# Feeding an assortment of cichlids



## Alisonj

I have herbivores, carnivores and ominvores. I give them a good quality flake as well as a pellet. But what about blood worms etc? Can some of the other fish get sick from eating blood worms?


----------



## cater20155

The non carnivores can get bloat due to the high protein in the blood worms. A safe bet would be to go with a good quality pellet such as New Life Spectrum. It will work for all herb, omni, and carnivores.


----------



## Gibbs

It's not the high protien levels that cause bloat it is the fat content that is the major factor. The most abundant source of protein on earth is found in plant matter when compared to animal matter. Bloodworms can also carry disease and infections with them only to pass them onto your fish, which is a major concern, decomposition of the un-eaten worms also pose as a threat.

These days with the high quality flake and pellets that are available to us there is no point feeding anything else. A good flake rich in spiralina and plant matter as well as a high quality pellet such as NLS is all that's needed.


----------



## Alisonj

Awesome, thanks!


----------



## HomeDawwg

I have the same mix you described, and i feed bloodworms once a fortnight. I have had zero problems with bloat or disease with these fish, and the fish love them. (tank was set up a bit over a year ago).

As Gibbs pointed out there is a risk, but feeding sparingly with bloodworms has served me well.

Darren


----------



## blairo1

The only reason I deviate from using a quality pellet (I use New Life Spectrum for what its worth) is if I want to try and induce breeding in my fish, and then it's dependant on the diet of the fish. Ie if I had my mbuna still I'd rather not change a thing, I'd up the frequency of my water changes and perhaps increase feeding the _tiniest_ amount just to help egg production in females.

For my SA's I switch to a fresh blend that I made of mussels, salmon skin, shelled peas, krill etc and feed that in place of the pellet for a couple of days - sets them all off a treat although I still believe it is largely the "excitement" that sets them off rather than the nutritional content entirely.

I can't see why you'd want to feed anything else other than a proven effective and balanced diet - as has been pointed out this is readily available in the form of quality flake and pellet food. In my opinion NLS is the way to go, there are others such as Dainichi who are also reputable and it really comes down to choice after research and opinion.

If you are feeding (I use NLS as the example because it is what I know) NLS as a staple diet it is absolutely and entirely unnecessary to vary or supplement their diet. That seems hard for many to accept, but your fish don't need variety, they need a stable and balanced diet. They don't get "bored" either, they're hungry, they will eat. Get a quality food and stick to it, _you_ get bored of feeding one food, not vice versa.


----------



## Gibbs

Just be aware that over feeding mbuna slows down the rate aggs are produced by females. A steady diet is required but it is usually feeding days that are missed that sparks an increase in egg production as well a good water change routine.


----------



## blairo1

> Just be aware that over feeding mbuna slows down the rate aggs are produced by females.


 :thumb: I certainly was not advising to over feed your fish. My main point is that rather than adding bloodworms to your staple diet, you would be better replacing that instead with... quality pellet/flake.



> The only reason I deviate from using a quality pellet ... is to induce breeding in my fish, and then it's dependant on the diet of the fish...if I had my mbuna I'd rather not change a thing


Egg production doesn't seem to be effected dependant on where the fat source has come from, so there is as much use in bloodworm fat as there is in your flake/pellet (probably not actually as usable). It is true however that the energetic cost of yolk deposition results in a depletion of lipid in the muscle - _that_ is in turn reflected in egg biochemistry, which is why I tend to give a teeny bit more food in running up to spawning.

It is worth noting that the amount I feed is probably considerably less than most - my 55, 40 and 20 gallon receive barely a teaspoon of 1mm NLS pellets between them each day and the stocking isn't exactly light, so when I increase feed a tiny bit it's probably a fairly "average" amount.

Triggering spawns can actually be performed with an action as simple as increasing the photo period, as well as many other factors that influence spawning when changes occur (salinity, temperature, mineral content etc all play a role). I did not intend to go into that here but merely mentioned that I use such additional feeds as "excitement triggers" for my fish, rather than as an addition to their diet, as I've found it tends to get them "randy" :lol:.


----------



## smellsfishy1

All the above is good but you still have to vary the diet of your fish. It is critical to supply a good staple food such as NLS or OmegaOne or Hikari ...... but the fish need different grub on occasion especially if you want to get them spawnning. Live brine is good for the omega vitatmins, you could do krill(color enhancer) or shrimp maybe mysis. I've even fed regualar shrimp from the grocery store that I eat.Go with something more like a seafood and stay away from beefhearts and bloodworms.I have used bloodworms on occasion but most people say to stay away from it.


----------



## blairo1

*smellsfishy1* it really isn't a necessity to feed a varied diet any more *IF* you feed a quality staple food. I understand the thinking but it just doesn't apply any more, there have been many developments in the fish food industry, both in the understanding of providing for their dietary needs and in actually implementing it.

If you feed NLS (I use NLS as an example because I have researched them and used them the most) you don't NEED to vary your fishes diet, the whole point of NLS (as one brand) is that it was created to supply everything your fish need - from varied sources of protein and fats, through to the oils and vitamins that you talk about.

There are some species that plain refuse to eat anything other than live food, if you could get those fish to eat a staple pellet like NLS they would not suffer from no longer eating varied live foods - if this were the case such food brands would not be staple diets, but instead all supplemental - trying to cater for what the other doesn't. If the staple diet that you feed doesn't supply for your fishes dietary needs, then I would not consider it a quality staple diet - it obviously needs supplementing to work efficiently, what companies like NLS and Dainichi pride themselves in is their foods ability to provide all your fishes dietary needs.

Feeding variety was necessary when foods where not capable of providing for the entire dietary requirements of our fish and still is if one is using a low grade pellet/flake. It really is more for our benefit these days (taking into account the points above), it's human thinking that we need variety, fish don't care, they'll be healthy as long as they eat it, and as long as it provides for their needs.


----------



## MalawiLover

Just like with dog and cat foods. The animals will be healthier if they are fed solely a high quality food that meets all their nutritional needs. Once you find one that the animal likes, you don't change it up all the time. It leads to digestive issues. Just ask a veterinarian. You can give treats sparingly, but they are more for our emotions, not the animals and are certainly not needed for nutrition.


