rå kost>< tørkost

Artikler om hundemad

WHY DON’T DOGS LIVE FOREVER?

 .......Rodney Habib is an award winning pet nutrition blogger, podcast/radio show host, magazine writer, and, most importantly, a pet parent and advocate.

 His popular website and blog posts have allowed thousands of dog owners worldwide to join him in his search for answers and to share the discoveries he has made in natural dog care and trying to get his pets to ‘live forever’!

 Rodney believes strongly we all need to be the change we wish to see in the world, a value very much in alignment with our event and one we are proud to support and share for you all....






kortere liv af tørkost?

Hvis din hund er blandt de hunde, der får tørfoder, så er den ikke alene, for langt de fleste hunde får nemlig tørfoder. En ny undersøgelse peger imidlertid på, at tørfoderet forkorter hundenes levetid.

Det er en belgisk dyreakupunktør bag undersøgelsen, der hævder, at fodring med industrialiseret hundemad resulterer i allergier og fedme, som forkorter hundenes liv.

- De hunde, der var blevet fodret med forarbejdet købemad, døde tre år før de hunde, der fik hjemmelavet mad, fortæller Gerard Lippert til AFP om resultatet af undersøgelsen.

600 døde hunde
Årsagen til, at tørfoderet er dårligt for hundene, er i følge Gerard Lippert, at forarbejdningen af maden ødelægger vitaminer og næringsstoffer.

For at nå frem til konklusionen har Gerard Lippert undersøgt 600 hundelig og sammenholdt det med oplysninger om deres kost.

- Ligesom mennesker er vores kæledyr også blevet ofre for junkfood. I fortiden var hunde altædende rovdyr, men nu prøver vi at gøre dem til drøvtyggere, fortæller Gerard Lippert

Råt kød i stedet for tørfoder
På Dansk Barf Center bakker de op om Gerard Lipperts konklusion af, at tørfoder er dårligt for hundene. Barf står for Biologically Appropriate Raw Food, der frit oversat betyder biologisk egnet rå mad.

Kort sagt går barf-metoden ud på, at hundene skal spise råt kød ligesom deres forfædre: ulvene. Diæten er ikke en ny opfindelse, for ifølge tilhængerne er metoden opfundet af naturen selv inden hunden blev et kæledyr.

Dansk Barf Center introducerede metoden som de første i Danmark for ti år siden og forsker som de eneste i landet i denne særlige kost.

Allergi og dårlig ånde
Der findes endnu ingen videnskabelige beviser for, at fodring med råt kød er bedre for hundene, men på Dansk Barf Center i Århus mener bestyrer Christa Nolde, at hundenes tiltagende livsstilssygdomme taler for sig selv.

Det er et faktum, at flere og flere hunde lider af allergi og fedme. Hundenes forfædre, ulvene, lider imidlertid aldrig under livsstilssygdomme og allergi, og det er ifølge Christa Nolde en naturlig følge af, at ulvene spiser deres naturlige kost, hvorimod hundene spiser under det unaturlige tørfoder.

- Jeg synes, at man bør undre sig over, at den gennemsnitlige levealder for mange hunderacer er faldet mærkbart over de seneste 30 år. Man burde jo ellers forvente, at hundene lever længere nu, hvor vi er blevet så meget bedre til at behandle og operere dyr, fortæller Christa Nolde.

Hunde er rovdyr
De fleste kender nok den sure lugt af hundeånde. Netop den dårlige ånde, sur pels og allergi skyldes ifølge Christa Nolde, at hundene fodres med tørfoder.

- Hunde har rovdyrmaver, og derfor skal de også fodres derefter. At give hunde tørkost er lige så forkert som at give en hest kød, fortæller Christa Nolde og fortsætter:

- Og lige så vel som teenagere får bumser, hvis de kun spiser chips og chokolade, så får flere og flere hunde også hudproblemer på grund af tørfoderet.

Hun fremhæver endvidere, at hunde fodret med råt kød også laver mindre lorte, som et klart udtryk for, at hundene optager meget mere af maden.

Dyrlæge mangler beviser
På Aarhus Dyrehospital oplever dyrlæge Nanna Enemark ikke, at tørfoderet er skidt for hundene.

- Det er mit indtryk, at hovedparten af hunde på tørkost lever et godt liv, fortæller hun.

Hun understreger samtidig, at de på Aarhus dyrehospital heller ikke fraråder barf-fodring af hundene.

- Jeg kan ikke afvise, at der kan være hunde med særlige behov, eksempelvis allergi, som muligvis ville trives bedre uden tørkost, fortæller Nanna Enemark og fortsætter:

- Som dyrlæger har vi hverken beviser for, at hundene lever dårligt på tørkost, eller at de har bedre af barf, og indtil det er bevist, så kan vi ikke ændre vores anbefalinger, nemlig tørfoder.

 

Do you know what is in your pet food: Stray Dogs Used to Manufacture Pet Food & Animal Feed!

Laboratory DNA analysis confirms that dogs were used to make ingredients used in pet food and animal feed brands. An investigation in Spain uncovered an underground network of criminals involved in feed manufacture, tanneries, animal shelters, kennels involved in a heinous practice of using the corpses of sick and abandoned animals in the production of pet food. At least 40 pet food and animal feed companies are involved, with some products sold internationally.

Stray dogs, animals from sanctuaries, vets and zoos used for food

For years locals complained about the stench of rotting corpses coming from a warehouse used to store feed ingredients. Acting on inside information, officials in Spain uncovered an organized group involved in taking stray dogs, sick and abandoned pets from shelters, euthanized pets from veterinarians, diseased livestock, horses, zoo animals to be sold for making pet food and animal feed ingredients. At least eleven people are involved in the plot, which include transporters, tanneries and other companies linked to the animal world.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=633891806620864&set=a.363847493625298.95183.363725540304160&type=1&theater

15 tons of dead dogs

Last May, investigators found two warehouses in Spain that were being used as clandestine warehouses for storing the animal corpses. One contained 15 tons of dead animals, most of them dogs. Similar gruesome discoveries were made in other locations in Spain.

Investigators also uncovered a human society diverting the corpses of cats and dogs brought to them for proper disposal to the animal feed makers. In one kennel, three freezers filled with the bodies of 52 dogs, 15 cats, and vehicles loaded dead pets were believed destined for the feed mills. Numerous other “irregularities” in the management of dead animals in veterinary clinics, kennels and equestrian centers were also discovered.

Mass graves

The motive for the sickening scheme was the profit to be made from using dead pets to make feed while saving the cost of transporting the corpses to an incinerator. According to reports they took the bodies of dogs and other animals from the streets, animal sanctuaries, vets, zoos and farms, hell you-name-it awaiting incineration, and processed them instead into “animal protein” and “animal fat” that could be sold to pet food and animal feed manufacturers. When selling dead pets and diseased livestock or burning them to a crisp wasn’t possible or convenient, it is believed that thousands of animal corpses were buried in remote places in mass graves. Officials in Spain also blame the problem in the lack of oversight and the fuzzy classification of mixing of animal species sent to processing plants to make pet food ingredients.

Dogs in the food chain

Authorities in Spain have not ruled out the possibility that protein or fats from the carcasses may even have been used in some processed human food. Using stray dogs and sick animals, including those from zoos, puts the food chain at risk, according to molecular biologist Montse Espiñeira. It could cause a disaster similar to the “Mad Cow” crisis, she warned. It is “beyond all logic” to use dead dogs to feed cattle which is eventually eaten by humans, Espiñeira said.

Forced cannibalism

The revelation raises questions about all meat products, whether for humans or animals, especially given the same-species implications (otherwise known as forced cannibalism) of the ongoing Spanish investigation. Experts and criminals alike know that by the time meat becomes “animal protein”, “animal fat”, and “meat and bone meal” traceability all but breaks down, especially in the pet and animal feed markets where not much, if any, attention is paid to the crimes occurring in that market. Food safety officials have their hands full with sorting out the horse meat in the human food chain across the EU without being bothered about a few (tons) of stray dogs in Spain.

As Britain’s Food Standards Agency points out, it is aware of the investigation, but admits, ‘We are currently not testing food for meat from dogs. Our priority is to test beef products for gross contamination with horse meat because that is where the problem clearly is.’

British supermarkets have been selling horse meat to consumers for who knows how long without knowing it, so what else has been on sale? The public may never know for certain unless the government and consumer groups specifically test for it.

Source: Poisonedpets.com

Read more:

http://www.dogfoodadvisor.com/…/shocking-truth-about-dog-f…/

http://www.whatsinyourdogfood.com

http://www.bornfreeusa.org/facts.php?p=359&more=1

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/…/How-pet-food-killing-dog-feedi…

En belgisk undersøkelse ......

........viser at tørrfôr kan forkorte hundens liv med tre år.
 Det er en belgisk dyreakupunktør som står bak den sjokkerende undersøkelsen som hevder at hunder som får tørrmat lever kortere enn hunder som får hjemmelagd mat.
 – De hundene som ble fôret med ferdig kjøpemat, døde tre år tidligere enn hundene som fikk hjemmelaget mat, sier Gerard Lippert til nyhetsbyrået AFP om resultatet av undersøkelsen.
 – Ofre for junkfood
 Årsaken til at tørrfôr ikke er bra for hunden, er at viktige vitaminer og næringsstoffer blir borte under prepareringen av maten.
 Hunder som får mye eller kun tørrfôr, kan utvikle allergier og bli overvektige. Det er dette som forkorter hundens levetid.
 Gerard Lippert har undersøkt 600 døde hunder.
– Akkurat som mennesker har våre kjæledyr blitt ofre for junkfood. I fortida var hunder altetende rovdyr, men nå prøver vi å gjøre dem om til drøvtyggere, forklarer Lippert.
 Tilbake til naturdietten
 Hundematindustrien ble født i England da James Spratt produserte verdens første hundekjeks i 1860. Nå, 150 år etter, er det den naturlige maten som igjen er i fokus.
 BARF eller Biologically Appropriate Raw Food, fritt oversatt til biologisk egnet rå mat, er en type dyrediett som består av rått kjøtt, bein og organer. Dette kostholdet skal få hunder og katter tilbake til sin opprinnelige diett, og maksimere levetid og styrke deres helse.
 – Hunder bør ikke spise kokt eller behandlet mat. I stedet bør kjæledyret ditt spise mat som ligner det hundenes ville forfedre spiser. Dette inkluderer bein, fett og kjøtt, står det på barfworld.com.
Dårlig pels og ånde
 Ved Barf-senteret i Århus støtter de Lipperts undersøkelse. Dansk Barf Center introduserte Barf-metoden for ti år siden i Danmark, og er de eneste i landet som forsker på dette kostholdet, skriver Ekstra Bladet.
 Leder Christa Nolde sier at hundenes livsstilssykdommer taler for seg.
– Jeg synes man bør undre seg over at den gjennomsnittlige levealder for mange hunderaser har falt merkbart de siste 30 årene. Vi bør jo forvente at hunder lever lenger, nå som vi har blitt så flinke til å behandle og operere dyr, sier Nolde til avisa.
 Hun forteller at hunder som lever av tørrfôr får dårlig ånde, dårlig pels og allergi.

Diverse om hundefoder

Foderstoffer og deres sammensætning, og jeg tror faktisk godt, at jeg kan forklare hvorfor hunde tåler nogle kulhydrater bedre end andre. Svaret ligger i, at kulhydrat ikke bare er kulhydrat. Groft set kan man dele dem i korte, letnedbrydelige (sukkerarter) og lange, svært nedbrydelige kulhydrater, cellulose. De korte er dem hunde, ulve og især bjørne gerne spiser hvis de får mulighed for det. De findes især i frugt og bær, og i mindre grad i grønsager. De lange findes derimod i korn, buske og træer. Ingen af de førnævnte rovdyr spiser disse typer. Alligevel er det netop disse typer der især findes i hundefoder. Nogle vil måske indvende, at hvedemel har meget kulhydrat, og de har ret, men det er jo ikke det hvede vi mennesker spiser, som bliver til hundemad. Det er til gengæld de små, dårlige kerner, hvor indholdet af cellulose dominerer. Ingen landmand med respekt for sig selv ville fodre med de kornprodukter der hældes i hundemad, og det siger vel egentligt det hele. Hvad angår ris. De ris vi ser på vore breddegrader er polerede. Der er kun det "hvide" kulhydrat tilbage. Derfor virker det også som skånekost

N år et fodermærke bliver opkøbt at et firma som dækker over produktion af mange forskellige ting lige fra rengøringsmiddel til cornflakes. Jeg har interesseret mig for hundeernæring i mange år efterhånden og har bla. været til et foredrag med en dyrlæge fra Royal Canin. Han startede ud med at opremse alle de gode proteinkilder (okse, kylling, lam mm.) for derefter at fortælle at Royal Canin bruger sojaprotein. Manden har lige fortalt hvad der er godt og siger så, at det bruger de ikke…. Det er da også virkeligt nok. Man skal ikke være raketforsker for at regne ud at det hænger sammen med profit og at det ganske enkelt er billigere at bruge sojaprotein. Hvis man så gider og har interesse for det kan man sætte sig lidt mere ind i tingene og finde ud af at f.eks. sojaprotein ikke bare er sojaprotein. Tit når man læser indholdet på en sæk foder står der jo mange fine ting, men ofte er det ”affald” fra f.eks. sojaproteinet eller majsen eller hvad det nu kan være som er tilovers fra produktionen af menneskemad som bruges i hundefoder. Altså den del af ingrediensen som har den dårligste kvalitet og udnyttelse, og som mange hunde reagerer på med allergi. Dette er for mig også ret virkeligt, men jeg har jo også studeret i det længe og konsekvensen er at mine egne hunde får råt foder, så jeg er helt sikker på hvad de får. Udover tvivlsomme ingredienser er der desværre mange foderproducenter som bruger konserveringsmidler som har en direkte indflydelse på hundenes evne til at formere sig og kan påvirke deres arvemateriale.

