| This is an actual research page i
found when working for a home vet
and she loved it so much that she
put it on her page..read it with an
open mind...and think...here is her
page also if you are
interested..http://www.carinrenning
s.com
(don't read if you have a weak
stomach)
what's really for dinner?
the truth about commercial pet
food, by tina perry
cow brains. sheep guts. chicken
heads. road kill. rancid grain.
these are a few of the so-called
nutritionally balanced ingredients
found in the commercial pet food
served to companion animals every
day.
more than 95 percent of us
companion animals derive their
nutritional needs from a single
source: processed pet food. when
people think of pet food, many
envision whole chickens, choice
cuts of beef, fresh grains, and all
the nutrition that a dog or cat may
ever need -- images that pet food
manufacturers promote in their
advertisements. what these
companies do not reveal is that
instead of whole chickens they have
substituted chicken heads, feet,
and intestines. those choice cuts
of beef are really cow brains,
tongues, esophagi, fetal tissue
dangerously high in hormones, and
possibly diseased and even
cancerous meat. those whole grains
have had the starch removed for
corn starch powder and the oil
extracted for corn oil, or they are
hulls and other remnants from the
milling process. grains used that
are truly whole have usually been
deemed unfit for human consumption
because of mold, contaminants, poor
quality, or poor handling
practices. pet food is one of the
world’s most synthetic edible
products, containing virtually no
whole ingredients.
pet food manufacturers have become
masters at inducing companion
animals to eat things cat and dogs
would normally spurn. pet food
scientists have learned that
it's possible to take a
mixture of inedible scraps, fortify
it with artificial vitamins and
minerals, preserve it so that it
can sit on the shelf for more than
a year, add dyes to make it
attractive, and then extrude it
into whimsical shapes that appeal
to the human consumer. for this,
pet food companies can expect to
earn $9 billion in sales in 1996.
scraps and byproducts for years,
many care givers have tried to
avoid feeding their companion
animals people food leftovers,
having been warned by veterinarians
about the heath problems they can
cause. yet much scrap material from
the human food industry is ending
up in dogs and cat’s dinner
bowls. what the consumer purchases
and what the manufacturer
advertises are often two entirely
different products, and this
difference threatens the animals
healthy, especially as they age.
learning to read ingredient labels
and taking the time to read them
carefully is crucial to making an
educated choice when purchasing pet
food. ingredients are listed in
descending order of weight
(heaviest first) under standards
established by the center for
veterinary medicine for the food
and drug administration (fda). the
name of the product (in most
states) is dictated by the
regulations of the american
association of feed control
officials (aafco). the trouble is,
aafco standards can lead to
deceptive product names due to the
weight and volume variations
between wet and dry ingredients.
also, the average consumer has no
idea what the definitions for the
listed ingredients mean.
preservatives, vitamins, minerals,
flavorings, and cereal make up most
of what the companion animal eats.
it is not happenstance that four of
the top five major pet food
companies in the united states are
subsidiaries of major multinational
food production companies: colgate
palmolive (which produces hills
science diet), heinz, nestle, and
mars )see the corporate
connection). from a business
standpoint, multi-national food
companies owning pet food
manufacturers is an ideal
relationship. the multinationals
have captive market in which to
dump their waste products, and the
pet food manufacturers have a
direct source of bulk materials.
both make a profit from selling
scraps that originate from places
far worse than the dinner table. in
his 1986 book pet allergies
veterinarian al plechner sums up
what goes into companion animals
food: condemned parts and animals
rejected for human consumption are
routinely rerouted for commercial
pet foods. a similar fate applies
to so-called 4-d animals. these are
food animals picked up dead, or
that are dying, diseased, or
disabled, and do not meet
human-food qualifications. they are
processed straightaway for
companion animal consumption.