----------



## smellsfishy1

You *definitley *have to feed your fish different foods at least once in a while. I had my yellow labs for 2 years and they never spawned. I fed them live brine shrimp and they spawned that same week. 8) I guess it does trigger something. You are right, NLS meets all of the dietary requirements of most if not all fish, but it is a dry food and all dry foods contain items that fish would never consume in the wild and a frozen or fresh food to change things up can do fish a lot of good. Fish are not dogs and their bodies are built for a wide variety of food. All diets need balance and not just in ingredients but in texture, preparation, and taste. Feeding variety will always be necessary, thats what they do in the wild, they eat everything not just NLS.  Yes the fish will be healthy and true they don't care but remember this, even if you don't agree with anything stated above, these fish evolved in their wild and native waters, not our aquariums.


----------



## blairo1

Sorry bud but this just isn't so, it's not that *I* don't agree with it, it's that these things have been tested under scientific scrutiny and developed with the requirements in mind. It is irrelevant that it is a dry food, "changing things up" really isn't necessary at all for your fish, providing for their nutritional needs is what it boils down to, you can choose to do that through an assortment of foods, or through an already blended assortment of foods designed specifically TO provide what your varied diet does, and more. If you feed a quality staple like NLS you DO NOT NEED to supplement the diet.

I wouldn't eat the same food over and over again because we are prone to boredom, WE are so picky about a varied diet because we have the choice, we have always had the choice, fish have never had this liberty, you are attributing human characteristics to those of animals and it's been shown that it just isn't so. Fish don't care and they don't need variety, they need nutrition to metabolise and as long as that nutrition is supplied in adequate amounts then they will be as healthy as can be. The foods we are talking about here go above and beyond providing that for your fish. You can see this from the ingredients and from the breakdown. I really spent a lot of time researching this subject and I really understand your opinion, but I'm telling you that it's just not the case any more, not that you are wrong, but that it no longer applies with the available products mentioned here.

Your labs most likely spawned because live food will generally trigger something in the fish - the hunting of a prey and eating something that is alive certainly does excite them and works wonders for spawning, but do not mistake this for the live food being beneficial as such, it is merely an excitement trigger. What feed you had them on at the time also influences things, if it were not a high quality staple food then the lack of quality fats would probably explain why when given live brine the extra lipids etc suddenly boosted egg production. I generally find that it just gets them rared up whatever the staple and as I mentioned I too use this to my benefit, but that doesn't mean my fish need it.  I can point you at lots of interesting reading if you want but I hadn't planned on getting into this in the OP's thread.


----------



## punman

I have had spawing of Frontosas, Cyprichromis, C. foai (featherfins), Tropheus, all raised from juveniles to adulthood when rasied on a good pellet food and some of these fish are not the easiest to breed. They did not need extra varied foods fromwhat I could tell. The only exception were tiny fry - some of which would only eat live brine shrimp at the start.


----------



## smellsfishy1

I didn't say all fish need live food to spawn it just happened to work on mine. I should also mention that these dried foods (which is very relevant since it is wise to do emmulate nature)do not contain everything therefore you should supplement their diets with other food items. The reason MOST of the stuff they need is in a flake or a pellet form is so you don't have to have all those things on hand or they can not be obtained with ease like kelp or krill or spirulina. It just makes it convenient not better bud. Why eat a pill when you can eat a meal? I do understand everything you have stated and I have heard it many times before but it wouldn't be fair to not use such a complete and complex digestive system.  I guess what I need to say is doing things the natural way once in a while can only be beneficial and not detrimental. If that's not healthy I don't know what is.


----------



## blairo1

> I guess what I need to say is doing things the natural way once in a while can only be beneficial and not detrimental


 :thumb:

My point is simply that if you feed NLS you don't NEED to supplement the diet (I'm not intending this to be nls vs argument), if you choose to supplement the diet (as I mentioned earlier I too do this on occasion, with certain fish, with a good blend of fresh ingredients) then that is something that can be done and as long as you're not adding vits (read up on vitamintosis) then no real harm done, it makes you feel better, it does excite the fish, it's fair enough. I'm not trying to stop you from doing what you do .

I only continue to "argue" because you are stating that these pellets NEED supplementing. You would have to go a loooong way and to a lot of expense to remotely match the nutritional content in NLS and some other high quality pellets (not all, there certainly ARE feeds out there that need supplementing, my argument for that is simply why feed something that needs to be supplemented - it obviously doesn't meet their dietary requirements alone):

Whole Antarctic *Krill* Meal, Whole *Herring* Meal, Wheat Flour, Whole *Squid* Meal, *Algae* Meal, Soybean Isolate, Beta Carotene, *Spirulina*, Garlic, Vegetable and Fruit Extract (*Spinach, Red & Green Cabbage, Pea, Broccoli, Red Pepper, Zucchini, Tomato, Kiwi, Apricot, Pear, Mango, Apple, Papaya, Peach*), Vitamin A Acetate, DL Alphatocophero( E ), D-Activated Animail-Sterol (D3),Vitamin B12 Supplement, Niacin, Folic Acid, Biotin Thiamine, Riboflavin Supplement, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Calcium Pantothenate, L-Ascorby-2-Polyphosphate (Stable C), Choline Chloride, Copper Proteinate, Ethylenediamine dihydroiodide, Cobalt Sulfate, Ferrous Sulfate, Manganese Sulfate.

New Life Spectrum does NOT need supplementing, that has been the entire developmental point of the product. I do not feed my fresh mix frequently enough for it to benefit my fish, yet they breed in vast numbers, are incredibly colourful etc, I've NEVER had an issue with digestion in my fish from eating nothing but pellets. I've raised fry on crushed NLS and fed them NOTHING but NLS for their entire lives up to this point (not even my fresh mix), if they needed more, they would not be so healthy. I understand your concerns about "fillers" but these too have been minimised and developed to be as digestible as possible. Soybean meal was replaced by Soybean Isolate, a much cleaner, and more expensive raw ingredient, with none of the anti-nutritional factors that can be found in soybean meal. Isolate is much more concentrated, so you can use much less of it etc.

If you are concerned about their gut being constantly filled with a dry pellet then do what I do and give them a. less food (the stuff is so potent anyway) and b. a day off of feeding, but you don't even need to do that. What of the lakeside exporters who have huge vats of fish for up to 6 months, do you think they feed those wild caught fish a variety of foods, do they heck, they're fed on a staple flake and usually a cheap one at that, those are fish straight from the lake, thriving for months on something that isn't even as concentrated or refined as the quality pellets available to us. Unprocessed live foods such as krill with their exoskeleton will prove somewhat harder to digest than the processed version, both still offer the same nutritional benefits....