 

 Mht. til for eksempel majs i hundefoder, så er der stor forskel på kvaliteten af majsen. Nogle gange er det bare "majs affald" fra anden produktion. Altså den dårligste kvalitet af ingrediensen. - eller man har anvendt de ikke helt modnede majs fordi de er lettere at forarbejde til mel (det har jeg fra folk som arbejde med udvikling af hundefoder). Umodne majs har en dårligere optagelse end modnede majs. Som sagt tidligere: sojaprotein er ikke altid bare sojaprotein og det samme kan være gældende for de øvrige ingredienser. Det er umuligt at gennemskue alene ud fra ingredienslisten.

Uanset hvor meget du blender modnet majs ændrer det ikke på cellulosen. Det er som at valse korn til hesten. Det gøres for at give en større overfade, og dermed en lidt bedre udnyttelse, da de korte kulhydrater bliver lettere tilgængelige.

De kan dø på sigt, af at spise foder konserveret med BHT, BHA eller etoxiqin (staves?) er et faktum, da disse stoffer er kræftfremkaldende og forbudt i menneske mad.

'Ingredienserne bliver nævnt i rækkefølge efter vægt. De første fire ingredienser er som regel ca. 90% af hvad foderet indeholder.

Rækkefølgen kan også være misledende på andre måder: Lad os sige at kød står øverst og får dig til at tro, at det er hovedingrediensen, kig igen. Hvis det bliver fulgt af hvedemel, ris, majsflager osv., kan de samlede kornprodukter let fylde meget mere end kødet - og foderet ville måske være mere velegnet som hestefoder end som hundemad.

Lad os starte med at gennemgå hvad tingene betyder:

Kød eller kød baseret - "kød" er det rene kød fra slagtede køer, grise, får eller geder. "Frisk" kylling eller kød, nævnt som første eller anden ingrediens indeholder ca. 70% vand. Da ingredienserne er nævnt efter vægt, ville det være langt nede på listen, hvis det blev dehydreret.

Kødmel - afpudset kød fra dyr. Det må ikke indeholde hår, hove, blod, horn, hud eller maveindhold. Der må ikke være tilføjet noget fremmed materiale og det må ikke indeholde mere end 14% ufordøjelige rester eller mere end 11% ufordøjeligt rå protein.

Fjerkræ biprodukt - hakket, afpudset og rene stumper fra fjerkræ, som uudviklede æg, halse, fødder, indvolde. Det indeholder ikke fjer.

Tørret æg - hele tørrede fjerkrææg.

Animalske biprodukter  består af afpudset dyrevæv der ikke passer i nogen af ovenstående kategorier. Må ikke indeholde hove, ekstra hår, horn, maveindhold eller fremmede materialer.

Fiskemel - rent, tørret og hakket fisk, med eller uden olie.

Tørret sukkerroemasse - den masse, der bliver tilovers, når sukkeret er ekstraheret fra sukkerroen. Bliver brugt til at gøre afføringen fastere, har ingen ernæringsmæssig værdi.

Konserveringsmidler:

BHA og BHT - BHA er butyl hydroxyanisol. BHT er butyl hydroxytoluen. Begge dele er blevet associeret med leverskader, fosterskader, og stofskifteproblemer. Der er også spørgsmål om cancer.

Ethoxyquin - dette konserveringsmiddel har været den mest diskuterede ingrediens i hundemad i de sidste mange år. Det er et kemisk konserveringsmiddel, der er blevet meget brugt for at forebygge fordærvelse. Det bliver påstået at ethoxyquin har givet kræft, lever, nyre og skjoldbrusk kirtels dysfunktion, fertilitetsproblemer og mere, men påstandene er ikke blevet bevist endnu.

Natrium Nitrat - bruges både som farvestof (rødt) og som konserveringsmiddel. Når brugt til konservering udvikler det kræftfremkaldende stoffer kaldet nitrosaminer.

Vitaminerne C og E - naturligt forekommende stoffer der bliver brugt som naturlige konserveringsmidler. Vitaminer fungerer som antioxidanter og forebygger iltningen af fedtyrer, vitaminer og nogle andre næringsstoffer. Vitamin C har en meget kort virkningstid, vitamin E´s virkningstid er lidt længere. Der tilsættes enten direkte vitamin E, der forebygger oxidationen af foderet, mens der også kan tilsættes en foreløber for vitamin E, der først aktiveres som vitamin E, når hunden indtager foderet. Omdannelsen efter indtagelse sikrer at hunden får det vitamin E den behøver.

De bliver brugt ret ofte som konserveringsmidler, da mange hundeejere er bekymrede over kemiske konserveringsmidler. Vitaminer har en meget kort virke tid, især når posen engang er åbnet. Så kig på sidste salgsdato og køb ikke for store poser.

Salt bliver også tit tilføjet som et konserveringsmiddel. For meget salt kan irritere fordøjelsessystemet og kan give ubalance i mineralbalancen.

Til sidst - kvalitet er vigtigt, tilstedeværelsen af nogle eller alle de ingredienser der normalt findes i hundemad, borger ikke automatisk for kvaliteten. Ingredienserne skal også være der i den rigtige blanding og af god kvalitet - både før og efter tilberedning.

Farve og smag:

Meget af den kunstige farve brugt i hundemad er blevet beskyldt for potentielle problemer. Husk farven bliver ikke tilføjet for hundens skyld. Det er for hundeejerens skyld - for dig, forbrugeren!

Sukker er ikke en ingrediens ret mange ville forvente at finde i hundemad, men noget foder indeholder så meget som 15% sukker. Sukkeret tilføjer smag og fugt, og hjælper mod bakteriel forurening. Hunde har ikke behov for så meget sukker, det kan stresse bugspytkirtelen m.m. og være skyld i sukkersyge.

                                *************************************

Kilde: Earl Wolfe: "Understanding Dog Foods and Dog Food Labels" - her gengives også deklarationerne fra de fleste hundefoder typer.

Skribent: ukendt

http://www.forsoegsdyrenes-vaern.dk/

Hvad er der i posen med tørfoder?

Ifølge producenterne af dyrefoder lutter gode råvarer, som opfylder alle hunde og kattes ernæringsbehov. Og noget tyder på, at danske dyreejere tror på producenternes ord - i Danmark blev der i 2001 angiveligt købt for cirka 1 milliard kr. hunde- og kattefoder.

En del af produkterne produceres af amerikanske koncerner. Reglerne siger, at importeret foder skal indeholde en dansksproget varedeklaration. Men der er ingen faste regler for produktion af dyrefoder eller for foderets indhold. På pakninger under 10 kg er det f.eks. tilladt kun at skrive »Tilsat antioxidant« eller »Tilsat konserverings-middel«, uden at specificere hvilket stof der er brugt.
De færreste dyreejere véd, at dyrefoder-industrien er en forlængelse af fødevare-industrien og det industrielle landbrug.

For disse industrier er produktionen af dyrefoder en måde at tjene penge på dét, der er uanvendeligt til menneskeføde og betragtes som affald. Slagteaffald som indvolde, yvere og spiserør, selvdøde eller aflivede dyr, og korn der er uegnet til menneskeføde, anvendes i dag i produktionen af foder til kæledyr.
Set udfra en kommerciel synsvinkel, så er dyrefoder-industrien en ideel partner for de multinationale selskaber, der producerer fødevarer. Til eksempel er Nestlé, Heinz og Mars nogle af de helt store dyrefoderproducenter (se boksen). Andre producenter er Procter & Gamble, Colgate-Palmolive og Nutro. De fødevareproducerende, multinationale koncerner står hver dag med store mængder spildprodukter, som ikke umiddelbart kan anvendes til menneskeføde. Ved fremstilling af dyrefoder kan de kapitalisere disse: de tjener penge på affaldsprodukter, som de førhen måtte kassere. De hundredvis af dyrefoder-mærker, der findes på markedet, vidner om, at mange hér har set et indtjeningspotentiale.

Er dyrefoder baseret på kødaffald sund kost for dyrene? Det hersker der uenighed om. Nogle dyrlæger hævder, at dyr der fodres med affald fra det industrielle landbrug, har en forøget risiko for at få kræft og andre degenerative sygdomme. F.eks. bliver de hormoner, som man i USA giver landbrugsdyrene for at de skal vokse hurtigere, blive federe på kortere tid eller forøge mælkeproduktionen, ikke nødvendigvis ødelagt ved de forskellige forarbejdningsmetoder såsom opvarmning, kogning og presning (til kugler).
Har det interesse for Danmark, hvor det ikke er tilladt at anvende hormoner til husdyr? Ja, for en del af det foder danskerne køber er af ikke-dansk oprindelse.
* ifølge forslag til EU-Parlamentet af 12/12/2001 - KOM (2001) 748

Dyrefedt
Når man åbner en pose tørfoder til dyr, stiger der en stærk, sødlig-vammel lugt op. Det er som hovedregel lugten af afsmeltet dyrefedt - bl.a. animalsk affaldsfedt fra restauranter. Affaldsfedt fra restauranter samles ofte i plastictønder, hvor det alt efter nationale regler kan blive opbevaret i op til flere uger under varierende temperaturer, inden det afhentes.
De firmaer der lever af at forarbejde blandt andet sådanne former for fedt, tilsætter antioxidanter for at hindre yderligere harskning og sælger det færdige fedt til producenter af dyrefoder. Fedtet sprøjtes bl.a. direkte på foderkuglerne for at give de som regel ildelugtende kugler, en mere salgbar lugt. Fedtet kan også fungere som bindemiddel for andre stoffer, der skal forbedre produktets lugt.

Hvede, peanutskaller, majs, soya og andre vegetabilske proteiner
Mængden af kornprodukter i foder til kæledyr er steget i de seneste 10 år. Hvor foderindustrien førhen anså korn for fyldstof, har det i dag erstattet en stor del af kødet. Den mængde næringsstof dyrene får ud af kornprodukterne afhænger som sagt i høj grad af, hvor let optagelige de er. Mængden og typen af kulhydrater i dyrefoder er bestemmende for, hvor værdifulde næringsstoffer dyret reelt får. Hunde og katte kan optage de fleste af de kulhydrater, der findes i f.eks. hvide ris. Derimod kan de være ude af stand til at optage op til 20% af andre former for kornsorter. Dyrenes mulighed for at optage næringsstoffer fra hvede, bønner og peanutskaller er ringe, og næringsstofferne i kartofler og kornprodukter er langt sværere at optage end dem i ris. Ingredienser som f.eks. peanutskaller anvendes alene som fyld eller fiberstoffer og har ikke nogen næringsværdi af betydning.
På dåsen eller posen med dyrefoder står de anvendte ingredienser anført efter mængde.
Da katte er kødædere - de må spise kød for at få opfyldt visse fysiologiske behov - kan man undre sig over, at man fodrer dem med kornbaserede produkter. Svaret på det er, at korn er en meget billigere »energiressource« end kød. Men der skal gives meget større mængder af foderet for at opfylde kattens ernæringsbehov.
Soya er en anden ret almindelig ingrediens i dyrefoder og bruges som protein- og energiressource. Producenterne anvender det også som fyld, fordi et dyr umiddelbart vil føle sig hurtigere mæt. Hos nogle hunde kan soya give problemer med luft i tarmsystemet, medens andre hunde fordøjer det uden problemer.
I vegetabilsk kæledyrsfoder anvendes soya som proteinkilde.
Tilsætningsstoffer og konserveringsmidler
Der tilsættes generelt en del kemikalier til det industrielt fremstillede dyrefoder. Det gøres for at forbedre foderets smag, holdbarhed, udseende og karakteristika. De har ingen ernæringsmæssig værdi. Der anvendes tilsætningsstoffer for at binde vand og fedt, antioxidanter for at forhindre fedt i at blive harsk og kunstig farve og lugt for at gøre produktet mere attraktivt for dyreejerne og mere tiltalende for kæledyrene.
I de sidste 40 år er antallet af tilsætningsstoffer til dyrefoder steget markant. Det skyldes producenternes ønske om at øge foderets holdbarhed. Mad på dåse har gennemgået en proces der gør, at det ikke er nødvendigt inden påfyldning at tilføre det så mange antioxidanter som til tørfoderet. En del forhandlere af råvarer til dyrefoder tilfører nogle antioxidanter for at forhindre forrådnelse, og senere tilfører producenten af det færdige produkt andre antioxidanter. Det gør han for at sikre, at tørfoderet har den lange holdbarhed som transport og lang opbevaringstid på lagre eller hos forhandler kræver. Tilsætningsstofferne, der skal sikre den lange holdbarhed, kan være syntetiske eller »naturlige«. De syntetiske kan være butylated hydroxyanisale (BHA) og butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), propyl gallate, propylene glycol og ethoxyquin. For disse stoffer er der ringe viden om deres virkning på længere sigt for hunde og katte, som indtager stofferne hver dag hele livet. Der er mistanke om, at BHA og BHT kan give allergilignende symptomer som høfeber, nældefeber, astma og hudlidelser.