little goes to waste. says
plechner, food processing refuse of
all sorts winds up in your animals
dinner bowls. moldy grains. rancid
foods. meat meal. the latter is
ground-up slaughterhouse discards
often containing disease-ridden
tissue and high levels of hormones
and pesticides, the very things
that may have contributed to the
death of the steer or hog. a decade
later, his words still apply. when
cattle, swine, chickens, lambs, or
other animals meet their ends at a
slaughterhouse, the choice cuts --
lean muscle tissue and organs
prized by humans -- are trimmed
away from the carcass for human
consumption. whatever remains of
the carcass (bones, blood, pus,
intestines, ligaments, subcutaneous
fat, hooves, horns, beaks, and
any other parts not normally
consumed by humans) is, according
to the pet food industry, perfectly
fit as a protein source for cat and
dog food.
the pet food institute, the trade
association of pet food
manufacturers, acknowledges in its
1994 fact sheet the importance of
using byproducts in pet foods as
additional income for processors
and farmers. the purchase and use
of these ingredients by the pet
food industry not only provides
nutritional foods for pets at
reasonable costs, but provides an
important source of income to
american farmers and processors of
meat, poultry, and seafood products
for human consumption. many of
these remnants are indigestible and
provide a questionable source of
nutrition. the amount of nutrition
provided by meat byproducts, meals,
and digests varies from vat to vat
of this animal protein soup. a vat
filled with chicken feet, beaks,
and viscera is going to make
available a lower amount of protein
than a vat of breast meat. james
morris and quinton rogers,
professors with department of
molecular biosciences at the
university of california at davis
veterinary school of medicine,
assert that there is virtually no
information on the bio-availability
of nutrients for companion animals
in many of the common dietary
ingredients used in pet foods.
these ingredients are generally
byproducts of the meat, poultry and
fishing industries, with the
potential for wide variation in
nutrient composition. claims of
nutritional adequacy of pet foods
based on the current aafco nutrient
allowances (profiles) do not give
assurances of nutritional adequacy
and will not until ingredients are
analyzed and bioavailability values
are incorporated. meat byproducts,
the catch-all term of the pet food
industry, is a misnomer because
these byproducts contain little if
any meat. byproducts contain little
if any meat. byproduct are animal
parts leftover after the meat has
been stripped from the bone.
chicken byproducts include heads,
feet, entrails, lungs, spleens,
kidneys, brains, livers, stomachs,
noses, blood, and intestines free
of their contents. what the pet
food manufactures fail to mention
is that most byproducts, digests
and meals are also filled with
other substances, such as cancerous
tissue cut from the carcass,
plastic foam packaging containing
spoiled meat from supermarkets, ear
tags, spoiled slaughterhouse meat,
road kill, and pieces of downer
animals.
canned cannibalism another source
of meat that isn't mentioned
on pet food labels is pet
byproducts, the bodies of dogs and
cats. in 1990 the san francisco
chronicle reported that euthanized
companion animals were found in pet
foods. although pet food company
executives and the national
renderers association vehemently
denied the report, the american
veterinary medical association and
the fda confirmed the story. the
pets serve a viable purpose by
providing foodstuff for the animal
feed chain, said lea mcgovern,
chief of the fda's animal feed
safety branch. because of the sheer
volume of animals rendered and the
similarity in protein content
between poultry byproducts and
processed dogs and cats, rendering
plant workers say it would be
impossible for purchasers to know
the exact contents of what they
buy. in fact, sacramento rendering
cited by inspectors five times in
the past two years for
product-labeling violations.