You see it as being either convenient OR better, yet they can go hand in hand - just because of somethings convenience you should not then assume it to be incapable of providing it all. To match the nutritional content in NLS you'd have a pretty interesting task on your hands as it is both concentrated and from VARIED sources - there are several sources of proteins and fats in NLS for a reason. One might argue "I do not think anybody knows enough to be absolutely sure that a single food has everything needed." What makes anyone think that by providing 10 different foods to a fish, that their fish will glean more nutrition than from a single food that contains a multitude of high quality highly digestible ingredients? That type of logic just doesn't fit. Just because the mixture of food is not found in pellet form in the wild you assume that it will effect the digestive efficiency or process of your fish, it just isn't so bud, it's a mixture of ingredients that are all as readily broken down as anything you will feed them "naturally". We do not need to emulate nature, we need to meet their nutritional and dietary needs, NLS for one, does that, in entirety.

To YOU it wouldn't be "fair" not to feed a varied diet, what I am trying to convey to you is that it really doesn't matter WHAT you feed your fish, as long as it is readily digestible and meets their nutritional needs. They will thrive as much as they would on any amount of live food, potentially even more so considering the addition of vitamins and the sheer variety of protein, amino acids and fats, in such feeds. Earlier I made mention of how egg production in female fish is not affected by where the nutritional source is derived from, simply that it only needs to be supplied - be it from bloodworms, krill, or quality pellet:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_o ... 8f0851c33d

This is an ooold study that shows even then some interesting results, bear in mind how far fish food has come since then and how much more we understand about the dietary requirements of fish, ie the pellet you feed in NLS is superior to that used in the study cited here:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/field/003/AB8 ... tm#ch2.2.1

:thumb: Nice to have an actual friendly debate about this that hasn't turned into a slagging match.


----------



## Gibbs

Wow that blew up :lol: 
A good flake and pellet provides everything. Anything else only satisfies our own emotions.
If it helps krill and herring make part of the ingredience in NLS. It may not be live, but it is a much safer way to provide the correct dietry intake for these fish.
Lets also remember that these flakes and pellets are scientificly blended to meet dietry needs, there is nothing in a live krill important enough to a fish that has been left out of the ingredience...for our convenience


----------



## smellsfishy1

I hear you Blairo/Gibbs.I know the studies, NLS has it all, I know your scientific evidence and all that is fine.I think to really understand and appreciate a fish or a pet for that matter, you should try some fresh stuff. Nature is beautiful. You will enjoy it and so will your fish. Cichlids(mbuna or most africans) are opportunistic feeders as well as grazers(i'm sure you know this already, you seem educated) I think you will learn to appreciate them more as they behave in nature if you feed them in this manner. I'm not saying all the time just on occasion. Put some seaweed on a clip or a piece of romaine and watch. That's how it is in the wild. It's not bad for them, its natural for them(natural is good) and you can still feed them NLS. It's just natural eating habits and it is a good thing that many keepers and the fish enjoy. Can a cichlid graze on NLS? Hey Gibbs, what species is your avitar?


----------



## blairo1

:thumb: Think we've pretty well covered it.



I said:


> For my SA's I switch to a fresh blend that I made of mussels, salmon skin, shelled peas, krill etc .......I still believe it is largely the "excitement" that sets them off rather than the nutritional content.





I also said:


> I did not intend to go into that here but merely mentioned that I use such additional feeds as "excitement triggers" for my fish, rather than as an addition to their diet, as I've found it tends to get them "randy" :lol:


To summarise then;
They certainly enjoy it, it _isn't_ a necessity when feeding ANY balanced quality pellet/flake (I made it quite clear this wasn't solely about NLS) but it can make for a nice "treat" for you and a bit of excitement for them every once in a while. If you do choose to "treat" make sure it's appropriate to the species. :thumb: As for watching the fish behave more "naturally", well that's why I keep my feeding light, because this way they do graze and explore the tank, especially when I had my Dem colony. It was great to watch them scout out and go to town rasping on rocks, trust me I very much appreciate such behaviour, which is why in my tanks I try to replicate the fishes habitat as best I can.


----------



## smellsfishy1

Appearantly as keepers, the more we think we are different the more we are the same. I also keep feedings down at times to watch them scavenge through the substrate and graze the rocks , so I guess we share some of the same "techniques" or "tricks".  We must be after the "excitement". 8) Well done Blairo. :thumb:


----------



## Misfit702

Where can I pick up this NLS stuff? Any specific type for my variety of fish? Size of pellet?


----------



## Gibbs

Any good LFS or online.
Cichlid formula 1mm pellets is what to look for


----------



## blairo1

They also do a 2mm pellet now in case your fish are at that "in-between" size - the 3mm pellet can be a little much for some, and the 1mm pellets obviously you need a few more for larger fish, so they've released a 2mm. :thumb:

So really the size pellet depends on what size fish, my tiny harlequin rasboras eat my 1mm cichlid formula, as do 99% of my fish BUT I keep dwarf cichlids predominantly so the 1mm pellet is perfectly suited. For fish 4" up I'd feed the 2mm pellet, obviously if you have a lot of fish smaller than that it'd just make sense to get the 1mm. 6" up and I go onto the 3mm and if it's a chunky fish like a Sev I give them the 7.5mm pellets.

Really a rough guide as the jaw structure of Cichlids varies so a little intuitiveness is required . Ie my Julidochromis is quite a large fish, but with the structure of it's jaw the Julie would have a hard time eating the same size pellets that a similar sized Calvus could manage.

As Gibbs has pointed out, stick to the Cichlid Formula (I feed that to ALL my fish, dithers, pleco's, SAE's included).

*smellsfishy* Nice to have a decent debate with you bud. :thumb:


----------



## thetim6

I don't disagree that your fish get all the nutrition they need from NLS pellets, but I do vary my fishes diet.

I'm interested in seeing a scientific study about how varying high quality foods for fish is a bad thing. It may not be beneficial, but surely it can't be detrimental to vary high quality frozen and fresh foods with a staple pellet or flake food.

My only problem with the argument that you only need to feed fish one type of food because it is somehow otherwise harmful to there digestive system, is this:

Say the pellet has the following ingredients: krill, herring, squid, spirulina, fruits and vegetables. If I took those same ingredients, fresh, mixed them up and fed them to my fish would it be a bad thing? There would be far more omega 3 fatty acids than in cooked foods.