Når man foretager foderforsøg på dyr, så plejer man at benytte de såkaldte metabolisme-bure. Det er bure, der udover generelt at være meget, meget små, er udstyret med en metalrist i bunden, så urin og fæces kan opsamles i en bakke under buret. Man foretager så forskellige målinger på dyrenes efterladenskaber, for at se hvor meget dyrene optager og udskiller, af de foderemner de har spist. Desuden tages der blodprøver. Dyrene bliver sat ind i buret, får det foder man ønsker at teste, hvorefter de skal forblive i buret til de har besørget.
Hverken hunde eller katte bryder sig om at stå på perforeret metalgulv, og specielt katte vægrer sig ved at skulle besørge et sted, hvor de ikke kan komme til at skrabe eller grave – hvilket jo er et instinkt hos katte. Vi har fået oplyst, at katte tit »holder sig« i op til 22-23 timer (og dermed sidder i metabolisme-buret ligeså længe), fordi de ikke vil besørge i det bur.
Nogle foderproducenter prøver at få det til at fremstå, som om foderforsøg er ganske harmløse. At der blot er tale om, at dyret får lov at vælge mellem madskål A eller B. Men det er ikke kun om dyret kan lide maden, der er af betydning for producenten. Det må også til en vis grad kontrolleres, at dyret ikke får for store koncentrationer af f.eks. tilsætningsstoffer eller andre emner. Derfor foretages ovennævnte forsøg

 

 

Forsøgsdyrenes Værn foretog en undersøgelse af hvilke færdigfoder-fabrikater der forhandles i de danske super-markeder. Vi besøgte 7 forretningskæder og fandt følgende hunde-/kattemad på hylderne:

Friskies (Nestlé)
Felix, Go cat, Gourmet,
Vital balance, Winalot

Hill's (Colgate-Palmolive)
Science Diet
Prescription Diet

Procter & Gamble
Iams, Eukanuba

Leo Animal Health (Arovit)
Specific, Specicare, Paw

MasterFood (Mars)
Whiskas, Cesar, Kitekat,
Pedigree, Sheba, Trill

Heinz Pet Products
9Lives, Nature's Recipe,
Reward

Nutro
Max, Natural Choice, Gourmet Classic

Skriv til de pågældende firmaer og spørg dem, hvorledes de afprøver deres dyremad og hvor-ledes de undersøger foderets påvirkning af lever, nyrer m.m. 

TØRFODER TIL HUNDE - EN TIKKENDE BOMBE?

 

Af LILLIAN GRØNBÆK, Naturterapeut og Homøopat

Jeg har opdaget, at hundetørfoder indeholder visse tilsætningsstoffer, som jeg blev chokeret over var tilladt. Jeg gik i gang med at undersøge dette og fik samlet en masse materiale. Efterhånden som jeg kom mere og mere ind i stoffet, blev jeg klar over, hvor lidt vi forbrugere vidste omkring dette emne og jeg bestemte mig for, at give de oplysninger videre jeg havde samlet.
De der læser dette og har hund, har således mulighed for at vælge fra eller til hvad hundens kost angår, men man kan jo ikke tage en bestemmelse om noget, man er uvidende om. Hunden er afhængig af os mennesker.
Det må være enhver hundeejers ansvar og interesse at deres hund trives både fysisk og Psykisk. Oplysninger om tilsætningsstoffer i vor egen kost er betydelig lettere at få fat på, evt. gennem E-nummer listen (positivlisten), medierne og varedeklarationer. Forskningen indenfor tilsætningsstoffer er også meget større, når det angår menneskets kost.

Noget af det jeg har skrevet kan måske godt virke som tørt stof. Jeg har brugt direkte citeringer mange steder i denne artikel, for der ikke skal opstå misforståelser.

De tre tilsætningsstoffer jeg kommer ind på er følgende:
· Butylhydroxyanisol (BHA) E 320
· Butylhydroxyoluen ( BHT) E 321
· Ethoxyquin 

De er alle kemiske fenoler, der tilsættes tørfuldfoder som antioxidanter.
BHA eller BHT findes i det meste tørfuldfoder der kan købes i forretningerne og Ethoxyquin er tilsat det meste tørfuldfoder som dyrlægerne sælger.
Disse tre kemiske fenoler er tilsat foderet, for at det fedt foderet indeholder ikke skal harske.
Der må i alt tilsættes op til 150 mg. Pr. kg. Foder. Der er fuldt lovligt at tilsætte disse kemiske fenoler, som vore hunde får dag efter dag i foderet. At det er legalt, er nok det mest chokerende.

BHA og BHT er blevet indskrænket så meget i menneskeføde, at vi praktisk talt ikke ser dem på varedeklarationerne mere. Ethoxyquin har aldrig været tilladt som antioxidant i menneskets kost og findes ikke på positivlisten.

Der er blevet foretaget forsøg med BHT på mus og rotter over 2 generationer, hvor der er blevet påvist følgende:
Ved fodring af mus og rotter op til 2 år, med føde tilsat BHT, får dyrene nedsat legemsvægt, forøget levervægt, leversvulster, en ringere fødeoptagelse og fødeudnyttelse og effekt på lunger.

Adskillige dyreforsøg tyder på at BHT kan virke som tumor-promoter, d.v.s. et stof, der kan fremme carciogeners (cancer) effekt. (Rostrou l982)
BHT virker som promoter (igangsætter for azoxymethan-inducerende tumorer i tarmkanalen hos rotter ( Weisburger, Ewarts og Wenk l977). Ligeledes virker BHT på nyrefunktionen. Der er fundet ødelagt nyrevæv og tumorer. Der er også fundet påvirkning af skjoldbruskkirtelen sammenlignelig med struma. Jo højere procent fedtstof i foderet der består af polyumættede fedtsyrer, jo større er igangsætterorganismen på cancer. BHT kan også gribe ind i immunforsvaret og svække dette. Det jeg har nævnt her, er kun et uddrag af de åbenbare dårligdomme, der har vist sig ved forsøg af rotter og mus ved brug af BHT. BHA ligger på samme linje som BHT. Dette er uddrag fra Publikation nr. 109, august l985, fra Statens Levnedsmiddelinstitut.

I Jesper Toft´s " E nummer guiden" står et rødt spørgsmålstegn ved BHA og BHT (uddrag citeret) "Betyder at tilsætningsstoffet kan forårsage problemer, skønt det er officielt godkendt".

Jeg har gode venner, der har hundeopdræt og som virkelig gør meget ud af deres hunde, både fysisk og psykisk. De har ligesom jeg brugt tørfoder i god tro med kemiske fenoler. I kraft af mit arbejde har jeg en stor indfaldsvinkel til især hunde, gennem de mennesker der opsøger mig. Jeg har efterhånden gjort den erfaring, at alt for mange mennesker klager over deres hunds velbefindende, og opdagede at størstedelen af hundene blev fodret med tørkost.

Jeg har gjort følgende iagttagelser:
Min egen hund døjede med en hårdnakket forhudsbetændelse og var konstant rødgul på dens hvide bug. Den havde bare og irriterede røde pletter omkring munden, rindende øjne og en pels der efterhånden syntes ret mat. Den havde skrækkelig dårlig ånde og det var ikke fra dens tænder, der er helt uden belægninger.
Mine kennelvenner og mange af mine klienter der har hunde, som fik tørkost, klagede mere og mere over forskellige gener, såsom hudkløe, eksem, dårlige trædepuder, svamp, dårlige maver m.v.
Efter at vi, der havde problemer med vore hunde, begyndte at give hjemmelavet, rigtig sammensat mad til dyrene, begyndte der at ske noget positivt. Den første reaktion var en voldsom fældning af både underuld og overpels. Den Nye pels der fremkom var af en hel anden struktur og blank og fin. Dyrene blev meget mere livlige og de allerfleste dårligdomme de forskellige hunde havde, forsvandt stille og roligt hen ad vejen.

Jeg har fået oplyst, at det slagterriaffald der går til tørfoder på hundefoderfabrikerne, lovligt må indeholde følgende:
Benmel, Selvdøde dyr og dyr der har fået medicin og herunder også antibiotika. Jeg har også fået oplyst at alt bliver renset inden brug til foder. Hvordan mon de bærer sig ad ?
Denne kategori af slagterriaffald må ikke anvendes til dåsefoder, har jeg fået at vide. I dåsemad er det heller ikke nødvendigt at tilsætte nogen form for kunstige antioxidanter.

Hvad angår Ethoxyquin i dyrlægernes tørfoder, har jeg ikke kunne finde særlig meget materiale om det. Jeg har fået oplyst gennem plantedirektoratet at der aldrig er blevet lavet forsøg i Danmark med Ethoxyquin, som der er blevet med BHA og BHT. Ethoxyquin må heller ikke bruges som tilsætningsstof til menneskeføde.
Men i en artikel som en Mrs. Elain Campbell fra USA har skrevet ( hun har en meget stor kennel ), fortæller hun om nogle af de samme problemer, som jeg har nævnt med hundene. Ydermere beskriver hun også de problemer, der er omkring hendes hvalpekuld, hvor de mislykkedes gang på gang og hvor hun fik misdannede hvalpe. Mange af de gener Mrs. Campbell havde med sine hunde, forsvandt efter hendes udsagn også ved foderskift, hvor hun ikke brugte foder med Ethoxyquin.
Man finder så godt som intet tørfoder på hylderne i forretningerne, der ikke indeholder Ethoxyquin, BHA eller BHT, enten det er fugle- fiske-katte- eller hundefoder.

I publikation nr. 109, august 1985 fra Statens Levnedsmiddelinstitut, står som afslutning af disse dyreforsøg, der er foretaget følgende:
Toksikologisk vurdering af BHT, der opsummerer og diskuterer de fundne biologiske effekter. JECFA (ekspertgruppe der vurderer og fastsætter ADI (anbefalet daglig dosering), har i l983 vurderet 50 mg. BHT pr. kg. Legemsvægt (1000 ppm) som no-effect level. Nyere toksikologiske forsøg sætter imidlertid spørgsmål ved denne værdi, idet lavere doser til rotter har vist biologiske/toksikologiske effekter af et "no effect level" og en ADI er stadig usikker.

De mængder af BHT der ifølge det daglige forbrug af levnedsmidler kan genfindes i menneskeligt væv, er af samme størrelsesorden som de koncentrationer, der har givet biokemisk effekter i in vitro studier også med humane celler ("Kohl l984"). Føjes hertil usikkerheden i vurderingen af BHT´s mulige påvirkning af mennesker, især som promoter (igangsætter) for latente neoplasmer bør man imidlertid efter instituttet for toksikologi´s opfattelse tilgodese en begrænsning af brugen ved kommende regulering. Ved en fremtidig anvendelse af BHT bør der lægges vægt på alternative antioxidanter, der kan udøve den ønskede teknologiske effekt uden BHT bivirkninger.

Hvorfor tillades noget sådant i vore kæledyrs foder, når det er så væsentligt indskrænket til os mennesker. Dyrene kan bestemt ikke have bedre af det i deres organismer end os. Der er andre måder at konservere fedt på, bl.a. ved brug af C- og E- vitaminer.
Forslag til hundefoderfabrikanterne: Vacuumpak i 1 kg. Poser og saml 10 vacuumposer i én sæk. Hundefoder behøver ikke at kunne holde sig i 18 måneder, efter det er åbnet, det er længe brugt inden. Desuden synes jeg også der er alt for dårlige varedeklarationer på dyrefoder. På meget af det, står der kun tilsat "antioxidanter og evt. E. nummer". Der er ingen forklaring på hvad denne antioxidant er, eller hvor meget der er tilsat af disse kemiske fenoler. Men det er igen fuldt legalt efter loven.

Jeg påstår ikke, at BHA, BHT eller Ethoxyquin er skyld i vore hundes dårlige tilstand rundt omkring, men man må undre sig. Det er min overbevisning, at tvivlen må komme forbrugeren tilgode.
I Danmark er der ca. 1 million kæledyr (hunde og katte) og i dag er vore kæledyr knyttet meget stærkere til os end førhen. I de allerfleste hjem i dag er de en del af familien og familiemønstret. Har vore dyr det ikke godt, er vi heller ikke godt tilpas. Jeg har mange gange set, at det kan være en kostelig affære med dyrlægeregninger, hvis vore hunde bliver syge. Efter hvad jeg personligt har observeret, tror jeg, at der kunne undgås en hel del dyrlægeregninger, hvis man skifter til foder uden kemiske fenoler.
Jeg syntes det må være i alles interesse at tage brugen af disse 3 kemiske fenoler op til vurdering, bruge naturlige antioxidanter eller finde en anden løsning, hvor det ikke er nødvendigt at tilsætte kemiske fenoler overhovedet.

Af LILLIAN GRØNBÆK, Naturterapeut og Homøopat

 

 

what is rendering?

 Ever wonder what happens to the dogs and cats that don’t get adopted at shelters? Ever wonder what happens to the squirrels, rats, etc. that are exterminated from homes and other properties because they are a "nuisance"? Or road kill wildlife? Did you ever think what's your dog really eating? The following article is shocking… but true!

 

What is RENDERING?

 

Rendering is a process that converts waste animal tissue into stable, value-added materials. Rendering can refer to any processing of animal products into more useful materials, or more narrowly to the rendering of whole animal fatty tissue into purified fats like lard or tallow. Rendering can be carried out on an industrial, farm, or kitchen scale.

