Thread: Differing Opinions ....

I feed my cats a mixed diet, they get some tinned ie Tuna and some Classic cat, tins I usually mix these together to increase the meat content.
I also feed raw chicken wings, thighs,drumsticks, Turkey legs, and Diced raw Ox heart. They also have large kibble biscuits (no sugar or grain) to keep their teeth nice and clean.
My girl was raised on poached chicken and was fine then suddenly she got upset tummy if she ate chicken, she is not very keen on raw food so has a mainly fish diet, she will eat a bit of ox heart or steak.
The one raw food my other 2 don't like is mince, but they will eat chunks of steak. (not daft are they)
I would say at this time of year I don't feed a lot of wet food, always bothered about flies, so if they are getting wet I feed them at night when flies arnt around, or I have splatted them all.
I think as long as your cats are healthy, then it is up to you as their slave what you feed them.
My vet has always commented on the crews teeth how nice and clean they are also how good a condition their coats and skin is in. So that is good enough for me and my babies.

Good on you Carol ann!

I know some cats (and dogs) can react adversely to chicken… hard to believe but true!

As for the kibble biscuits – they really don’t do much to clean teeth, however big the biscuits are. Teeth are best kept clean by letting them chew on some tough meat (like beef of horsemeat or chicken gizzard) or a chicken or duck neck a couple of times a week. That’s probably why your cats have such good teeth.

Originally Posted by catslave

Whilst I agree that there are certain subjects that should not be discussed I don't think that this should including feeding on a cat forum. Openly discussing alternate feeding in an adult manner is a way of clearing up some of the myths etc about them. In various different threads over the last year at least 17 regular contributors on here have posted that they feed some raw meat to their cats regularly. Yesterday alone I had PM's from three contributors who were interested in finding out about alternative feeding but were worried about posting due to the actions of a very small group.

Lets not forget that tinned cat food was only "invented" in the 1970's - what did cats eat before then?

I have no wish to argue with you Walter, I respect your opinions and we have never clashed in the past, I have always found your advice extremely helpful.

I haven't clashed with anyone on this forum because, up to now, I've avoided any controversial topics.

Your statement that 'tinned cat food was only "invented" in the 1970's [sic]' is incorrect. The Gaines Food Company introduced canned/tinned cat food in the 1930s.

Truth is not established by majority vote. It doesn't matter how many people take one side or another on an issue. At one time almost all people thought the earth was flat (and a few still do), but that didn't make it true. It doesn't matter how many people favour feeding raw food to cats or how many people oppose feeding raw food to cats.

As soon as the admins here established a section for those in favour of raw food to discuss the topic and made it off-limits to those who think raw food is a bad idea without creating a section for those who think raw food is a bad idea and making it off-limits to those in favour of raw food, they took a position. They came down on one side. They prevented an equitable sharing of views.

Now I assume everyone here wants what is best for their animals (feline or otherwise) and would never accuse someone of mistreating their cat because of their position on raw food, nor do I condone anyone engaging in that sort of written abuse. But there were some people here who did not do that sort of stuff, who stuck to facts as demonstrated through scientific testing who have been effectively silenced and, in at least one case, driven away from this forum altogether. I think that is wrong. I think it has hurt the usefulness of this forum. It has certainly eliminated the forum as a balanced source of information.

That there has to be a protected sub-forum for those interested in raw food, and that there isn't one for those who think raw feeding is a bad idea, speaks volumes for the attitude of some (of course not all!) of those against raw feeding.

The fact is that the pro-raw and those interested in raw were made to feel that it was unmentionable. This seemed very unfair to me, so I started a thread 'Raw Feeding Corner' which was immediately trashed. I have not done that to anyone else.

Originally Posted by Walter Coonkat

Now I assume everyone here wants what is best for their animals (feline or otherwise) and would never accuse someone of mistreating their cat because of their position on raw food, nor do I condone anyone engaging in that sort of written abuse.

I actually was accused of 'not really caring' about my cats' health, which I found offensive, and for which I received a grudging apology. Again, I would never think that of anyone who was not feeding raw, let alone say so in a forum. There were other insulting assumptions made against me, even though I thought I had kept my posts measured and reasonable.