I give my fish frozen mysis, fresh brine, frozen/fresh/freeze dried krill, spirulina flakes, NLS pellets, frozen cyclop eeze, fresh peas, lettuce, etc.

I can't see how supplementing high quality frozen and fresh seafoods and vegetables could be a bad thing for my fish. It's the same foods essentially, just in a different format and less prepared.

It does say on the NLS jar to feed it solely for best results. I think feeding my fish solely fresh and frozen unprocessed foods would actually be how to achieve the best results, but it's just not feasible or cost efficient. NLS is super cost efficient and it is by far the best processed fish food on the market that I have used, but I still like to feed frozen and fresh foods occasionally.


----------



## smellsfishy1

You won't find a study to support the claim that it is detrimental. With a single food it is hard to target the exact diet(hard to do anyway) but the REQUIREMENTS are met. I think with MOST fish, NLS is the staple to go with. There is a problem here in the case for herbivores. Some of those protein ingredients are too high on the list and algae/spirulina are not high enough on the list to feed as the only food they will need. An omnivore or carnivore is better off with NLS as the exlusive food. All the literature I have read mentions that in the wild spirulina/algae is the primary food of herbivore cichlids and the treat of other critters in the aufawchs(hope I spelled it right) occurs sometimes. So a veggie eaters list should be more like spirulina,algae,kelp,spinach(any veggies) then the krill, salmon, herring,squid and so on. OmegaOne super kelp fits the bill here.
The fish should thrive on its staple. Requirement is defined as something essential to the existence or a necessity, to summarize, just getting by. That just doesn't cut it for me.


----------



## Gibbs

smellsfishy1 said:


> There is a problem here in the case for herbivores. Some of those protein ingredients are too high on the list and algae/spirulina are not high enough on the list to feed as the only food they will need. An omnivore or carnivore is better off with NLS as the exlusive food. All the literature I have read mentions that in the wild spirulina/algae is the primary food of herbivore cichlids and the treat of other critters in the aufawchs(hope I spelled it right) occurs sometimes. So a veggie eaters list should be more like spirulina,algae,kelp,spinach(any veggies) then the krill, salmon, herring,squid and so on. OmegaOne super kelp fits the bill here.
> The fish should thrive on its staple. Requirement is defined as something essential to the existence or a necessity, to summarize, just getting by. That just doesn't cut it for me.


Although parts of your statement are true (omnivore or carnivore is better off with NLS), a lot of it isn't. A herbivore could survive solely on NLS. It's protien levels, even though most of the time it isn't the cause of bloat (i'll get to that soon) aren't really that high, my vegetable flake is actually higher in protien on average by 8.2%. I no people that feed tropheus NLS and a vege flake daily without problems.
The most abundant source of protein on earth is found in plant matter, including algea and kelp. A herbivore does need protien and gets plenty of it, it's a herbivores inability to process fats found in raw meat that sets it a part. Fats not protein is usually the cause of the bloat, coming a close second is over feeding.
So go ahead, feed your herbivores NLS, if you want to throw them a pea here and there then why not


----------



## blairo1

> With a single food it is hard to target the exact diet(hard to do anyway) but the REQUIREMENTS are met. I think with MOST fish, NLS is the staple to go with. There is a problem here in the case for herbivores. Some of those protein ingredients are too high on the list and algae/spirulina are not high enough on the list to feed as the only food they will need.


Dude comments like that are unfounded and based on your opinion, your stating it as fact and really I don't think you've researched this enough to make statements like that. I'm not being funny or insulting but it's something I've spent a lot of time really looking into, scientifically, not just speculative. People will be reading this who don't understand much and they will get confused by such statements....

The majority of herbivorous feeds contain fishmeal as the primary ingredient.... So you can either use those Spirulina sticks with cheap fish meal as the primary ingredient, or you can use NLS where the exact same amount of spirulina is available but with a higher quality blend of other ingredients, and therefore in a more readily digestible form.

Spirulina is not found in any feed (even spirulina sticks, as far as I know) at more than a 5% concentration, and for good reason. Like I keep pointing out, it doesn't matter so much where the source of the nutrition comes from, no matter whether herbivore or carnivore, only that it is both readily digestible and of suitable nutritional value. I've cited scientific papers that show this to you.

A blend of live feeds will not have more vitamins in it than a prepared, scientifically balanced, carefully produced feed which has been made specifically TO provide the right blend of proteins, fats and vits. Why, because even if you replicate the ingredients list there are processes in which further additional nutrition is added. I made mention of vitamintosis earlier, if you didn't you might want to read up on it - NLS recommends you feed it as the staple and do not supplement because you could actually cause detrimental results - especially if you are adding vitamins to the foods you are supplementing, or if the feeds you supplement are fatty. The reason being that stuff like NLS is so rich in nutrients, fats and vitamins, at a careful blend, that adding more to it can cause issues, such as vitamintosis. That in itself pays tribute to how potent the feed is.

Go back and read the study regarding the pellet RD1 vs FF in the study I linked earlier, take into account that the study perfomed in 1989 showed that the pellet outperformed the fresh mix. 1989 guys, we understand so much more about amino acid, lipid profiles, the digestability of certain ingredients etc etc I could go on and on but I've covered it here, if you don't agree with it/want to believe it then carry on doing what you do. I'm really not trying to change your minds but instead presenting the information that I understand from reading scientific papers etc.

I'm just repeating the same stuff over and over again here and it gets tiring, it's turning to being solely about NLS and that wasn't my intention either....

If you want to feed live foods whilst feeding something like NLS then do it, it's not going to do much other than satisfy you and excite your fish. Please, for the health of your fish DO NOT add vitamins and please DO NOT think that pure spirulina is the way to go. If it makes you feel better to add some live food every once in a while then good for you and fair enough you went to the effort of doing that for them. It is no bad thing (considering it is appropriate to the species and not too fatty, that you are not adding vitamins etc as I mention above) and only pays tribute to your care of your animals, I'm just trying to put accross that it is not necessary, these foods don't just meet requirements, they exceed them and provide *ample* nutrition, period.

Enjoy your fish and enjoy continuing to vary their diet, for others who are not so concerned with such things, well as long as you feed a high quality pellet, you don't need to. :thumb:


----------



## thetim6

Assume I gathered all the ingredients in NLS. Now I'll take those fresh (not LIVE) ingredients and blend them in a blender with some gelatin and a bit of water if needed for correct consistency. Then I freeze or refrigerate the mix until it is firm.