 

The majority of tissue processed comes from slaughterhouses, but also includes restaurant grease and butcher shop trimmings, expired meat from grocery stores, and the carcasses of euthanized and dead animals from animal shelters, zoos and veterinarians. This material can include the fatty tissue, bones, and offal, as well as entire carcasses of animals condemned at slaughterhouses, and those that have died on farms, in transit, etc. The most common animal sources are beef, pork, sheep, and poultry.

 

Rendering plants often also handle other materials, such as slaughterhouse blood, feathers and hair, but do so using processes distinct from true rendering.

 

Unfortunately… as hard as it is to believe… the final “product” of this grisly process is sold as a source of protein and fat for making animal feeds.

 

That’s right… food ingredients to be fed to chickens, pigs, cattle… and you guessed it… dogs & cats!

 

The Shocking Truth!!!

Every day, hundreds of rendering plants across America ship thousands of pounds of this recycled garbage to ranches, farms, feed lots… and pet food manufacturers.

 

Each batch of rendered product is labeled… according to its dominant animal source. That’s why on a dog & cat food label you’ll see so many ingredients that look like these…

◾Poultry by-product meal

◾Meat by-product meal

◾Fish meal

◾ Animal fat

 

http://www.youtube.com/embed/UbN6u7r0WFU

 

http://www.youtube.com/embed/bAZrpWzAzww

 

All are products of the rendering process.

 

This same complex system which converts waste into animal feed has also evolved into a recycling nightmare. That’s because rendering plants are unavoidably processing toxic waste, too.

 

 

Here’s how…

 

*The dead animals are frequently accompanied by a host of unwanted ingredients. Pesticides enter the rendering process via tainted livestock.

 

*Fish oil is commonly contaminated with mercury and other heavy metals.

 

*Dead pets are frequently thrown into the grinder with their flea collars still attached. Insecticide-laced patches found on the skin of slaughtered cattle are also carelessly added to the mix.

 

*Antibiotics and other pharmaceuticals follow livestock directly into the soup. And drugs given to euthanize pets have been regularly found in the rendered product.

 

*Unwanted metal contaminants can be traced to a variety of sources including pet collars, ID tags, surgical pins, and needles.

 

*Even plastics end up getting into the process.

 

http://www.youtube.com/embed/03jOl1xG084

 

http://www.youtube.com/embed/g9DTzDfYMxo

 

……there is not the end…..

 

Every day, out-of-date supermarket meats as well as spoiled fish and poultry arrive by the truckload… right in their original Styrofoam trays and shrink wrap. There’s simply no time for the tedious task of unwrapping each individual package of the many thousands of rejected products.

 

Plastic cattle ID lags, pesticide patches and even the green waste disposal bags containing pets from veterinarians are tossed directly into the pit.

 

As you can see, literally all of it (plastic, paper, cardboard, and whatever) goes right into the rendering machine.

 

By now, you must be starting to figure it all out. Much of what goes into dog food is simply what’s left over after the processing of human food. It’s what’s commonly classified as “unfit for human consumption”.

 

Unfit for Human Consumption, however: Legal for Pet Food!!!

 

Here’s a short list of some of the unsavory raw materials I’ve already mentioned… plus a few others. All of the following ingredients are appalling… yet each can be lawfully used to make dog food:

◾Slaughterhouse waste (organs, heads, hooves, beaks, feet)

◾Bread and cereal rejects (cobs, stalks, mill sweepings)

◾Contaminated grain middling

◾Dying, diseased and disabled farm animals

◾Road kill (deer, skunks, and raccoons)

◾Distiller fermentation waste

◾Spoiled supermarket food

◾Dead zoo animals

◾Restaurant grease

◾ Euthanized cats and dogs

 

The pet food industry can be… at least in part… a sinister waste disposal vehicle for the human food manufacturers… and a way to profit from its own garbage. Many companies practice legal witchcraft by magically turning their trash… into cash!!!

 

Sources: Wikipedia/ Dog Food Advisor by Mike Sagman

 

Other very informative articles:

 

http://www.occupyforanimals.org/rendering-the-grotesque-and-disrespectful-way-we-continue-to-exploit-animals-objectify-them-and-commodify-them-even-in-death1.html

http://www.occupyforanimals.org/you-and-your-cat-and-mad-cow-disease1.html

http://www.jlhweb.net/BOSS/think.html

http://www.petmd.com/blogs/fullyvetted/2010/oct/rendered_barbiturates#.UVByWZ3D9jo

http://www.dogbreedinfo.com/care/renderingplantscatsdogs.htm

http://www.mad-cow.org/~tom/cats_bse_rend.html

http://rense.com/general70/dead.htm

http://healthypets.mercola.com/sites/healthypets/archive/2012/04/11/pet-food-contains-poultry.aspx

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0106-03.htm

En amerikansk artikel om tørkost

WHAT’S REALLY IN PET FOOD REPORT 

Get The Facts:

What’s Really in Pet Food

Plump whole chickens, choice cuts of beef, fresh grains, and all the wholesome nutrition your

dog or cat will ever need.

These are the images pet food manufacturers promulgate through the media and advertising.

This is what the $15 billion per year U.S. pet food industry wants consumers to believe they are

buying when they purchase their products.

This report explores the differences between what consumers think they are buying and what

they are actually getting. It focuses in very general terms on the most visible name brands — the

pet food labels that are mass-distributed to supermarkets and discount stores — but there are

many highly respected brands that may be guilty of the same offenses.

What most consumers don’t know is that the pet food industry is an extension of the human food

and agriculture industries. Pet food provides a convenient way for slaughterhouse offal, grains

considered “unfit for human consumption,” and similar waste products to be turned into profit.

This waste includes intestines, udders, heads, hooves, and possibly diseased and cancerous

animal parts.

The Players

The pet food market has been dominated in the last few years by the acquisition of big

companies by even bigger companies. With $15 billion a year at stake in the U.S. and rapidly

expanding foreign markets, it’s no wonder that some are greedy for a larger piece of the pie.

• Nestlé’s bought Purina to form Nestlé Purina Petcare Company (Fancy Feast, Alpo, Friskies,

Mighty Dog, Dog Chow, Cat Chow, Puppy Chow, Kitten Chow, Beneful, One, ProPlan,

DeliCat, HiPro, Kit’n’Kaboodle, Tender Vittles, Purina Veterinary Diets).

• Del Monte gobbled up Heinz (MeowMix, Gravy Train, Kibbles ’n Bits, Wagwells, 9Lives, Cycle,

Skippy, Nature’s Recipe, and pet treats Milk Bone, Pup-Peroni, Snausages, Pounce).

• MasterFoods owns Mars, Inc., which consumed Royal Canin (Pedigree, Waltham’s, Cesar,

Sheba, Temptations, Goodlife Recipe, Sensible Choice, Excel).

P.O. Box 22505, Sacramento, CA 95822 • (916) 447-3085 • info@bornfreeusa.org • www.bornfreeusa.org

Other major pet food makers are not best known for pet care, although many of their house

hold and personal care products do use ingredients derived from animal by-products:

• Procter and Gamble (P&G) purchased The Iams Company (Iams, Eukanuba) in 1999. P&G

shortly thereafter introduced Iams into grocery stores, where it did very well.

• Colgate-Palmolive bought Hill’s Science Diet (founded in 1939) in 1976 (Hill’s Science Diet,

Prescription Diets, Nature’s Best).

Private labelers (who make food for “house” brands like Kroger and Wal-Mart) and co-packers

(who produce food for other pet food makers) are also major players. Three major companies

are Doane Pet Care, Diamond, and Menu Foods; they produce food for dozens of private label

and brand names. Interestingly, all 3 of these companies have been involved in pet food recalls

that sickened or killed many pets.

Many major pet food companies in the United States are subsidiaries of gigantic multinational

corporations. From a business standpoint, pet food fits very well with companies making human

products. The multinationals have increased bulk-purchasing power; those that make human

food products have a captive market in which to capitalize on their waste products; and pet

food divisions have a more reliable capital base and, in many cases, a convenient source of

ingredients.

The Pet Food Institute — the trade association of pet food manufacturers — has acknowledged

the use of by-products in pet foods as additional income for processors and farmers: “The growth

of the pet food industry not only provided pet owners with better foods for their pets, but also

created profitable additional markets for American farm products and for the byproducts of the

meat packing, poultry, and other food industries which prepare food for human consumption.”

LABEL BASICS

There are special labeling requirements for pet food, all of which are contained in the annually

revised

Official Publication of AAFCO. ii While AAFCO does not regulate pet food, it does

provide model regulations and standards that are followed by U.S. pet food makers.

The name of the food

provides the first indication of the food’s content. The use of the terms

“all” or “100%” cannot be used “if the product contains more than one ingredient, not including

water sufficient for processing, decharacterizing agents, or trace amounts of preservatives and

condiments.”

The “95% Rule” applies when the ingredient(s) derived from animals, poultry, or fish constitutes

at least 95% or more of the total weight of the product (or 70% excluding water for processing).

Because all-meat diets are not nutritionally balanced and cause severe deficiencies if fed

exclusively, they fell out of favor for many years. However, due to rising consumer interest

in high quality meat products, several companies are now promoting 95% and 100% canned

meats as a supplemental feeding option.

The “dinner” product is defined by the “25% Rule,” which applies when “an ingredient or a

combination of ingredients constitutes at least 25% of the weight of the product (excluding water

sufficient for processing)”, or at least 10% of the dry matter weight; and a descriptor such as

“recipe,” “platter,” “entree,” and “formula.” A combination of ingredients included in the product

name is permissible when each ingredient comprises at least 3% of the product weight, excluding

water for processing, and the ingredient names appear in descending order by weight.

The “With” rule allows an ingredient name to appear on the label, such as “with real chicken,” as

long as each such ingredient constitutes at least 3% of the food by weight, excluding water for

processing.

The “flavor” rule allows a food to be designated as a certain flavor as long as the ingredient(s)

are sufficient to “impart a distinctive characteristic” to the food. Thus, a “beef flavor” food may

contain a small quantity of digest or other extract of tissues from cattle, or even an artificial flavor,

without containing any actual beef meat at all.

The ingredient list

is the other major key to what’s really in that bag or can. Ingredients must

be listed in descending order of weight. The ingredient names are legally defined. For instance,

“meat” refers to only cows, pigs, goats and sheep, and only includes specified muscle tissues.

Detailed definitions are published in AAFCO’s

Official Publication , revised annually, but can also

be found in many places online.

The guaranteed analysis

provides a very general guide to the composition of the food. Crude

protein, fat, and fiber, and total moisture are required to be listed. Some companies also

voluntarily list taurine, Omega fatty acids, magnesium, and other items that they deem important

— by marketing standards.

Pet Food Standards and Regulations

Trational Research Council (NRC) of the Academy of Sciences set the nutritional standards

for pet food that were used by the pet food industry until the late 1980s. The original NRC

standards were based on purified diets, and required feeding trials for pet foods claimed to be

“complete” and “balanced.” The pet food industry found the feeding trials too restrictive and

expensive, so AAFCO designed an alternate procedure for claiming the nutritional adequacy

of pet food, by testing the food for compliance with “Nutrient Profiles.” AAFCO also created

“expert committees” for canine and feline nutrition, which developed separate canine and feline

standards.

While feeding trials are sometimes still done, they are expensive and time-consuming. A standard

chemical analysis may also be used to make sure that a food meets the profiles. In either case,

there will be a statement on the label stating which method was used. However, because of the

“family rule” in the AAFCO book, a label can say that feeding tests were done if it is “similar” to

a food that was actually tested on live animals. There is no way to distinguish the lead product

from its “family members.” The label will also state whether the product is nutritionally adequate

(complete and balanced), and what life stage (adult or growth) the food is for. A food that says

“all life stages” meets the growth standards and can be fed to all ages.

Chemical analysis, however, does not address the palatability, digestibility, or biological availability

of nutrients in pet food. Thus it is unreliable for determining whether a food will provide an animal

with sufficient nutrients. To compensate for the limitations of chemical analysis, AAFCO added

a “safety factor,” which was to exceed the minimum amount of nutrients required to meet the

complete and balanced requirements.

In 2006, new NRC standards were published; but it will take several years for AAFCO’s profiles

to be updated and adopted, let alone accepted by the states.

The pet food industry loves to say that it’s more highly regulated than human food, but that’s just

not true. Pet food exists in a bit of a regulatory vacuum; laws are on the books, but enforcement

is another story. The FDA has nominal authority over pet foods shipped across state lines.

But the real “enforcers” are the feed control officials in each state. They are the ones who

actually look at the food and, in many instances, run basic tests to make sure the food meets

its Guaranteed Analysis, the chart on the label telling how much protein, fat, moisture, and fiber

are present. But regulation and enforcement vary tremendously from state to state. Some, like

Texas, Minnesota, and Kentucky, run extensive tests and strictly enforce their laws; others, like

California, do neither.

THE MANUFACTURING PROCESS: HOW PET FOOD IS MADE

Dry Food

The vast majority of dry food is made with a machine called an extruder. First, materials

are blended in accordance with a recipe created with the help of computer programs that

provide the nutrient content of each proposed ingredient. For instance, corn gluten meal has

more protein than wheat flour. Because the extruder needs a consistent amount of starch and

low moisture to work properly, dry ingredients — such as rendered meat-and-bone-meal, poultry

by-product meal, grains, and flours — predominate.