grease and grain
the most nutritious dry pet food is
no better than the worst if animals
will not eat it. pet food
scientists have discovered that
spraying the kibble or pellets with
a combination of refined animal
fat, lard, kitchen grease, and
other oils too rancid or deemed
inedible for humans makes an
otherwise bland or distasteful
product palatable. animal fat is
mainly packing house waste or
supermarket trimmings from the
packaging of meats. animals love
the taste of this sprayed fat,
which also acts as a binding agent
to which manufacturers may add
other flavor enhancers. the pungent
odor wafting from an open bag of
pet food is created by this
concoction. restaurant grease has
become a major component of
feed-grade animal fat over the last
15 years. often held in 50-gallon
drums for weeks or months in
extreme temperatures, this grease
is usually kelp outside with no
regard for its safety or further
use. the rancid grease is then
picked up by fat blenders who mix
the animal and vegetable fats
together, stabilize them with
powerful antioxidants to prevent
further spoilage, and then sell the
blended products to pet food
companies. rancid, heavily
preserved fats are extremely
difficult to digest and can lead to
a host of animal health problems,
including digestive upsets,
diarrhea, gas, and bad breath. once
considered filler by the pet food
industry, the amount of grain
products included in pet food has
risen over the last decade as the
american population has focused its
attention away from consuming beef
and toward a healthier diet of
grains and vegetables. commonly two
of the top three pet food
ingredients are some form of grain
products. for instance, alpo's
beef flavored dinner lists ground
yellow corn, soybean meal, and
poultry byproduct meal as its top
three ingredients. 9 lives crunchy
meals lists ground yellow corn,
corn gluten meal, and poultry
byproduct meal as its top three
ingredients. of the top four
ingredients of purina's o.n.e.
dog formula -- chicken, ground
yellow corn, ground wheat, and corn
gluten meal -- two are corn-based
products from the same source. this
is an industry practice known as
splitting. when components of the
same whole ingredient are listed
separately (ground yellow corn and
corn gluten meal) it appears that
there is less corn than chicken,
even when the whole ingredient may
weigh more than the chicken. soy is
another common ingredient in many
pet foods. it is used by the
manufacturers to boost the claimed
protein content and add bulk so
that when animals eat a product
containing soy they will fell more
sated. tofu is suitable for humans,
but most forms of soybean do not
agree with a dog or cat's
digestive system. like many other
pet food ingredients, soy is
virtually unusable by an
animal's body. being obligate
carnivores, cats have little
ability to digest any nutrients
from soy. the problem is worse for
dogs because they lack the
essential amino acid to digest soy
products. soy has also been linked
to bloat and gas in many dogs.
additives and processing
pet food industry critics note that
many of the ingredients (such as
corn syrup and corn gluten meal)
used as humectants to prevent
oxidation also bind water molecules
in such a way that the food
actually sticks to the
animal's colon and may cause
blockage. blockage of the colon may
cause an increased risk of cancer
of the colon or rectum. two-thirds
of the pet food manufactured in the
united states contains synthetic
preservatives added by the
manufacturer. of the remaining
third, 90 percent includes
ingredients already stabilized by
synthetic preservatives. because
most pet food contains large
percentages of added fat, a
stabilizer is needed to maintain
the quality of the food. sodium
nitrite, often used as a coloring
agent, fixative, and preservative,
has the ability to combine with
natural stomach and food chemicals
(secondary amends) to create
nitrosamines, powerful
cancer-causing agents, according to
a consumer's dictionary of
food additives.
many pet foods advertised as
preservative-free do not contain
preservatives. almost all rendered
meats have synthetic preservatives
added as stabilizer, but
manufacturers aren't required
to list preservatives they
themselves haven't added.
premixed vitamin additives can also
contain preservatives. in the 1003
journal of the american veterinary
medical association, veterinarian
philip roudebush reported finding
low concentrations of synthetic
antioxidant preservatives in all
analyzed samples of products
labeled as chemical free or
all-natural. other types of
additives depend on whether the pet
food is semi-moist, dry or canned.
because semi-moist food contains
25-50 percent water, antimicrobial
preservatives must be used.
propylene glycol was frequently
used in cat food until it was
pulled in 1992 for causing a
variety of health problems.
processing greatly alters the
nutritional value of the food
ingredients. veterinarian r. l.