The frozen or refrigerated blend of fresh ingredients is guaranteed to be more nutrition filled than dried, heat processed NLS.

Dried pellet foods like NLS are great, but saying they are better than a fresh natural diet based on the same ingredients is blashpemy to your whole argument about how good NLS is.

If dried food didn't last forever and it would rot just as fast as uncooked, unprocessed ingredients there would be no benefit. You don't need a fridge or freezer to store dried foods, they are cheaper and more convenient. It's not about ultimate nutrition, it's about convenience.

Fresh ingredients CANNOT be less nutritious than the same ingredients that have been cooked and processed into little dry pellets.


----------



## blairo1

REMOVE


----------



## blairo1

Read what I wrote again because you missed the entire point - in your fresh mix there are no added vitamins, no carefully blended fats etc that all add up to making the feed what it is. Also, the development of new binding ingredients (a previous post) and better methods of processing mean that the amount of nutrition lost is minimal. Not to mention that this loss is compensated for in the production process....

Also, your mix of unprocessed foods will contain quite a quantity of indigestible or hard to digest by-products whereas the nutrition in the pellet is readily usable. Not to mention that you are not going to have the scientific knowledge or ability to carefully balance the blend that you make as well as has been done in such pellets. See previous posts, again.

It's not blasphemy, it's an understanding of the science behind the process. There would still be a benefit in feeding the pellet if it were no more convenient because it provides more than just a fresh mix can, because there is more to it than just those basic ingredients. All covered in my previous posts.


----------



## thetim6

If the fish digested everything, they would never excrete any waste. I have two more questions for you and then I'll try my best to not keeping arguing with you. If fresh food that is not entirely digestible is somehow harmful to fish, how could they ever make it in the wild? And the second part to this question, if the blended vitamins and fats are really necessary for the fishes survival, don't you think the fish are getting that in the wild? Fish in the wild probably have a less varied diet than the mixed balance of ingredients in NLS. They might every once in a while eat something they have never eaten, but I would be willing to bet most fish have a staple diet in the wild and it is part of their evolutionary strategy to focus on that/those foods. Vitamins move up the food chain. And the fish in the wild are not getting fats and vitamins added in, they are getting vitamins from fresh, unprocessed foods.

It's like saying humans need vitamin supplements. If you eat a balanced healthy diet, you won't need to take vitamins. If you feed your fish fresh, balanced, unprocessed foods you wouldn't need to supplement the dried food.

You do make some interesting points, I'll give you that. I can't verify any of them and so it would be irresponsible for me to just take your word, but I'll keep what you are saying in mind.


----------



## MalawiLover

thetim6 said:


> You do make some interesting points, I'll give you that. *I can't verify any of them *and so it would be irresponsible for me to just take your word, but I'll keep what you are saying in mind.


 

Have you actually read any of the research papers and studies he linked in the previous posts? It pretty much lays it out right there. How much more verification do you need?


----------



## blairo1

Of course I don't expect you to take my word, which is why I provided the scientific papers that back up what I say. I covered most of this in my first post of the second page.

And of course, pellets will contain some amount of indigestible ingredients, it's inevitable in any feed which uses a binding ingredient (as well as fresh feeds). But read my earlier posts (soybean isolate etc) and you'll see that these are really at a minimal and intended to be as digestible as possible. There will always be indigestible elements in any food, whether fresh or produced - the digestive system is not efficient enough to break down everything as it passes through.

I think maybe you see me as saying that live food is worse, which is not true, simply that it is not at all necessary in the instance of feeding an already wholesome diet. You yourself acknowledge that NLS goes above and beyond providing what the fish both receive and require in the wild, so why do you feel the need to supplement on top of that.



> Fish in the wild probably have a less varied diet than the mixed balance of ingredients in NLS.


My point in comparison to live/fresh feed blends is simply to bring to your attention that it isn't as simple as just recreating that blend of ingredients, but that the quantities are carefully blended in processed feeds (not all, as I have made clear there are pellets/flakes out there that aren't so great) in specific amounts, that there are other additives and processes that add to the overall nutritional value of such feeds, and that to recreate that in your own fresh mix would require a sound understanding in the science behind nutrition - because to create a blend that matched the nutritional content would require a knowledge of safe levels of fats, proteins, protein sources, ingredient quantities, etc and not only that but in actually being able to accurately produce and measure that.

Your fish will be healthy if you choose to feed a varied and "balanced" fresh blend (how balanced is it though, do you have the knowledge to ascertain what quantities should be used to provide optimum nutrition?). As long as you are careful about how you go about providing that feed you won't go too wrong, that is not an argument that I make, my argument is why do that when a pellet provides that AND more - the vitamin content in NLS is higher than you will find naturally in any fresh/live food. See what I'm saying.

As I've maintained throughout, it's not necessary if you feed a high quality wholesome pellet/flake. That you can supplement the diet with fresh if you wish, but that I caution you to watch what you feed BECAUSE NLS (for one) is so rich in nutrition, that if you feed fresh mix high in fat, or if you use vit supplements and add that to the mix, it most certainly CAN be detrimental, as studies have shown. That's all, I think the argument has become a little confused on that front. I certainly do not disagree about the qualities of a fresh or live food, or that it can be beneficial. Read back a bit, you'll see that I do it myself with my SA's on occasion.

If you have further questions about something or want to read some interesting science papers then please don't hesitate to PM or ask me, I'm deeply fascinated by the topic because it is an area I am seriously considering a career in once I finish my studies, so I love to talk about it (as long as it stays civil). I appreciate your questions because it keeps me thinking.

:thumb:


----------



## Gibbs

> thetim6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> If fresh food that is not entirely digestible is somehow harmful to fish, how could they ever make it in the wild? And the second part to this question, if the blended vitamins and fats are really necessary for the fishes survival, don't you think the fish are getting that in the wild? Fish in the wild probably have a less varied diet than the mixed balance of ingredients in NLS.quote]
Click to expand...

Do believe that wild fish are in better health then those raised in captivity? Answer is no


----------



## blairo1

I wouldn't generalise too much bud, there are many factors that contribute to our fishes health, even if you give the best diet in the world the fish will (obviously) not be very healthy if kept in poor conditions etc, I know you know that, I just want to avoid generalisations .

