to their own..........everyone is allowed to hold their own ideas and if it works for you fine but please don't be too forcefull when getting your point across..............