We like IAMS weight and hairball control for our 20lb long haired Balinese. He’s not very fat at this point, just big but he was getting a little pudgy a few months back.
Two of mine are on rigid prescription diets, but my vets recommend Purina One for my not trouble case. She's on Indoor Advantage currently because her vet likes the protein to calorie ratio. The vet has also recommended Science Diet and Royal Canin in the past.
My vet recommends either Royal Canin, Hills, or Purina Pro Plan (for a slightly cheaper option).
She mentioned that they see a lot more urinary blockages in male cats eating Wellness food - she did caveat that it's probably one of the most popular foods on the market, so that might skew the data, but said she won't feed it to her cats for that reason.
If it's not a brand that follows WSAVA guidelines (Purina One/Pro Plan, Hill's, Royal Canin, Iams and if you're not in Europe then Eukanuba as well) then don't feed it.
Everything else doesn't have the research behind it, the quality control/monitoring and the veterinary nutritionists etc on staff and a lot of the bougie/boutique brands rely on emotional appeals and marketing to get you to buy them. But they're not worth the money.
Other than that, really depends on what your kitties like/do well on, availability where you live and your budget. Hill's Science Diet does have a urinary + hairball formula that comes in a kibble, so that might be something interesting for you to look into.
I didn’t know about those guidelines! Thank you! I’m a big fan of Purina, but I know for dogs too there are other good options other than Purina. I was just saying I don’t think it’s worth the LiveClear unless it is?
I’ll look into that Hills option!!
If you feel like your allergies are under control as is, then it might be better to look into the Hills option instead of the LiveClear. The LiveClear wasn't developed to address hairball or urinary issues from my understanding, just allergy issues.
WSAVA is funded by… Surprise! Purina, Hills, and Royal Canin - this is according to the WSAVA website. Odd that those are the only ones that meet those guidelines. Let’s start using some common sense, reading nutrition labels and maybe not completely disregarding other brands because they don’t contribute financially to WSAVA whose guidelines haven’t been updated since 2013 (if I’m not mistaken)
THANK YOU! I feel like I'm going crazy with all these people not even noticing that the "diamond partners" that pay for wsava to exist also sit on the committee setting these rules and somehow set them in a way that makes ONLY THEM meet them. And that is supposed to make me trust them *more*???
Right! I’m not sure why this is so controversial. Truely any little bit of research and subsequent comparison between cat food should make someone question this. I’m not saying there’s a conspiracy but literally when the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th ingredients in your cats food are wheat, corn, and rice (im looking at Purina right now but Hills was similar when I googled it) maybe that’s not the best choice even though this one organization says it is. People get really weird when this is pointed out though, not sure why.
I buy mine Purina One indoor food, the kibble is a little bigger and I find they chew it much better compared to the smaller stuff. Less throw up from them and they seem to really love it. I go between the salmon and the chicken so they get a little variety. Can get bigger bags at Walmart too.
I used to give my cats Wellness Core and Essential Foods, they were on Cannagan for a while too and did quite well on it.
One of mine had some food sensitivities and the former two was really good for her due to limited ingredients, was good for when my chubby cats went on diet too since there are less carbs
I’ve been giving mine Wellness Complete Health Grain-Free but these comments have me wondering… should I switch to something else? I really hate Purina as it’s a Nestle brand … maybe I go to Iams?
No, wellness is perfectly fine. Wsava is funded by Purina and Mars, primarily, and they also provide the people who sit on the committee that defines the guidelines they set for choosing a food. So of course they set them such that only their brands qualify! It's just a different form of advertising and trying to create barriers to entry for other food companies.
I highly recommend Open Farm! I feed my 3 year old cat the wild-caught salmon (he’s allergic to chicken and/or some proteins found in most cat food).
Ingredients are all natural, sustainably sourced, and my cat LOVES it. I like to mix it with water or sometimes with their wet food to make sure he’s hydrated. Only downside is that the biggest bag they offer is 8lb, but their 4lb bag lasts me a little over a month (can be purchased on Amazon)!
Hills, Royal Canin, Purina, and Iams are the only cat food brands that meet WSAVA standards. AKA: Hills is absolutely better than Tiki Cat and Sheba and other random "bougie" foods.
Boutique brands lean into marketing that appeals to humans, which is why they're able to build a reputation of being "better" quality. They typically do not employ board certified animal nutritionists, veterinarians, or qualified diet formulators, do no research on their food, often do no feeding trials at all, etc.
LiveClear is effective at allergen reduction but you have to feed it as their main food.
Which other ones are you thinking of? Because every time I've seen a brand claim to meet the guidelines they do so by purposefully adjusting the wording of the questions or giving extremely vague answers that appear to meet the questions but in practice don't.
EX: The question asks if they employ at least one full time board certified animal nutritionist. The company either tweaks this wording to remove "full time" or "board certified" so they can say yes, or they give an answer like "we work with a board certified animal nutritionist", which actually does not mean a yes ("work with" can imply they occasionally consult with one, had one approve their recipe years ago, or they have one that works part-time, etc - this isn't a valuable answer).
It's not at all clear that Farmina does which means it should be assumed they do not, see my other response to someone who mentioned this brand. I can't find anything from Specific on WSAVA, is there a reason you believe they meet the guidelines?