Of course with good care the fish will thrive as much if not more so than their wild "counterparts" - it's one of the simple benefits of having a scientifically founded understanding of their needs, the result of which is our ability to provide above and beyond those needs in captivity.

:thumb:


----------



## Gibbs

You know what i mean blairo. The topic in general is concerning diet and the fishes health due to that diet.
If fed nutritious food such as NLS which does have adding vitamins and minerals 9 times out of 10 those fish will be healthier then their wild counterparts that don't consume the ingredience that are added to NLS, obviously providing that living conditions are optimal in the first place such as water condition and tank size, tank mates, stress levels, filtration etc.

Even if i was to generalise, it would be a pretty good conclusion to say that captive fish are usually healthier then wild fish, that goes for any animal in the animal kingdom (I do think some animals should be left in their natural habitats and never housed in captivity), providing correct care and housing is given to those in your care.


----------



## blairo1

:wink:


----------



## thetim6

I don't disagree with you at all blairo1, but I wasn't clear about what you are saying and now I am. Thanks for clarifying, your civil tone is seriously appreciated.

I thought you were saying that fresh foods are inferior to processed foods, but you are just agreeing that it is waaay more convenient to feed processed foods. Not only based on preparation, but as you brought up I am in no way qualified to assess what ingredients should go in and in what quantities, best I can do is approximate.

Gibbs, As for fish being healthier in the wild, yes I do think as a majority fish are healthier in the wild. Obviously there are discrepancies, in a polluted river the fishes are not going to be very healthy. I haven't done much freshwater scuba diving and the little bit I have done there were very low densities of fishes, or life in general. However, diving in saltwater I can assure you that the fish are very healthy and that most of the ones with poor health or that are unequipped to fend for themselves, whether due to environment or a mutation, invariably die prematurely. It's the law of survival of the fittest at it's best. Another easy to point out argument against the assumption that fish in captivity are healthier is the obviously case where a wild fish displays a color that is rarely, if ever, displayed in captivity. Case in point is the red devils caught from the wild that have extraordinary coloration (deep rich hues of red and orange) that when brought into captivity dulls into the pale orange that red devils have in captivity. Obviously those red devils were getting something in the wild (even if it is Vitamin D from the sun) that they aren't getting in captivity. No one has been able to actually verify what causes this color change in red devils, but it is a well documented fact. My opinion is that fish in the wild are healthier, but that is not a fact, merely my perspective on a very complicated and gray matter. How you can assume that all fish in captivity are healthier than their wild counterparts is easy to understand for me because you probably treat your fish very well. Just like not every body raises their kids right, not every body really 'cares' about their fish. To some people they are simply ornamental and they have absolutely no desire to research their fishes nutrition. They buy the cheap flakes at the store because their fish will probably stay alive eating them. Most fish can tolerate high levels of nitrate, which means as long as someone has any form of biological filtration, they have good chances of their fish at least living. I bring that up because obviously, as blairo1 pointed out, you can't make the generalization either way. Like how I brought up the topic of a polluted river, fish could be unhealthy in the wild. It's all relative to what fish you are talking about, generalizations one way or the other don't really work in this case.

MalawiLover, I looked briefly at a few of the articles but none of them were apparently dealing with feeding processed foods verse feeding the exact same ingredients in a fresh format. That is what my inquiries to blairo1 specifically have been about. I guess I could've PM'd him but I felt like being a discussion forum, this is the perfect place to have discussions about subjects relevant to fishes! And had we discussed the matter via PM, none of our conversation would be public and would have only benefited me and blairo rather than the whole community.


----------



## smellsfishy1

Why do fish only have to survive? I set my standards higher than that. I'm not lazy. Thank you for proving my point Gibbs,


> The most abundant source of protein on earth is found in plant matter, including algea and kelp. A herbivore does need protien and gets plenty of it, it's a herbivores inability to process fats found in raw meat that sets it a part. NLS does not contain kelp or any veggies just algae meal. I don't know where bloat came from I never mentioned it.


Spirulina is not found in any feed (even spirulina sticks, as far as I know) at more than a 5% concentration, and for good reason. Like I keep pointing out, it doesn't matter so much where the source of the nutrition comes from, no matter whether herbivore or carnivore, only that it is both readily digestible and of suitable nutritional value. Let me drop some science Blairo , Omega One Super Kelp Pellets : Whole Kelp, Spirulina, Whole Salmon, Halibut, Seafood Mix (Including Krill, Whole Herring, & Shrimp), Wheat Flour, Wheat Gluten, Lecithin, Astaxanthin, L-Ascorbyl-Phosphate (Source of Vitamin C), Natural and Artificial Colors, Vitamin A Acetate, Vitamin D3 Supplement, Vitamin E Supplement, Vitamin B12 Supplement, Riboflavin, Niacin, Pantothenic Acid, Folic Acid, Biotin, Inositol, Tocopherol (Preservative), Ethoxyquin (Preservative).This KIND of food is more suitable for herbivores as a staple.


----------



## blairo1

Bro, that's not science, it's an ingredients list. I gave you the science paper that shows that it doesn't matter where the nutrition comes from, only that it is both readily digestible and of suitable nutritional value...

What percentage is the spirulina in it?

You might want to email them and ask, I'd be interested in their answer too so be sure to post it up here. When we have some figures we can talk more, until then it's purely speculation about that feed, I know that the majority of feeds only contain around 5% spirulina because spirulina itself is such potent stuff, like I said, 5%, for good reason. All of my fish are thriving on the pellet I've chosen, I don't know why you have it stuck in your head that they are only just surviving/getting by when I've shown and explained to you why this just isn't the case....

For what its worth that seems like a decent feed for herbivores IMO. I'm merely pointing out to you that even though spirulina might be second on the list, a/ there are no regulations on the order of the ingredients list, ie it may in fact be primarily fish meal (not an accusation), the ingredients order does not necessarily reflect the quantities and b/ it may be in higher quantity than the ingredients below it, but that still doesn't mean there is more than around 5% weight....

Of course there will be other specialised feeds out there focused on specific diets and providing for those diets, that's just another benefit of our better understanding of nutrition. No argument there and certainly I'm not trying to say you shouldn't use them, as long as you properly research and ascertain the quality of the food you consider, then why not. You'd be surprised by some feeds which are sold as algae/herbivorous feeds, yet the primary ingredient is in fact fish meal, unfortunately the labelling on feeds are, as far as I am aware, still not properly regulated.