The dough is fed into the screws of an extruder. It is subjected to steam and high pressure as it

is pushed through dies that determine the shape of the final product, much like the nozzles used

in cake decorating. As the hot, pressurized dough exits the extruder, it is cut by a set of rapidly

whirling knives into tiny pieces. As the dough reaches normal air pressure, it expands or “puffs”

into its final shape. The food is allowed to dry, and then is usually sprayed with fat, digests, or

other compounds to make it more palatable. When it is cooled, it can be bagged.

Although the cooking process kills bacteria in the ingredients, the final product can pick up more

bacteria during the subsequent drying, coating, and packaging process. Some experts warn that

getting dry food wet can allow the bacteria on the surface to multiply and make pets sick.

Do not

mix dry food with water, milk, canned food, or other liquids.

A few dog foods are baked at high temperatures (over 500oF) rather than extruded. This produces

a sheet of dense, crunchy material that is then broken into irregular chunks, much like crumbling

crackers into soup. It is relatively palatable without the sprayed-on fats and other enhancers

needed on extruded dry food.

Semi-moist foods and many pet treats are also made with an extruder. To be appealing to

consumers and to keep their texture, they contain many additives, colorings, and preservatives;

they are not a good choice for a pet’s primary diet.

Wet Food

Wet or canned food begins with ground ingredients mixed with additives. If chunks are required,

a special extruder forms them. Then the mixture is cooked and canned. The sealed cans

are then put into containers resembling pressure cookers and commercial sterilization takes

place. Some manufacturers cook the food right in the can.

Wet foods are quite different in content from dry or semi-moist foods. While many canned foods

contain by-products of various sorts, they are “fresh” and not rendered or processed (although

they are often frozen for transport and storage). Wet foods usually contain much more protein,

and it’s often a little higher quality, than dry foods. They also have more moisture, which is better

for cats. They are packaged in cans or pouches.

Comparing Food Types

Because of the variation in water content, it is impossible to directly compare labels from

different kinds of food without a mathematical conversion to “dry matter basis.” The numbers

can be very deceiving. For instance, a canned food containing 10% protein actually has much

more protein than a dry food with 30% protein.

To put the foods on a level playing field, first calculate the dry matter content by subtracting the

moisture content given on the label from 100%. Then divide the ingredient by the dry matter

content. For example, a typical bag of dry cat food contains 30% protein on the label, but 32% on

a dry-matter basis (30% divided by its dry matter content, 100-6% moisture = 94%). A can of cat

food might contain 12% protein on the label, but almost 43% on a dry-matter basis (12% divided

by its dry matter content, 100-72% moisture = 28%). Dry food typically contains less than 10%

water, while canned food contains 78% or more water.

PET FOOD INGREDIENTS

Animal Protein

Dogs and cats are carnivores, and do best on a meat-based diet. The protein used in pet food

comes from a variety of sources. When cattle, swine, chickens, lambs, or other animals

are slaughtered, lean muscle tissue is trimmed away from the carcass for human consumption,

along with the few organs that people like to eat, such as tongues and tripe.

However, about 50% of every food animal does not get used in human foods. Whatever remains

of the carcass — heads, feet, bones, blood, intestines, lungs, spleens, livers, ligaments, fat

trimmings, unborn babies, and other parts not generally consumed by humans — is used in pet

food, animal feed, fertilizer, industrial lubricants, soap, rubber, and other products. These “other

parts” are known as “by-products.” By-products are used in feed for poultry and livestock as well

as in pet food.

The nutritional quality of by-products, meals, and digests can vary from batch to batch. James

Morris and Quinton Rogers, of the University of California at Davis Veterinary School, assert

that, “[pet food] ingredients are generally by-products of the meat, poultry and fishing industries,

with the potential for a wide variation in nutrient composition. Claims of nutritional adequacy

of pet foods based on the current Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO)

nutrient allowances (‘profiles’) do not give assurances of nutritional adequacy and will not until

ingredients are analyzed and bioavailability values are incorporated" 

Meat or poultry “by-products” are very common in wet pet foods. Remember that “meat” refers to

only cows, swine, sheep, and goats. Since sheep and goats are rare compared to the 37 million

cows and 100 million hogs slaughtered for food every year, nearly all meat by-products come

from cattle and pigs.

The better brands of pet food, such as many “super-premium,” “natural,” and “organic” varieties,

do not use by-products. On the label, you’ll see one or more named meats among the first few

ingredients, such as “turkey” or “lamb.” These meats are still mainly leftover scraps; in the case

of poultry, bones are allowed, so “chicken” consists mainly of backs and frames—the spine and

ribs, minus their expensive breast meat. The small amount of meat left on the bones is the meat

in the pet food. Even with this less-attractive source, pet food marketers are very tricky when

talking about meat, so this is explained further in the section on “Marketing Magic” below.

Meat meals, poultry meals, by-product meals, and meat-and-bone meal are common ingredients

in dry pet foods. The term “meal” means that these materials are not used fresh, but have been

rendered. While there are chicken, turkey, and poultry by-product meals there is no equivalent

term for mammal “meat by-product meal” — it is called “meat-and-bone-meal.” It may also be

referred to by species, such as “beef-and-bone-meal” or “pork-and-bone-meal.”

What is rendering? As defined by

Webster’s Dictionary , to render is “to process as for industrial

use: to render livestock carcasses and to extract oil from fat, blubber, etc., by melting.” In other

words, raw materials are dumped into large vat and boiled for several hours. Rendering separates

fat, removes water, and kills bacteria, viruses, parasites, and other organisms. However, the

high temperatures used (270°F/130°C) can alter or destroy natural enzymes and proteins found

in the raw ingredients.

Because of persistent rumors that rendered by-products contain dead dogs and cats, the FDA

conducted a study looking for pentobarbital, the most common euthanasia drug, in pet foods.

They found it. Ingredients that were most commonly associated with the presence of pentobarbital

were meat-and-bone-meal and animal fat. However, they also used very sensitive tests to look

for canine and feline DNA, which were

not found. Industry insiders admit that rendered pets and

roadkill were used in pet food some years ago. Although there are still no laws or regulations

against it, the practice is uncommon today, and pet food companies universally deny that their

products contain any such materials. However, so-called “4D” animals (dead, dying, diseased,

disabled) were only recently banned for human consumption and are still legitimate ingredients

for pet food.

Vegetable Protein

The amount of grain and vegetable products used in pet food has risen dramatically over

time. Plant products now replace a considerable proportion of the meat that was used in

the earliest commercial pet foods. This has led to severe nutritional deficiencies that have been

corrected along the way, although many animals died before science caught up.

Most dry foods contain a large amount of cereal grain or starchy vegetables to provide texture.

These high-carbohydrate plant products also provide a cheap source of “energy” — the rest of

us call it “calories.” Gluten meals are high-protein extracts from which most of the carbohydrate

has been removed. They are often used to boost protein percentages without expensive animalsource

ingredients. Corn gluten meal is the most commonly used for this purpose. Wheat gluten

is also used to create shapes like cuts, bites, chunks, shreds, flakes, and slices, and as a

thickener for gravy. In most cases, foods containing vegetable proteins are among the poorer

quality foods.

A recent fad, “low-carb” pet food, has some companies steering away from grains, and using

potatoes, green peas, and other starchy vegetables as a substitute. Except for animals that are

allergic to grains, dry low-carb diets offer no particular advantage to pets. They also tend to be

very high in fat and, if fed free-choice, will result in weight gain. Canned versions are suitable for

prevention and treatment of feline diabetes, and as part of a weight loss program, as well as for

maintenance.

Animal and Poultry Fat

The unique, pungent odor to a new bag of dry pet food — what is the source of that

smell? It is most often rendered animal fat, or vegetable fats and oils deemed inedible fohumans. For example, used restaurant grease was rendered and routed to pet foods for several

years, but a more lucrative market is now in biodiesel fuel production.

These fats are sprayed directly onto extruded kibbles and pellets to make an otherwise bland or

distasteful product palatable. The fat also acts as a binding agent to which manufacturers add

other flavor enhancers such as “animal digests” made from processed by-products. Pet food

scientists have discovered that animals love the taste of these sprayed fats. Manufacturers are

masters at getting a dog or a cat to eat something she would normally turn up her nose at.

What Happened to the Nutrients?

Cooking and other processing of meat and by-products used in pet food can greatly diminish

their nutritional value, although cooking increases the digestibility of cereal grains and

starchy vegetables.

To make pet food nutritious, pet food manufacturers must “fortify” it with vitamins and minerals.

Why? Because the ingredients they are using are not wholesome, their quality may be extremely

variable, and the harsh manufacturing practices destroy many of the nutrients the food had to

begin with.

Proteins are especially vulnerable to heat, and become damaged, or “denatured,” when cooked.

Because dry foods ingredients are cooked twice — first during rendering and again in the extruder

— problems are much more common than with canned or homemade foods. Altered proteins

may contribute to food intolerances, food allergies, and inflammatory bowel disease.

Additives in Processed Pet Foods

Many chemicals are added to commercial pet foods to improve the taste, stability,

characteristics, or appearance of the food. Additives provide no nutritional value. Additives

include emulsifiers to prevent water and fat from separating, antioxidants to prevent fat from

turning rancid, and artificial colors and flavors to make the product more attractive to consumers

and more palatable to their companion animals.

A wide variety of additives are allowed in animal feed and pet food, not counting vitamins and

minerals. Not all of them are actually used in pet food. Additives can be specifically approved, or

they can fall into the category of “Generally Recognized as Safe” (GRAS).

Anticaking agents

Antigelling agents

Antimicrobial agents

Antioxidants

Color additives

Condiments

Curing agents

Drying agents

Emulsifiers

Essential oils

Flavor enhancers

Flavoring agents

Grinding agents

Humectants

Leavening agents

Lubricants

Palatants

Pelleting agents and binders

Petroleum derivatives

pH control agents

Preservatives

Seasonings

Spices

Stabilizers

Sweeteners

Texturizers

Thickeners


Chemical vs. Natural Preservatives

All commercial pet foods must be preserved so they stay fresh and appealing to our animal

companions. Canning is itself a preserving process, so canned foods need little or no

additional help. Some preservatives are added to ingredients or raw materials by the suppliers,

and others may be added by the manufacturer. The U.S. Coast Guard, for instance, requires

fish meal to be heavily preserved with ethoxyquin or equivalent antioxidant. Evidently, spoiling

fish meal creates such intense heat that ship explosions and fires resulted.

Because manufacturers need to ensure that dry foods have a long shelf life (typically 12 months)

to remain edible through shipping and storage, fats used in pet foods are preserved with either

synthetic or “natural” preservatives. Synthetic preservatives include butylated hydroxyanisole

(BHA) and butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), propyl gallate, propylene glycol (also used as a

less-toxic version of automotive antifreeze), and ethoxyquin. For these antioxidants, there is

little information documenting their toxicity, safety, interactions, or chronic use in pet foods that

may be eaten every day for the life of the animal. Propylene glycol was banned in cat food

because it causes anemia in cats, but it is still allowed in dog food.

Potentially cancer-causing agents such as BHA, BHT, and ethoxyquin are permitted at relatively

low levels. The use of these chemicals in pet foods has not been thoroughly studied, and long

term build-up of these agents may ultimately be harmful. Due to questionable data in the original

study on its safety, ethoxyquin’s manufacturer, Monsanto, was required to perform a new, more

rigorous study. This was completed in 1996. Even though Monsanto found no significant toxicity

associated with its own product, in July 1997 the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine requested

that manufacturers voluntarily reduce the maximum level for ethoxyquin by half, to 75 parts per

million. While some pet food critics and veterinarians believe that ethoxyquin is a major cause

of disease, skin problems, and infertility in dogs, others claim it is the safest, strongest, most

stable preservative available for pet food. Ethoxyquin is approved for use in human food for

preserving spices, such as cayenne and chili powder, at a level of 100 ppm — but it would be

very difficult for even the most hard-core spice lover to consume as much chili powder every day

as a dog would eat dry food. Ethoxyquin has never been tested for safety in cats. Despite this,

it is commonly used in veterinary diets for both cats and dogs.

Many pet food makers have responded to consumer concern, and are now using “natural”

preservatives such as Vitamin C (ascorbate), Vitamin E (mixed tocopherols), and oils of

rosemary, clove, or other spices, to preserve the fats in their products. The shelf life is shorter,

however — only about 6 months.

Individual ingredients, such as fish meal, may have preservatives added before they reach

the pet food manufacturer. Federal law requires fat preservatives to be disclosed on the label;

however, pet food companies do not always comply with this law.

DANGER AHEAD

Potential Contaminants

Given the types of things manufacturers put in pet food, it is not surprising that bad things

sometimes happen. Ingredients used in pet food are often highly contaminated with a wide

variety of toxic substances. Some of these are destroyed by processing, but others are not.


Bacteria . Slaughtered animals, as well as those that have died because of disease, injury,

or natural causes, are sources of meat, by-products, and rendered meals. An animal that

died on the farm might not reach a rendering plant until days after its death. Therefore the

carcass is often contaminated with bacteria such as

Salmonella and E. Coli . Dangerous E.