wysong states in rationale for
animal nutrition: processing is the
wild card in nutritional value that
is, by and large, simply ignored.
heating, freezing, dehydrating,
canning, extruding, pelleting,
baking and so forth, are so
commonplace that they are simply
thought of as synonymous with food
itself. because the ingredients
that pet food companies use are not
wholesome, and harsh manufacturing
practices destroy what little
nutritional value the food may have
had in the first place, the final
product must be fortified with
vitamins and minerals.
questionable nutrition
how, then, can any pet food be
guaranteed to be 100 percent
complete or nutritionally adequate?
as long as it meets the aafco
minimum standards, such a guarantee
can be on the label. yet in 1994,
feed tests conducted by the new
york state agriculture department
showed 7 percent of all pet foods
analyzed failed chemical analyses
for guaranteed nutrients. other
states report similar findings,
with failure of analyzed feed
ranging from to 12 percent. even if
a pet food meets aafco standards,
certain nutritional requirements
(for example, lysine) can vary
between species by as much as
seven-fold. although manufacturers
clam that millions of companion
animals can thrive on a diet
consisting of nothing by commercial
pet food, research and an
increasing number of veterinarians
implicate processed pet food as a
source of disease or as an
exacerbating agent for a number of
degenerative diseases. for example,
kidney disease is on of the top
three killers of companion animals.
according to plechner, the extra
protein and harsh ingredients of
many pet foods place an overload on
the kidneys. left untreated, the
toxic buildup leads to vomiting,
loss of appetite, uremic poisoning,
and death. wysong adds, in the last
few years, large statistical
studies have shown the link between
the diet (of processed foods) and a
variety of degenerative diseases,
including cancer, heart disease,
allergies, arthritis, obesity,
dental disease, etc. after
extensive research, the animal
protection institute (api)
published a pet food investigative
report to educate companion animal
care givers about pet food
ingredients, ingredient
definitions, labeling, and dietary
ailments resulting from processed
commercial pet food, including the
most commonly know brands. yet,
whether such food is purchased at
the supermarket, pet store, or from
a veterinarian, it makes little
difference in terms of the quality
-- only in the cost. since the
report was published earlier this
year, api has conducted more
research on holistic pet care and
pet food alternatives, but still
claims that the vast majority of
pet foods available on the market
today provide less that optimum
nutrition for companion animals.
it is sad to think that the food
provided by animal care givers to
their four-legged friends could be
hazardous to the animals';
health and longevity. care givers
should assume responsibility for
providing as healthful a diet as
possible for the animals in the
care. consumers should be informed:
speak with a holistic practitioner
or herbalist, or consult your
veterinarian (but be aware that a
veterinarian's knowledge of
nutrition may be limited to the two
weeks of nutrition he or she had
veterinary school 20 years ago).
although the ideal solution would
be for companion animals to be fed
only wholesome homemade and/or
vegetarian diets, this is not an
optician for everyone -- the cost
and time commitment is sometimes
prohibitive. by taking more
moderate steps, however, care
givers can still greatly improve
companion animals' diet and
quality of life.
edit: on carin rennings page she
lists recommended diets... she
really researched them and its
really helpful....go check it
out..smile
edit edit: sorry but it is still
happening to the person that said
its not... when i did my research i
asked around and found out that the
people that picked up the dead pets
from the vets offices that did not
want a private creamation actually
had a company come in and pick the
bodies up...really sick...valley
protien i think was the name of the
company...
i am not just trying to
"scare" people ...here is
more proof....read this article
just written!! and see for yourself
whats in your pet foods!!
http://www.petfoodreport.com/aboutp
etfood.htm#ingredients
edit: as far as ill timing and
such... i think its just the right
time!! people need to open their
eyes...so sorry you 2 feel that
way...smile
http://www.api4animals.org/facts.ph
p?p=359&more=1
Thanks for the research and letting others see it. Those who are new pet owners should know about it, if they don't already. |