As I maintain this isn't purely about NLS, but about nutrition, where it comes from and what effect that has etc, NLS for me is a good benchmark and hence my continued reference to it, but don't take that as me being close minded to the potential benefits of other feeds .

To finish, if you were to feed something like that Kelp mix to your herbivores, you probably wouldn't need to supplement that either .


----------



## smellsfishy1

Come on Blairo, ingredients are everything. The order in which they appear is to an extent it's percentage(not exact but close). Thats why you use NLS (the first thing you showed me was the ingredient list of NLS)and I use omegaone. There you go Blairo you hit it on the head. Specialized feeds my friend. Your fish are not my fish. Not the same fish. Its about the nutrition and meeting the correct nutrition. Your percentages are right on the money but my point was simply that there needs to be more veggie in a herbivore diet. I still supplement with other foods like romaine lettuce,seaweed and peas. Why just give them what suffices, give them more. I'll email the question on the percentage of spirulina percentage, I'm curious to see.


----------



## smellsfishy1

I am not judging what anyone else is doing, I am stating what I do and the logic behind it. They have given me excellent results and I offer to pass on my experiences to all. I actually just made some homemade food and fed it to my rusties(omnivore),amazing results. I have tried every high quality brand but couldn't color up my rusties. I did a half of a pound seafood mix(crab,mussel,clam,octopus,squid,prawn,shrimp,scallop) and lost of veggies in the blender(spinach,parsley,romaine,squash,cucumber) about a 75-80% veggie to 20-25% seafood ratio. I added a half a clove of garlic, a tablespoon spirulina, and some vitamins from the lfs. Froze it and fed a few hours later, the fish were fighting over it. I fed them more of it later in the week and their colors are phenomenal. I fed my herbivores and saw no difference, they are already very bright in coloration. This was not expensive to make at all and is now conveniently frozen.


----------



## Gibbs

Smellsfishy if you are going to quote me do it properly, these were my words



> The most abundant source of protein on earth is found in plant matter, including algea and kelp. A herbivore does need protien and gets plenty of it, it's a herbivores inability to process fats found in raw meat that sets it a part. Fats not protein is usually the cause of the bloat
> So go ahead, feed your herbivores NLS, if you want to throw them a pea here and there then why not


Blairo1, I just got it :lol:

Smellsfishy, it an Elongatus Mphanga


----------



## blairo1

smellsfishy1 said:


> Come on Blairo, ingredients are everything. The order in which they appear is to an extent it's percentage(not exact but close).


Once again this is untrue, please stop making bold statements which you are speculating on, you haven't researched this enough to make statements like you are making as facts and it is quite apparent from the last few statements that this is the case. I'm not trying to attack you personally, but you're making huge statements against facts and evidence I've provided, and you have nothing but speculative opinion to back it up with. I have no issue with your opinions, until you present them as facts in an argument that really requires factual debate..

If it is your _experience_ with a feed that leads you to believe it is a good feed, great, recommend it, but don't present is as fact because you yourself don't fully understand the make-up of that feed, only that it has made your fish more colourful - and is that really a guide to their health?

I can feed a lot of feeds that would make my fish pop with colour, but the actual quality of the nutrition they receive could be ****, because the quality of a feed depends on the science behind it and ALL of the elements I have repeatedly explained in this discussion - protein content - source of protein - fat content - source of fats - lipid profiles - amino acid profiles - binding ingredients etc etc etc. Do you know enough about that to make factual comments about the feed!? Honestly!? Do you know enough about it to manufacture a feed of similar balance and quality from fresh? I myself don't possess the ability to create a fresh mix comparable to the high quality pellets, I understand the make-up and the science behind it, but I sure don't have the equipment or means to recreate that with any amount of ingredients. You can make an interesting fresh blend that will generally suit the fish and excite them, but it's not balanced, it's not accurate.

I KNOW for a FACT that (perhaps until recently) the labelling on fish food has gone unregulated. If you want to know the specific make up of a food, you need to go to the effort and extent of researching that food. Email them and ask them what the ingredient make up truly is - in terms of asking for an ingredient list reflective of the quantities of each of those ingredients. I'm not saying all do it, it certainly isn't an accusation directed at any one feed, but it's part of what makes fish nutrition so hard to get right and understand if you really want to take it that far. Just because kelp and spirulina are first on the list, doesn't mean that in fact they are in higher quantity than fishmeal, which would mean that actually hey, there's really less difference between your veggie flake and others than you might think. Trust me, because I used to follow your thought, until I found out that the "veggie" flake I fed actually had primarily fishmeal and more binders in it than I'd want to give to herbivores.

Of course that may well be the quantitative breakdown and in which case, assuming you look into the fillers and binding ingredients used and determine them suitable, there is absolutely no reason why that food would not provide well for your herbivores. I don't see what the argument is there, it's just another scientifically formulated feed that will provide amply for any herbivorous fish, hopefully the ingredients are reflective of quantities. But, in keeping with the topic, with an *assortment* of carnivores, omnivores and herbivores in the same tank, what would you feed, considering that whatever you choose will be consumed by all of them, and considering that feeds like NLS and Dainichi have been formulated with this in mind, to do more than provide what they require, but to actually have them thriving.... You only have to look at the number of highly successful tanks with peacocks and mbuna in them, or the numbers of people feeding Trophs on NLS etc to see that what I continue to state is true - that it doesn't matter where the nutrition comes from as long as it is readily digestible and of suitable nutritional value.

What that means is, them not being regulated - they do not have to include all ingredients on the list. They do not have reflect to the actual quantitative make-up of the feed, I explained this to you and you've just come out with that, thinking it's science? You don't understand the full make-up of that feed, don't take that personally, I wouldn't expect you to, but you cannot then make statements which are unfounded and based PURELY on your speculation and (again please don't take offence) fairly limited understanding of the subject.

I provided the NLS ingredients list just to give you an idea of what ingredients you would be looking at including to try and match it earlier on in a comparison to providing fresh mixes, not as a scientific comparison- I gave you scientific control study papers for that. You're trying to twist comments to suit your opinion. FYI - NLS IS a specialised feed, you still have it stuck in your head that because you feed a "veggie" flake your herbivorous fish will be healthier than mine, I'm afraid that's just not so - once again, they require nutrition to metabolise, as long as the feed you provide is readily digested and of suitable nutritional value, they will metabolise as efficiently as they can, pretty simple and what the science paper I showed you proves. Gibbs explained very clearly and briefly what you need to be careful of with herbivores, funnily enough, stuff like NLS has been developed with that in mind.... You know recently an independent study used NLS vs comparable fresh mix in a controlled scientific study, and NLS came out on top every time. I'll try dig that out for you.... If I remember correctly it was with malawi mbuna too.....