Coli

bacteria are estimated to contaminate more than 50% of meat meals. While the cooking

process may kill bacteria, it does not eliminate the endotoxins some bacteria produce during

their growth. These toxins can survive processing, and can cause sickness and disease. Pet

food manufacturers do not test their products for bacterial endotoxins. Because sick or dead

animals can be processed as pet foods, the drugs that were used to treat or euthanize them

may still be present in the end product. Penicillin and pentobarbital are just two examples of

drugs that can pass through processing unchanged. Antibiotics used in livestock production

are also thought to contribute to antibiotic resistance in humans.

ins . Toxins from mold or fungi are called mycotoxins. Modern farming practices,

adverse weather conditions, and improper drying and storage of crops can contribute to mold

growth. Pet food ingredients that are most likely to be contaminated with mycotoxins are

grains such as wheat and corn, and fish meal.

Chemical Residue . Pesticides and fertilizers may leave residue on plant products. Grains that

are condemned for human consumption by the USDA due to residue may legally be used,

without limitation, in pet food.

GMOs . Genetically modified plant products are also of concern. By 2006, 89% of the planted

area of soybeans, 83% of cotton, and 61% of maize (corn) in the U.S. were genetically

modified varieties. Cottonseed meal is a common ingredient of cattle feed; soy and corn are

used directly in many pet foods.

Acrylamide . This is a carcinogenic compound formed at cooking temperatures of about

250˚F in foods containing certain sugars and the amino acid asparagine (found in large

amounts in potatoes and cereal grains). It is formed in a chemical process called the Maillard

reaction. Most dry pet foods contain cereal grains or potatoes, and they are processed at

high temperatures (200–300°F at high pressure during extrusion; baked foods are cooked at

well over 500°F); these are perfect conditions for the Maillard reaction.

iv,v In fact, the Maillard

reaction is considered

desirable in the production of pet food because it imparts a palatable

taste, even though it reduces the bioavailability of some amino acids, including taurine and

lysine.

vi The content and potential effects of acrylamide formation in pet foods are unknown.

Pet Food Recalls

When things go really wrong and serious problems are discovered in pet food, the company

usually works with the FDA to coordinate a recall of the affected products. While many

recalls have been widely publicized, quite a few have not.

In 1995 , Nature’s Recipe recalled almost a million pounds of dry dog and cat food after

consumers complained that their pets were vomiting and losing their appetite. The problem

was a fungus that produced vomitoxin contaminating the wheat.

In 1999 , Doane Pet Care recalled more than a million bags of corn-based dry dog food

contaminated with aflatoxin. Products included Ol’ Roy (Wal-Mart’s brand) and 53 other

brands. This time, the toxin killed 25 dogs.

 

In 2000 , Iams recalled 248,000 pounds of dry dog food distributed in 7 states due to excess

DL-Methionine Amino Acid, a urinary acidifier.

In 2003 , a recall was made by Petcurean “Go! Natural” pet food due to circumstantial

association with some dogs suffering from liver disease; no cause was ever found.

In late 2005 , a similar recall by Diamond Foods was announced; this time the moldy corn

contained a particularly nasty fungal product called aflatoxin; 100 dogs died.

Also in 2005 , 123,000 pounds of cat and dog treats were recalled due to Salmonella

contamination.

In 2006 , more than 5 million cans of Ol’ Roy, American Fare, and other dog foods distributed

in the southeast were recalled by the manufacturer, Simmons Pet Food, because the cans’

enamel lining was flaking off into the food.

Also in 2006 , Merrick Pet Care recalled almost 200,000 cans of “Wingalings” dog food when

metal tags were found in some samples.

In the most deadly recall of 2006 , 4 prescription canned dog and cat foods were recalled by

Royal Canin (owned by Mars). The culprit was a serious overdose of Vitamin D that caused

calcium deficiency and kidney disease.

In February 2007 , the FDA issued a warning to consumers not to buy “Wild Kitty,” a frozen

food containing raw meat. Routine testing by FDA had revealed

Salmonella in the food. FDA

specifically warned about the potential for illness in humans, not pets. There were no reports

of illness or death of any pets, and the food was not recalled.

In March 2007, the most lethal pet food in history was the subject of the largest recall ever.

Menu Foods recalled more than 100 brands including Iams, Eukanuba, Hill’s Science

Diet, Purina Mighty Dog, and many store brands including Wal-Mart’s. Thousands of pets

were sickened (the FDA received more than 17,000 reports) and an estimated 20% died

from acute renal failure caused by the food. Cats were more frequently and more severely

affected than dogs. The toxin was initially believed to be a pesticide, the rat poison “aminopterin”

in one of the ingredients. In April, scientists discovered high levels of melamine, a

chemical used in plastics and fertilizers, in wheat gluten and rice protein concentrate imported

from China. The melamine had been purposefully added to the ingredients to falsely

boost their protein content. Subsequent tests revealed that the melamine-tainted ingredients

had also been used in feed for cows, pigs, and chickens and thousands of animals

were quarantined and destroyed. In early May, scientists identified the cause of the rapid

onset kidney disease that had appeared in dogs and cats as a reaction caused by the combination

of melamine and cyanuric acid, both unauthorized chemicals. The fallout from this

recall is ongoing as of May 2007 so please be sure to check the FDA web site for the most

recent updates (www.fda.gov/oc/opacom/hottopics/petfood.html)

.

Nutrition-Related Diseases

The idea that one pet food provides all the nutrition a companion animal will ever need for its

entire life is a dangerous myth.

Today, the diets of cats and dogs are a far cry from the variable meat-based diets that their

ancestors ate. The unpleasant results of grain-based, processed, year-in and year-out diets are

common. Health problems associated with diet include:

Urinary tract disease . Plugs, crystals, and stones are more common in cats eating dry diets,

due to the chronic dehydration and highly concentrated urine they cause. “Struvite” stones

used to be the most common type in cats, but another more dangerous type, calcium oxalate,

has increased and is now tied with struvite. Manipulation of manufactured cat food formulas

to increase the acidity of urine has caused the switch. Dogs can also form stones as a result

of their diet.

Kidney disease . Chronic dehydration associated with dry diets may also be a contributing

factor in the development of kidney disease and chronic renal failure in older cats. Cats have

a low thirst drive; in the wild they would get most of their water from their prey. Cats eating dry

food do not drink enough water to make up for the lack of moisture in the food. Cats on dry

food diets

drink more water, but the total water intake of a cat eating canned food is twice as

great.

Dental disease . Contrary to the myth propagated by pet food companies, dry food is not good

for teeth.

 Given that the vast majority of pets eat dry food, yet the most common health

problem in pets is dental disease, this should be obvious. Humans do not floss with crackers,

and dry food does not clean the teeth.

Obesity . Feeding recommendations or instructions on the packaging are sometimes inflated

so that the consumer will end up feeding — and purchasing — more food. One of the most

common health problems in pets, obesity, may also be related to high-carb, high-calorie dry

foods. Both dogs and cats respond to low-carb wet food diets. Overweight pets are more

prone to arthritis, heart disease, and diabetes. Dry cat food is now considered the cause of

feline diabetes; prevention and treatment include switching to a high protein, high moisture,

low-carb diet.

Chronic digestive problems . Chronic vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, and inflammatory bowel

disease are among the most frequent illnesses treated. These are often the result of an allergy

or intolerance to pet food ingredients. The market for “limited antigen” or “novel protein” diets

is now a multi-million dollar business. These diets were formulated to address the increasing

intolerance to commercial foods that pets have developed. Even so, an animal that tends

to develop allergies can develop allergies to the new ingredients, too. One twist is the truly

“hypoallergenic” food that has had all its proteins artificially chopped into pieces smaller than

can be recognized and reacted to by the immune system. Yet there are documented cases

of animals becoming allergic to this food, too. It is important to change brands, flavors, and

protein sources every few months to prevent problems.

Bloat . Feeding only one meal per day can cause the irritation of the esophagus by stomach

acid, and appears to be associated with gastric dilitation and volvulus (canine bloat). Feeding

two or more smaller meals is better.

Heart disease . An often-fatal heart disease in cats and some dogs is now known to be caused

by a deficiency of the amino acid taurine. Blindness is another symptom of taurine deficiency.

This deficiency was due to inadequate amounts of taurine in cat food formulas, which in

turn had occurred due to decreased amounts of animal proteins and increased reliance on

carbohydrates. Cat foods are now supplemented with taurine. New research suggests that

some dog breeds are susceptible to the same condition. Supplementing taurine may also be

helpful for dogs, but as yet few manufacturers are adding extra taurine to dog food.

Hyperthyroidism . There is also evidence that hyperthyroidism in cats may be related to diet.

This is a relatively new disease that first surfaced in the 1970s. Some experts theorize that

excess iodine in commercial cat food is a factor. New research also points to a link between

the disease and pop-top cans, and flavors including fish or “giblets.” This is a serious disease,

and treatment is expensive.

Many nutritional problems appeared with the popularity of cereal-based commercial pet foods.

Some have occurred because the diet was incomplete. Although several ingredients are now

supplemented, we do not know what ingredients future researchers may discover that should

have been supplemented in pet foods all along. Other problems may occur from reactions to

additives. Others are a result of contamination with bacteria, mold, drugs, or other toxins. In

some diseases the role of commercial pet food is understood; in others, it is not. The bottom line

is that diets composed primarily of low quality cereals and rendered meals are not as nutritious

or safe as you should expect for your cat or dog.

PET FOOD INDUSTRY SECRETS

Co-Packing

The 2007 Menu Foods recall brought to light some of the pet food industry’s dirtiest secrets.

Most people were surprised — and appalled — to learn that all Iams/Eukanuba canned foods

are not made by The Iams Company at all. In fact, in 2003 Iams signed an exclusive 10-year

contract for the production of 100% of its canned foods by Menu.

This type of deal is called “co-packing.” One company makes the food, but puts someone else’s

label on it. This is a very common arrangement in the pet food industry. It was first illustrated by

the Doane’s and Diamond recalls, when dozens of private labels were involved. But none were

as large or as “reputable” as Iams, Eukanuba, Hill’s, Purina, Nutro, and other high-end, so-called

“premium” foods.

The big question raised by this arrangement is whether or not there is any real difference between

the expensive premium brands and the lowliest generics. The recalled products all contained the

suspect ingredient, wheat gluten, but they also all contained by-products of some kind, including

specified by-products such as liver or giblets.

It’s true that a pet food company that contracts with a co-packer can provide its own ingredients,

or it can require the contractor to buy particular ingredients to use in its recipes. But part of the

attraction of using a co-packer is that it can buy ingredients in larger bulk than any one pet food

maker could on its own, making the process cheaper and the profits larger. It’s likely that with

many of the ingredients that cross all types of pet foods, those ingredients are the same.

Are one company’s products — made in the same plant on the same equipment

with ingredients called the same name — really “better” than another’s? That’s what the makers of expensive

brands want you to think. The recalled premium brands claim that Menu makes their foods

“according to proprietary recipes using specified ingredients,” and that “contract manufacturers

must follow strict quality standards.” Indeed, the contracts undoubtedly include those points.

But out in the real world, things may not go according to plan. How well are machines cleaned

between batches, how carefully are ingredients mixed, and just how particular are minimumwage

workers in a dirty smelly job going to be about getting everything just perfect?

Whatever the differences are between cheap and high-end food, one thing is clear. The purchase

price of pet food does not always determine whether a pet food is good or bad or even safe.

However, the very cheapest foods can be counted on to have the very cheapest ingredients. For

example, Ol’ Roy, Wal-Mart’s store brand, has now been involved in 3 serious recalls.

Menu manufactures canned foods for many companies that weren’t affected by the recall,

including Nature’s Variety, Wellness, Castor & Pollux, Newman’s Own Organics, Wysong, Innova,

and EaglePack. It’s easy to see from their ingredient lists that those products are made from

completely different ingredients and proportions. Again, the issue of cleaning the machinery out

between batches comes up, but hopefully nothing so lethal will pass from one food to another.

Animal Testing

Another unpleasant practice exposed by this recall is pet food testing on live animals. Menu’s

own lab animals, who were deliberately fed the tainted food, were the first known victims.

Tests began on February 27 (already a week after the first reports); animals started to die

painfully from kidney failure a few days later. After the first media reports, Menu quickly changed

its story to call these experiments “taste tests.” But Menu has done live animal feeding, metabolic

energy, palatability, and other tests for Iams and other companies for years. Videotapes reveal

the animals’ lives in barren metal cages; callous treatment; invasive experiments; and careless

cruelty.

Although feeding trials are not required for a food to meet the requirements for labeling a food

“complete and balanced,” many manufacturers use live animals to perform palatability studies

when developing a new pet food. One set of animals is fed a new food while a “control” group

is fed a current formula. The total volume eaten is used as a gauge for the palatability of the

food. Some companies use feeding trials, which are considered to be a much more accurate

assessment of the actual nutritional value of the food. They keep large colonies of dogs and cats

for this purpose, or use testing laboratories that have their own animals.

There is a new movement toward using companion animals in their homes for palatability and

other studies. In 2006, The Iams Company announced that it was cutting the use of canine and

feline lab animals by 70%. While it proclaims this moral victory, the real reasons for this switch

are likely financial. Whatever the reasons, it is a very positive step for the animals.

Finally, it is important to remember that the contamination that occurred in the Menu Foods

recall could have happened anywhere at any time. It was not Menu’s fault; the toxin was unusual

and unexpected. All companies have quality control standards and they do test ingredients for

common toxins before using them. They also test the final products. However, there is a baseline

risk inherent in using the raw materials that go into pet foods. When there are 11 recalls in 12

years, it’s clear that “freak occurrences” are the rule, not the exception.

Marketing Magic

A trip down the pet food aisle will boggle the mind with all the wonderful claims made by pet

food makers for their repertoire of products. Knowing the nature of the ingredients helps sort

out some of the more outrageous claims, but what’s the truth behind all this hype?