If anyone has prevented the equitable sharing of views, it is the people with this unhelpful attitude, and not the admins. I don't see that anyone has been driven away: after all, both sides of the discussion can still be found on this forum.

Originally Posted by Walter Coonkat

I haven't clashed with anyone on this forum because, up to now, I've avoided any controversial topics.

Your statement that 'tinned cat food was only "invented" in the 1970's [sic]' is incorrect. The Gaines Food Company introduced canned/tinned cat food in the 1930s.

Truth is not established by majority vote. It doesn't matter how many people take one side or another on an issue. At one time almost all people thought the earth was flat (and a few still do), but that didn't make it true. It doesn't matter how many people favour feeding raw food to cats or how many people oppose feeding raw food to cats.

As soon as the admins here established a section for those in favour of raw food to discuss the topic and made it off-limits to those who think raw food is a bad idea without creating a section for those who think raw food is a bad idea and making it off-limits to those in favour of raw food, they took a position. They came down on one side. They prevented an equitable sharing of views.

Now I assume everyone here wants what is best for their animals (feline or otherwise) and would never accuse someone of mistreating their cat because of their position on raw food, nor do I condone anyone engaging in that sort of written abuse. But there were some people here who did not do that sort of stuff, who stuck to facts as demonstrated through scientific testing who have been effectively silenced and, in at least one case, driven away from this forum altogether. I think that is wrong. I think it has hurt the usefulness of this forum. It has certainly eliminated the forum as a balanced source of information.

Walter: I commend you for your balanced post but I would remind you that the people who run this forum and the mods are volunteers! I have a day job and have to juggle hospital appointments, work and family. We don't scrutinise every post and trust the "adults" on here to respect each others views and debate in an adult fashion.

In all fairness posters had free reign here for a long time without any proper moderation, and some took advantage of this!
Perhaps, if some more of the rational voices on the forum had spoken up before now, we would have avoided alot of bad feeling . After all, it is you folks who are the eyes and ears of the forum!
Mods are only a PM away!

Sadly once again I'm having to defend the actions of the administation first thing in the morning, it's really not pleasant going around in circles on this issue.

1. A SUB FORUM is certainly not necessary in addition to the diet and nutrition forum to discuss the risks of raw feeding. That idea doesn't make sense, do you see yourself posting new threads in there daily?

2. Whereas the subforum for RAW FEEDING is, I repeat there solely for those who DO raw feed to discuss the matter and recipes etc to ensure people do it properly. Whether you or me think thats right or wrong, it happens and will continue to happen.

3. A SUB FORUM is certainly not necessary in addition to the diet and nutrition forum to discuss the risks of raw feeding. The majority of forums on here are for general debate. You wouldn't go into the Breeders of Scotland subforum and start discussing the risks of interbreeding, so why is this any different!?

4. The fact that you claim people are being silenced and driven off the forum is Ludicrous!!!! - The person who has left, left entirely by choice and was extremely hostile on forum. If you cannot debate issues without turning on the other members when people are not swayed to your way of thinking then leave by all means, regardless of your stance on a topic there is NEVER need to throw tantrums and belittling the other members just because you don't like their opinion. This above all my points is the most frustrating as it feels I'm repeatedly discussing toleration and respect for others with my kids.

5. So just to clarify you disagree with the admins, (who are trying extremely hard to keep balance despite receiving abuse via PMs themselves!) because a. we haven't created a dedicated subforum which will probably only contain one single thread in all likelihood. b. because we've allowed free discussion of the debate but clearly stated we won't tolerate abuse for the protection of all our members, and c. because we're encouraging 'friendly' debate you think we're unbalanced.

It would be quite a boring forum if everyone agreed with each other imo, I'm not even going to say where i stand on the raw feeding topic. It's when people start getting a bit too personal with comments if someone disagrees that needs to be stamped out.
I don't envy your job Dave especially as i assume you do it for free because you love the breed, as we all do (at least that's one thing we can all agree on
Just my 2 cents...