I'm curious about a couple things.
First, when the protein/fat/fiber calculations are done in a given food mix, whether it's a lab block type or a seed mix, it's taking into account the entirety of the bag. What I mean by that is, when you're using really specific calculations (gram scales) to determine how much of food A to mix with food B to get desired protein level C, you can't know which of the seeds/grains/etc. in your mix are contributing X amount of protein. fat, or fiber. You also can't determine with utter certainty when you feed a variety mix which ratio of those bits your hamster is eating. So my curiosity is: why agonize over the "perfect" complementary mix?
Next, what's the definition of "filler"? Soybean hulls are the most common culprit labeled as a filler, but they're added to the foods for herbivores and insectivores for a specific reason: fiber. They also have 11% protein, which is not insignificant when considering some of these diets have a total protein level in the low teens.
Soybean Hulls Nutritional Content (100% Dry Matter Basis)
Dry Matter: 91%
Total Digestible Nutrients: 78%
Crude Protein: 11%
Crude Fat: 2.2%
Crude Fiber: 39.6%
Acid Detergent Fiber: 50%
Calcium: 0.49%
Phosphorous: 0.18%
(data from West Virginia University)
Another thing to keep in mind is that a hamster's natural diet would consist of a lot of low-value grasses and seeds. It's part of why they stockpile so heavily.
Questions people should keep in mind when examining any food source so analytically: What's the calcium to phosphorous ratio? Are the vitamins and minerals actually balanced for my animal? In a seed type mix, how evenly spread are the nutrients, specifically fat? How palatable is the food as both a whole, and as individual ingredients?
When we examine an ingredients list, we like to take away the three big values: Protein, Fat, and Fiber. We should always bear in mind that a whole heckuva a lot can go wrong, nutritionally speaking, even with those three values "perfect".
The key, in my mind, is variety. Mix up brands, types, sources. Add in veggies, fruits, additional protein sources such as mealworms, bits of chicken, egg or fish. The goal is to not *always* use mealworms, or *always* use romaine; individual items always have strengths and weaknesses. Spinach, for example, contains an incredible level of oxalic acid. Oxalic acid bound with minerals such as calcium forms a salt known as an oxalate. Oxalic acid interferes with the absorption of calcium in foods because of the binding, making the calcium content of spinach (among other veggies) largely unusable. And yet, spinach is one of the more popular veggie treats fed not only to hams, but guinea pigs and even herbivorous reptiles. Oxalates also contribute to the formation of kidney stones, which is something people with diabetic hams (whose kidneys are already working hard) should be aware of.
Does this mean we shouldn't feed spinach to our pets? Of course not. It means we shouldn't feed it every day, just as we shouldn't use mealworms as a sole protein supplement, or the exact same combination of hamster foods every time. Those low value foods may well have an abundance of nutrients some of the high value foods lack; do you think the manufacturing companies don't know what we consumers are looking for as "good" in the ingredients list? Don't underestimate the pull of marketing vs. actually good.
I'm not an expert, and that leaves me with a lot of questions with regards to my pets' nutrition. I ask questions of experts when I have them, and I get good answers from someone who has no vested interest in where I spend my money. Asking the companies that make your foods will potentially give you a skewed answer about what's "good", of course, but also the people you speak to in either customer service or marketing most likely cannot tell you why an ingredient was placed in their food. They pay scientists for that, and scientists aren't answering the phones.


This topic is locked
