Niche claims . Indoor cat, canine athlete, Persian, 7-year old, Bloodhound, or a pet with

a tender tummy, too much flab, arthritis, or itchy feet — no matter what, there’s a food

“designed” just for that pet’s personal needs. Niche marketing has arrived in a big way in

the pet food industry. People like to feel special, and a product with specific appeal is bound

to sell better than a general product like “puppy food.” The reality is that there are only two

basic standards against which all pet foods are measured: adult and growth, which includes

gestation and lactation. Everything else is marketing.

“Natural” and “Organic” claims . The definition of “natural” adopted by AAFCO is very broad,

and allows for artificially processed ingredients that most of us would consider very unnatural

indeed. The term “organic”, on the other hand, has a very strict legal definition under the

USDA National Organic Program. However, some companies are adept at evading the intent

of both of these rules. For instance, the name of the company or product may be intentionally

misleading. Some companies use terms such as “Nature” or “Natural” or even “Organic” in

the brand name, whether or not their products fit the definitions. Consumers should also be

aware that the term “organic” does not imply anything at all about animal welfare; products

from cows and chickens can be organic, yet the animals themselves are still just “production

units” in enormous factory farms.

Ingredient quality claims . A lot of pet foods claim they contain “human grade” ingredients.

This is a completely meaningless term — which is why the pet food companies get away with

using it. The same applies to “USDA inspected” or similar phrases. The implication is that the

food is made using ingredients that are passed by the USDA for human consumption, but

there are many ways around this. For instance, a facility might be USDA-inspected during the

day, but the pet food is made at night after the inspector goes home. The use of such terms

should be viewed as a “Hype Alert.”

“Meat is the first ingredient” claim . A claim that a named meat (chicken, lamb, etc.) is the

#1 ingredient is generally seen for dry food. Ingredients are listed on the label by weight,

and raw chicken weighs a lot, since contains a lot of water. If you look further down the list,

you’re likely to see ingredients such as chicken or poultry by-product meal, meat-and-bone

meal, corn gluten meal, soybean meal, or other high-protein meal. Meals have had the fat

and water removed, and basically consist of a dry, lightweight protein powder. It doesn’t take

much raw chicken to weigh more than a great big pile of this powder, so in reality the food

is based on the protein meal, with very little “chicken” to be found. This has become a very

popular marketing gimmick, even in premium and “health food” type brands. Since just about

everybody is now using it, any meaning it may have had is so watered-down that you may

just as well ignore it.

• s pecial ingredient claims . Many of the high-end pet foods today rely on the marketing appeal

of people-food ingredients such as fruits, herbs, and vegetables. However, the amounts of

these items actually present in the food are small; and the items themselves may be scraps

and rejects from processors of human foods — not the whole, fresh ingredients they want

you to picture. Such ingredients don’t provide a significant health benefit and are really a

marketing gimmick.

Pet food marketing and advertising has become extremely sophisticated over the last few years.

It’s important to know what is hype and what is real to make informed decisions about what to

feed your pets.

What Consumers Can Do

Write or call pet food companies and the Pet Food Institute (contact below) and express your

concerns about commercial pet foods. Demand that manufacturers improve the quality of

ingredients in their products.

Print out a copy of this report for your veterinarian to further his or her knowledge about

commercial pet food.

Direct your family and friends with companion animals to www.bornfreeusa.org/petfood to

alert them to the dangers of commercial pet food. Give out copies of our Fact Sheet on

Selecting a Good Commercial Food and download more copies of this report both at www.

bornfreeusa.org.

Stop buying commercial pet food; or at least stop buying dry food. Dry foods have been the

subject of many more recalls, and have many adverse health effects. If that is not possible,

reduce the quantity of commercial pet food and supplement with fresh, organic foods, especially

meat. Purchase one or more of the many books available on pet nutrition and make your own

food. Be sure that a veterinarian or a nutritionist has checked the recipes to ensure that they

are balanced for long-term use.

• I f you would like to learn about how to make healthy food for your companion animal, visit

www.bornfreeusa.org and type “Sample Diets” into the search box for simple recipes and

important nutritional information.

Please be aware that Born Free USA is not a veterinary hospital, clinic, or service. Born

Free USA does not and will not offer any medical advice. If you have concerns about your

companion animal’s health or nutritional requirements, please consult your veterinarian.

Because pet food manufacturers frequently change the formulations of their products, and

Born Free USA cannot conduct the necessary testing, we are unable to offer endorsements

for particular brands of pet food. Many of our staff choose to make their own pet food, or to

purchase natural or organic products from feed and specialty pet stores or online, but we cannot

recommend brands that would be right for your companion animal or animals.

Who to Write

AAFCO Pet Food Committee

David Syverson, Chair

Minnesota Department of Agriculture

Dairy and Food Inspection Division

625 Robert Street North

St. Paul, MN 55155-2538

www.aafco.org

FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine

Sharon Benz

7500 Standish Place

Rockville, MD 20855

301-594-1728

www.fda.gov/cvm/

Pet Food Institute

2025 M Street, NW, Suite 800

Washington, DC 20036

202-367-1120

Fax 202-367-2120

For Further Reading about Animal Nutrition

Born Free USA recommends the following books (listed in alphabetical order by author),

many of which include recipes for home-prepared diets:

• Michelle Bernard. 2003.

Raising Cats Naturally — How to Care for Your Cat the Way Nature

Intended.

Available at www.raisingcatsnaturally.com.

• Chiclet T. Dog and Jan Rasmusen. 2006.

Scared Poopless: The Straight Scoop on Dog Care .

Available at www.dogs4dogs.com. ISBN-10: 0977126501, ISBN-13: 978-0977126507.

• Rudi Edalati. 2001.

Barker’s Grub: Easy, Wholesome Home-Cooking for Dogs. ISBN-10:

0609804421, ISBN-13: 978-0609804421.

• Jean Hofve, DVM. 2007.

What Cats Should Eat. Available at www.littlebigcat.com.

• Richard H. Pitcairn, DVM, and Susan Hubble Pitcairn. 2005.

Dr. Pitcairn’s New Complete

Guide to Natural Health for Dogs and Cats.

Rodale Press, Inc. ISBN-10: 157954973X, ISBN-

13: 978-1579549732. Note: The recipes for cats were not revised in this new edition and date

back to 2000; they may contain too much grain, according to recent research.

• Kate Solisti. 2004.

The Holistic Animal Handbook: A Guidebook to Nutrition, Health, and

Communication

. Council Oaks Books. ISBN-10: 1571781536, ISBN-13: 978-1571781536.

• Donald R. Strombeck. 1999.

Home-Prepared Dog & Cat Diets: The Healthful Alternative. Iowa

State University Press. ISBN-10: 0813821495, ISBN-13: 978-0813821498. Note: Veterinary

nutritionists have suggested that the taurine and calcium are too low in some of these recipes.

Clam juice and sardines are poor sources of taurine; use taurine capsules instead.

• Celeste Yarnall. 2000,

Natural Cat Care: A Complete Guide to Holistic Health Care for Cats ;

and 1998,

Natural Dog Care: A Complete Guide to Holistic Health Care for Dogs. Available

at www.celestialpets.com.

The books listed above are a fraction of all the titles currently available, and the omission of a

title does not necessarily mean it is not useful for further reading about animal nutrition.

Please note:

Born Free USA is not a bookseller, and cannot sell or send these books to you.

Please contact your local book retailer, an online bookstore, or the website indicated, who can

supply these books based on the ISBN provided for each title.

References

Association of American Feed Control Officials Incorporated.

Official Publication 2007. Atlanta:

AAFCO, 2007.

Case LP, Carey DP, Hirakawa DA.

Canine and Feline Nutrition: A Resource for Companion

Animal Professionals

. St. Louis: Mosby, 1995.

FDA Enforcement Reports, 1998-2007. www.fda.gov.

Hand MS, Thatcher CD, Remillard RL, et al., eds.

Small Animal Clinical Nutrition, 4th Edition.

2002. Topeka, KS: Mark Morris Institute.

Logan, et al., Dental Disease, in: Hand et al.,

ibid .

Mahmoud AL. Toxigenic fungi and mycotoxin content in poultry feedstuff ingredients.

J Basic

Microbiol

, 1993; 33(2): 101–4.

Morris JG, and Rogers QR. Assessment of the Nutritional Adequacy of Pet Foods Through the

Life Cycle.

Journal of Nutrition , 1994; 124: 2520S–2533S.

Mottram DS, Wedzicha BL, Dodson AT. Acrylamide is formed in the Maillard reaction.

Nature ,

2002 Oct 3; 419(6906): 448–9.

Pet Food Institute.

Fact Sheet 1994. Washington: Pet Food Institute, 1994.

Phillips T. Rendered Products Guide.

Petfood Industry , January/February 1994, 12–17, 21.

Roudebush P. Pet food additives.

J Amer Vet Med Assoc , 203 (1993): 1667–1670.

Seefelt SL, Chapman TE. Body water content and turnover in cats fed dry and canned rations.

Am J Vet Res

, 1979 Feb; 40(2): 183–5.

Strombeck, DR.

Home-Prepared Dog and Cat Foods: The Healthful Alternative. Ames: Iowa

State University Press, 1999.

Tareke E, Rydberg P, Karlsson P, et al. Analysis of acrylamide, a carcinogen formed in heated

foodstuffs.

J Agric Food Chem , 2002 Aug 14; 50(17): 4998–5006.

Zoran D. The carnivore connection to nutrition in cats.

J Amer Vet Med Assoc , 2002 Dec 1;

221(11): 1559–67.

Information on Reprints:

Born Free USA receives many requests to reprint all or portions of our “What’s Really in Pet

Food” report in newsletters, on websites, and elsewhere. Permission is usually granted under

the following conditions:

• Full acknowledgment is made to Born Free USA as the source of the material.

• Born Free USA’s copyright is preserved.

• Our URL — www.bornfreeusa.org — is included in the reprint.

• Under no circumstances is the reprint to be used for fundraising of any kind.

• We appreciate a copy of the final piece if possible.

• If you are using the report in a book or other item that will be sold for a profit, we ask you to

consider donating a percentage of the sales to Born Free USA. We are a non-profit 501(c)(3)

organization, so contributions made to us are tax-deductible.

Please write first for permission so that we can track your requests at info@bornfreeusa.org or

Born Free USA/Pet Food, PO Box 22505, Sacramento, CA 95822. Thank you.

Footnotes:

i

Pet Food Institute. Fact Sheet 1994. Washington: Pet Food Institute, 1994.

ii

Association of American Feed Control Officials. Official Publication , 2007. Regulation PE3,

120–121.

iii

Morris, James G., and Quinton R. Rogers. Assessment of the Nutritional Adequacy of Pet

Foods Through the Life Cycle.

Journal of Nutrition , 124 (1994): 2520S–2533S.

iv

Tareke E, Rydberg P, Karlsson P, et al. Analysis of acrylamide, a carcinogen formed in heated

foodstuffs.

J Agric Food Chem , 2002 Aug 14; 50(17): 4998–5006.

v

Mottram DS, Wedzicha BL, Dodson AT. Acrylamide is formed in the Maillard reaction.

Nature

, 2002 Oct 3; 419(6906): 448–9.

vi

Hand MS, Thatcher CD, Remillard RL, et al., eds. Small Animal Clinical Nutrition, 4th Edition .

2002. Topeka, KS: Mark Morris Institute.

vii

Seefelt SL, Chapman TE. Body water content and turnover in cats fed dry and canned

rations.

Am J Vet Res , 1979 Feb; 40(2): 183–5.

viii

Logan, et al., Dental Disease, in: Hand et al., eds., Small Animal Clinical Nutrition, Fourth

Edition

. Topeka, KS: Mark Morris Institute, 2000.

Opdrætter af Alaskan Malamute.....

- Camilla, indehaver af kennel My Alaskan, fortæller om ernæring:

http://www.myalaskan.dk/ernaeligring.html

Det skal du ikke gi din hund.....


Der er forskel på hunde og mennesker. Hvad der er ganske ugiftigt for os, kan være livsfarligt for hunde. »Det kan overraske rigtig mange hundeejere, at deres hund ikke kan tåle alt det, vi mennesker kan tåle, men der en række fødevarer, der kan være farlige eller ligefrem livsfarlige for en hund, og som man skal sørge for, at hunden aldrig får adgang til,« fortæller dyrlæge Paulette Topsøe-Jensen, der har speciale i familiedyr. Hun anbefaler, at man altid ringer og snakker med sin dyrlæge, hvis hunden har spist noget mistænkeligt. Her er ti almindelige fødevarer, som Paulette Topsøe-Jensen advarer kraftigt imod de følgende ting, du kan se her


Chokolade er en af de store syndere. Og lige så lækkert det er for os, lige så farligt er det for hunde. Chokolade indeholder stoffet theobromine, som hunden kan dø af, hvis den spiser det i større mængder. Jo mørkere chokoladen er, desto farligere er den. 30 gram chokolade er nok til at slå en hund på 15 kilo ihjel. Theobromine får hundens hjerte til at slå meget hurtigere og kan føre til hjerteanfald. Stoffet kan også irritere mave-tarm-kanalen og give maveblødninger, der kan være så voldsomme, at hunden kan dø i løbet af nogle få dage.