I'm not going to continue on a speculative vs proven argument, it's just a waste of my time, I've taken a lot of time to lay it all out, explain it as simply (in some cases generalising) as possible and to provide the evidence to back up my statements. You are entitled to your opinion but I will not continue to argue against your opinion in something that requires specific details and facts, as well as evidence, it's just pointless and goes nowhere, I've had a good debate with you and at this point things normally start to get out of hand, so I bow out respectfully.

Do get back to me once you've spoken to them via PM, if you do have questions then please don't hesitate to ask, I have nothing against you or your opinions in general, but I can see where this is going - the old opinion vs evidence route, and if evidence isn't enough for you, it never will be. I don't intend to change your mind, only hoped to increase your understanding of the subject. I'm glad that you obviously care so much about your fish and that you are willing to go to lengths to accommodate them, as I continue to maintain, that is a tribute to your care of your animals. Just don't assume its necessary to do what you do to have healthy fish, there are scientifically based alternatives that don't just MEET requirements, they EXCEED them.

Be well.


----------



## blairo1

Remove please.... Slooooooow forum today.


----------



## becadavies

Ha, the inevitable "feeding" debate- still going strong i see :wink: :wink: 
Same debate, different antagonists!!

Blair- i dont know why these facts haven't been stickied yet- would save my little pickle a whole lot of agro (thou i think you secretly LOVE it) :lol:

xxxxxxxxxxxxxx


----------



## becadavies

sorry a bit finger happy with the left clicker there!!!


----------



## becadavies

third times a charm....


----------



## blairo1

Well actually, thus far it's been a far more enjoyable debate with smellsfishy and thetim than any I've had in the past, both of them have presented great questions and shared their opinions. I certainly do love debate likes this, but it is veering off a bit now so before it goes the way of those previously I shall leave you all to it... I do not want to fall out with or offend anyone here, I've exchanged PM's with a couple of people regarding this topic and it has all remained civil and challenges of knowledge/opinion have not been taken personally, it really has been a pleasure.

There were some articles on the site that covered all of this very well but I believe they were removed due to a conflict of interest or something like that, I don't know, don't really want to get involved. This site has sponsors and interests there and I do not intend to discredit any particular brand, as I have maintained there are several high quality feeds out there that exceed the requirements of your fish, your task is simply to research them properly and as a result to better understand them, allowing you to make better decisions regarding your choices.

My sole aim in entering this discussion was to increase the knowledge of the science behind these feeds and why that makes them so efficient, to the extent that they can solely provide above and beyond for your fish. I did not intend to be specific about one brand, but only to use one brand as an example of how far our understanding of nutrition has come - in that we are able to provide above and beyond for a plethora of diets in a _single_ feed, it truly is an accomplishment of science and I for one try to pay tribute to the researchers behind such developments by presenting those accomplishments in a way that I would have understood before I became so deeply interested in the topic (and ergo increased my understanding).

I am still learning, a lot, daily, and these sorts of debates only help to secure what I have learnt solidly in my mind, so yes, I really do appreciate and enjoy them.

Guys, great talking with you, I hope I didn't offend you or appear condescending, it was never my intention, only to try and keep the topic as factual as possible. I stand by my statements that if you have further questions feel free to PM me.

smellsfishy I certainly want to know the results of your email to omega one as I too would very much be interested in their actual breakdown. I hope you continue to have success with your fish and as I have maintained throughout, credit to you because you are obviously very compassionate and caring keepers, willing to go above and beyond, even if shown not necessary, that determination to provide above and beyond makes you special fish keepers, you can't really fault that .


----------



## Gibbs

Thats me out to guys, cheers for sharing your opinions and experience especially blairo1, very informative and thorough
This the best statement


> I am still learning, a lot, daily, and these sorts of debates only help to secure what I have learnt solidly in my mind, so yes, I really do appreciate and enjoy them


----------



## smellsfishy1

Blairo, at first you said the food meets requirements now you say it exceeds them, why did you change from meeting requirements to exceeding requirements? Just curious. And another thing, you never offended me and the debate has been very productive and informative. I have studied chemistry and other sciences for years and I understand the scientific method so I understand your perspective on the subject. One thing you should always remember is that even accepted facts have to be rigorously tested many many times and will continue to be tested until the end of time. That is how science works. Science always attempts to disprove the existing hypothesis or theory. I think this debate will always be around. By the way, I sent the email in regards to the food content of that feed and I will share any and all results I receive from the reply.
Gibbs, sorry I didn't quote right, my mistake, I'm not that hip with computers.


----------



## blairo1

The feeds meet their requirements in terms of what they require for metabolism, it fully meets those requirements for them, but with the added vits etc I simply changed my wording to reflect that this is going beyond requirements - when I said that it meets their requirements it was simply to point out that it meets all of their requirements, not that it meets their requirements but does not exceed them (not what I was saying at all) - once I saw that things needed to be quite specific within the discussion I rectified it, no other reason than to properly clarify. It's my fault, I should have been clear from the start, but I hadn't expected to get quite so specific (as I'd mentioned). Silly really because it always ends up getting specific :lol:.

smellsfishy, you're a good sport and you're all too right that questions always need to be asked and understanding needs to be challenged, that is how we develop and it is why I have both appreciated and enjoyed our conversation on this matter. It's invaluable. Like I said, it teaches us all something and forces us to look further into our understanding and challenge our knowledge, it's such a rapidly developing area nowadays that it can actually be pretty hard to keep up to date.

Nice to end it on good terms too, it's really a positive for me as usually these things turn into a slinging match as matter get confused etc and it all goes to heck in a handbasket... Please do let me know when you get that email, I'd love to know what they say. :thumb:


----------



## smellsfishy1

I'm actually very surprised that there aren't any regulations involving the ingredients of fish food. I know that was farther back in the post but it is news to me. Are you saying that a food could just put fish meal and not have to report what is in the fish meal? I'm not sure I follow? I never bought food with out reading the label and checking ingredients first. Although you applaud the makers of these feeds Blairo, I am beginning to doubt them more if this is the case. I hope we as consumers are getting what we are paying for.


----------



## Gibbs

OMG


----------



## becadavies

LOL


----------