Rosiner og vindruer kan give hunden alvorlige nyreproblemer, som kan føre til nyresvigt og dermed være dødelige. Hvilke stoffer der ødelægger nyrerne, er ikke helt afdækket. Den giftige dosis er fra én til otte rosiner eller vindruer pr. kilo kropsvægt. Det er ikke alle hunde, der bliver syge. Nogle dyr kan spise rosiner og vindruer hele deres liv, uden at de på noget tidspunkt bliver syge. Andre hunde kan dø af kun ganske små mængder


Nødder, især valnødder og macadamianødder, er giftige for hunde og kan føre til alt lige fra opkast til lammelser og død. Inden for 12 timer kan hunden udvikle forskellige symptomer som at miste balanceevnen, få feber og kaste op. Symptomerne kan forværres, hvis hunden har spist nødderne i chokolade


Løg og løgplanter i alle afskygninger – også blomsterløg – indeholder nogle giftstoffer, der kan ødelægge dyrets røde blodlegemer og give pludselig blodmangel og vejrtrækningsproblemer


Avocado indeholder stoffet persin, der antages at være meget giftigt for hunde og de fleste andre dyr. Persin findes både i frugtkødet, stenen og planten. Det giftige stof kan give akut celledød i hjertemuskulaturen og i mælkekirtlerne


Æblekerner, kirsebærsten, blommekerner og abrikossten indeholder giftstoffet cyanid, der er ekstremt giftigt. Nogle få æblekerner gør måske ingen skade, men hvis hunden går i gang med at gnaske nedfaldsblommer eller kirsebær i sig, kan det blive en dødelig affære


Sukkerstoffet xylitol, som blandt andet findes i slik, og nogle fabrikanter af peanutbutter er begyndt at tilsætte xylitol, kan forårsage et pludseligt fald i hundens blodsukkerniveau. Hunden kan begynde at kaste op, ryste, blive sløv og i alvorlige tilfælde få kramper og blive bevidstløs.


Tomater og tomatplanter kan forgifte hunden. Symptomerne vil være savlen, besværet vejrtrækning, kolik, opkastning, diarre eller forstoppelse


Alkohol påvirker dyr på samme måde som mennesker - bare kraftigere, fordi de fleste hunde er mindre end os. Selv små mængder øl eller alkohol kan få hunden til at kaste op.


Kaffe og te indeholder koffein, som påvirker hundens centralnervesystem og hjerte. Hunden vil blive rastløs, få hjerteproblemer, muskelsitren og kaste op. Der er også koffein i kaffegrums, cola og energidrikke som Red Bull

   

Soya

Posted By: Dr. Becker on March 28 2012 |

 

Story at-a-glance

·                                 Despite ample evidence that soy in processed foods is harmful to man and beast, use of soy products continues to spread, infiltrating the ingredient lists of countless people foods and commercial pet foods as well.

 

·                                 The plant estrogens in soy are well-documented endocrine disruptors, as evidenced by cases involving creatures as diverse as rare exotic parrots in New Zealand and captive North American cheetahs.

 

·                                 In addition to phytoestrogens, soy also contains phytates that prevent mineral absorption, substances that block the enzymes needed to digest protein, and other anti-nutrients.

 

·                                 The soy in traditional oriental diets doesn’t remotely resemble the soy in Western diets, including pet food. Whereas the former is slowly fermented for one to two years, radically altering its chemistry and increasing nutrient availability, the latter is processed through a series of shortcuts that potentially make it more, not less, harmful when ingested.

 

·                                 The health risks associated with soy products far outweigh any potential benefit, which is why pet owners should avoid exposing their dog or cat to any food containing soy.

 

By Dr. Becker

 

As I was scanning an industry trade journal recently, a headline caught my eye.

 

It announced the opening of a new manufacturing plant to produce protein for animal diets.

 

Protein in animal diets being one of my favorite subjects, I read a little further … only to discover the company opening the new plant makes vegetable protein.

 

And the reason they need more manufacturing capacity is to answer the growing demand for soy protein products in North America.

 

Clearly, soy in all its forms is being included in an increasing number of commercial dog and cat food formulas.

 

I've discussed the problem of soy in pet food often here at Mercola Healthy Pets.

 

But I think it's probably time for a closer look at what soy is, the health problems it can create, why it's used by so many pet food manufacturers … and why you shouldn't feed it to your dog or cat.

 

Parrots in New Zealand: Canaries in the Coal Mine*

 

In 1991, a wealthy American lawyer named Richard James was living with his wife in New Zealand.

 

The James's were pursuing their retirement dream of raising exotic birds 'down under.'

 

The couple wanted to feed their flock of exotics the best diet available.

 

Soya beans were being heavily marketed in the U.S. as a new wonder food, so James offered the young birds soya feed.

 

Parrots don't eat soya beans in the wild. And the result for the James' flock was disastrous.

 

Some of the birds became infertile. Many died. Young males hit puberty years early and aged prematurely.

 

James consulted Dr. Mike Fitzpatrick, a toxicologist consulting at a New Zealand laboratory. James told Fitzpatrick he was certain soya beans were killing his rare birds. Fitzpatrick thought James was mistaken, but he decided to investigate, because there was obviously hormonal disruption occurring with the parrots, and he had eliminated the possibility of other hormone disrupting chemicals like pesticides from the equation.

 

Dr. Fitzpatrick went about studying soya and its effects. He discovered soya contains both toxins and powerful plant estrogens capable of disrupting female menstrual cycles. It also appeared to damage the thyroid.

 

Eventually, the British government studied the safety of soya proteins in modern food and published results in 2002 concluding that health claims for soya were not supported by clear evidence. Further there could be risks associated with high levels of consumption.

 

Meanwhile, Dr. Fitzpatrick, still concerned about soya consumption and in particular, about children and soya milk, determined an infant fed exclusively soya formula could ingest estrogen equivalent to five birth control pills a day, based on body weight.

 

*(For those of you unfamiliar with the expression "canaries in the coal mine," from Wisegeek:

 

“Life for an actual canary in a coal mine could be described in three words: "short but meaningful." Early coal mines did not feature ventilation systems, so miners would routinely bring a caged canary into new coal seams. Canaries are especially sensitive to methane and carbon monoxide, which made them ideal for detecting any dangerous gas build-ups. As long as the bird kept singing, the miners knew their air supply was safe. A dead canary signaled an immediate evacuation.”)

 

North American Cheetahs: More Canaries in the Coal Mine

 

Approximately 30 years ago, captive breeding of North American cheetahs was undertaken to reverse a population crisis within the species.

 

But in 1985, 29 cheetahs in American zoos died, many from liver disease. Only 18 were born, and 7 of those died before reaching adulthood.

 

As few as 10 percent of adult female cheetahs living in captivity in North America produced live cubs in the mid-1980s. Yet in other countries, 60 to 70 percent was the norm.

 

The difference? Cheetahs living and breeding successfully in other parts of the world were fed whole animal carcasses. North American cheetahs were fed a commercial feline diet of horsemeat and soy.

 

Researchers in Ohio studied the food the North American cheetahs were eating. They found the soy portion of the diet contained plant estrogens similar to the hormones found in female mammals.

 

Four cheetahs in a U.S. zoo were switched to a diet of chicken meat and no soy. Liver function improved, however, whether the cats would ever be able to breed successfully remained a question mark.

 

The researchers theorized the cheetahs were probably extra-sensitive to the effects of plant estrogens due to inbreeding (the result of a previous population crisis). However, the amount of soy in their diets was relatively small, leading the scientists to conclude all felines probably have difficulty ridding their bodies of excess estrogens.

 

The Difference Between "Safe" Soy and Most Soy

 

Only folks who've been living under a rock for the last 30 years have missed the massive marketing campaigns promoting the health benefits of soy products. It's estimated the American soy industry spends at least $80 million a year to promote worldwide soy consumption.

 

This, despite well documented evidence of the anti-health properties of soya in both animals and humans.

 

Plant estrogens, also called phytoestrogens, produce biological effects in humans. In soy protein, the most common of these compounds are isoflavones.

 

The way soy is processed affects the level of phytoestrogens. Traditional fermentation reduces the levels of isoflavones dramatically, however, factory processing does not. And U.S. varieties of soy are manipulated to be pest resistant (soybeans have some of the highest concentrations of pesticides of any crop), with the result that they contain higher levels of isoflavones than soy grown in Japan or China.

 

Raw, mature soybeans contain not only phytoestrogens, but also phytates that prevent mineral absorption and substances that block the enzymes needed to digest protein. Soy also contains other anti-nutrients, including:

 

·        Antigens in the form of non-denatured proteins that can create serious allergic reactions in both animals and people

 

·        Trypsin inhibitors that hinder the action of proteolytic enzymes in the GI tract, reducing the digestibility of proteins

 

·        Oligosaccharides -- indigestible sugars that cause gassiness and diarrhea

 

·        Phytic acid, which can interfere with the body's use of vital minerals like calcium, magnesium, iron and zinc

 

The soy in traditional oriental diets has been fermented for long periods (18 months on average) using molds, cultures or other substances that radically alter its biochemistry. This transformation through fermentation lessens the impact of anti-nutrients while making the amino acids in soybeans available for use by the body.

 

Factory processing, by contrast, starts with defatted soy protein meal rather than the whole bean. The meal is produced in a crushing process. Raw beans are crushed into thin flakes. The flakes are mixed with a petroleum-based hexane solvent to extract the soy oil. Flake waste is toasted and ground down to soy meal or soy flour, both of which wind up in animal feed.

 

The soy oil is then cleaned, bleached, degummed and deodorized.

 

"Naturally brewed" soy sauce means the processed soy protein meal has been mixed with mold spores and "aged" at high temperatures for 3 to 6 months.

 

Regular, non-brewed soy sauce takes only 2 days to produce. Soy flour is blended with hydrochloric acid at high temps, under pressure, and the result is hydrolyzed vegetable protein. Various preservatives and additives are used to improve color and taste. This method employs the use of the enzyme glutamase, which in turn produces large quantities of the "g" (glutamate) in MSG.

 

Why You Should Avoid Pet Foods Containing Soy Products

 

Soybeans and soybean-related products can be found in an increasing number of commercially available pet food formulas, dry, semi-moist and wet, including many beautifully advertised, big selling brands, as well as veterinary formulas and prescription diets.

 

Soy is a plant protein used by pet food companies to boost protein content and add bulk. Because plant proteins are less expensive than meat proteins, pet food manufacturers use them to increase profit margins.

 

The ingredient label might not even say soy, as it is commonly listed as vegetable broth, textured vegetable protein or TVP, and perhaps other aliases.

 

The majority of experts on pet nutrition agree soy isn't good nutrition for cats or dogs. It is considered a low-quality, incomplete protein well known to create food allergies in pets.

 

According to Sally Fallon and Mary G. Enig, PhD, authors of Cinderella's Dark Side:

 

"The soybean contains large quantities of natural toxins or "antinutrients." First among them are potent enzyme inhibitors that block the action of trypsin and other enzymes needed for protein digestion. These inhibitors are large, tightly folded proteins that are not completely deactivated during ordinary cooking. They can produce serious gastric distress, reduced protein digestion and chronic deficiencies in amino acid uptake. In test animals, diets high in trypsin inhibitors cause enlargement and pathological conditions of the pancreas, including cancer. Soybeans also contain haemagglutinin, a clot-promoting substance that causes red blood cells to clump together. Trypsin inhibitors and haemagglutinin are growth inhibitors."

 

A study was conducted in 2004 at the University of Pennsylvania to determine the amount of phytoestrogens in 24 random commercial dog foods. Results revealed all the foods containing soy ingredients had concentrations of phytoestrogens in large enough quantities to have a biological effect on the pet. i

 

Soy has been linked to gas and deadly bloat in dogs. It is high in purines and is therefore a completely inappropriate protein source for urate-forming dogs. It is also high in silicates and promotes the formation of silica stones.

 The carbohydrate action of soy can cause a rise in blood sugar in many cats. Soy is also linked to thyroid damage, and since hyperthyroidism is common in kitties, this is yet another reason it should not be part of a feline's diet.

 The ingestion of soybean products is also linked to seizures in both dogs and cats.

 I hope I've given you a more complete understanding of why avoiding pet foods containing soy products is best for your favorite four-legged companion.

 In my opinion, the potential risks associated with feeding soy are simply unacceptable … especially when you consider your carnivorous cat or dog prefers and receives a much higher level of nutrition from animal protein sources.

 

 

Raw hide tyggeben

Om måden tyggeben af hud fremstilles:


Nyeste (amerikanske) liste over de 20 værste tørkost varianter til hunde 


Skriv en ny kommentar: (Klik her)

123hjemmeside.dk
Tegn tilbage: 160
OK Sender...
Se alle kommentarer

| Svar

Nyeste kommentarer

07.02 | 16:29

Helt nuttet! <3

------------------------------
http://www.kviklantop.com/

...
02.07 | 15:50

Prøv at ring til en af kontakterne hos Græske hunde og hør om de kan hjælpe dig http://www.graeskehunde.dk/kontakt.html - der kræves papirer/dyrlægetjek mm

...
02.07 | 14:38

Hvordan får jeg en hund med hjem?
Den bor i en have,hvor der hænger et skilt med at den kan adopteres. Du må megetgerne ringe til mig på 22786722. VVenligst Ni

...
18.11 | 10:04
Håb for hundene? har modtaget 2
Du kan lide denne side
Hej!
Prøv at lave din egen hjemmeside ligesom mig! Det er nemt, og du kan prøve det gratis
ANNONCE