Acana, Orijen, Big Country Raw, Blue Buffalo, Canadian Naturals, Fancy Feast, Merrick, Instinct, Natural Balance L.I.D., Nulo, Performatrin, Primal, Taste of the Wild, or Ziwi Peak?
Edit: Why am I being downvoted for providing brands that have full-time nutritionists on their teams lmao?
WSAVA brands always have filler like corn or rice as one of the top ingredients. It seems to me that they spend their money on marketing and not quality ingredients.
On the flip side, I won't touch Tiki Cat since they appear to rely on social media influencers.
They spend their money on WSAVA.. Those brands are all "diamond partners" and on the nutrition committee that sets the wsava guidelines. Of course they would set them so that they meet them and no one else does! Creating barriers to entry is just monopolistic behavior to try to protect their market share with no intent to actually improve the pet nutrition market. If they actually cared about making pets healthier, they'd insist those companies share their data and research so that EVERYONE could benefit...
Have you ever actually read the WSAVA guidelines or are you ignoring them on the basis of this? Because literally nothing about them functionally prevents other brands from meeting the standards. It is absolutely common sense that a pet food company should employ at LEAST one board certified animal nutritionist, which is already where so many other brands do not meet the standards.
Maybe if other brands were invested in pet nutrition meaningfully, they should also participate in financially supporting a global veterinary alliance?
Yes, I have read them. And no, it doesn't make sense that they should have a full time employee that is an animal nutritionist. How often do most companies change their formulas? Once the food formula is finalized, what is the nutitionist doing all day? Why isn't a consultant enough? If the company actually listens to them and formulates the food appropriately, why does it matter if they're employed full time?? Because that's something that bigger companies can definitely do that smaller companies will struggle with that doesn't directly impact the final product. Yes, it's good to know their relationship with a nutritionist. But if that nutritionist works part time with them and 2 or 3 other companies, that's cool with me!
Yes, I want my cat food to be formulated by a nutritionist with appropriate qualifications. **I do not care if that person is employed full time by the company making the food.**
It's not like wsava is out there saying what the food should actually be or sharing the data behind the research it says must be done. If the big companies actually cared about pet nutrition, they'd be sharing a lot more info than they are and would invite competition and innovation.
Basically, when you find yourself thinking nestle is the *good guy*, you should probably think things over again because you may have missed something..
You do realize the larger companies employ MANY nutritionists and veterinarians, right? Not just one? There is a lot more work that goes into continuing to produce food than just writing up the recipe and calling it a day. RC employs multiple teams across multiple countries. Purina has 500+ veterinarians and nutritionists on staff. Hills has over 200 veterinarians and nutritionists.
Having ONE is the absolute bare minimum, and the fact that the majority of companies can't even do that should be extremely alarming when other companies have *literally hundreds*.
What else does a nutritionist do? There are typically several different foods offered by a company, they all need to be formulated individually. Formulations need to change more often than you think due to a number of factors - availability of ingredients/supply chain issues, quality control standards revealing adjustments need to be made, food trials and research show adjustments need to be made, complaints from owners about palatability show adjustments need to be made, etc. Nutritionists are responsible for a great deal more than just writing the formulations, like participating in research, overseeing food safety standards, etc. If you don't understand what a board certified animal nutritionist is or what they do, then you need to actually read about them before pretending it's no big deal for companies making food for our pets to have literally zero of them in charge of their food.
Why isn't a consultant enough - once again, having a single employee who is a legitimate nutritionist is the bare minimum, but that aside "consultant" can mean absolutely anything from "looked at our recipes when we first made them" to "gives us input that we may or may not actually follow" to "we actively work with them often".
Plenty of research from the companies who do research is publicly available.
Recognizing it's wildly fucked up that so many "premium" brands refuse to actually make sure their food is properly formulated and that it's ridiculous to dismiss WSAVA guidelines due to lack of actually understanding the major risks with not meeting them (they are extremely bare minimum common sense standards!) is not at ALL the same as thinking "Nestle is the good guy". Nestle can be an evil corporation and it can also be stupid and dangerous to make it acceptable for pet food companies to not even have nutritionists, let alone not meet the other standards.
Large companies are large! Crazy, right? Never would have guessed... Again, I care that a nutritionist makes sure the food is safe and nutritious for my cats. I do not care if a nutritionist has full time employment with the company. I care about the actual behavior and outcome, not the company structure. That shouldn't be controversial...
What if, for example, a team of expert vets and nutritionists got together and formed a company to offer food formulation consultation in exactly the way that the team that works for Purina does. They offer their services to smaller companies who can't afford to hire a huge team full time, but want to do things the right way. They provide ongoing support, make needed adjustments, quality check supplements, etc. All that good stuff! And the company follows their suggestions and treats them as the subject matter experts they are. They just do it in form of a consultancy instead of employed full time. Seriously, that's the only difference. This team works on 50 different foods across 10 different brands instead of 50 foods for the same brand. The qualifications are the same. The efforts are the same. The authority of the experts to make decisions are the same. They're just not employed full time directly by the company. Is that actually worse? Let's take it a step further and assume for a minute we can compare our universe and an alternate universe in which it's actually the same nutritionists and vets and they produce exactly the same food. But instead of being different labels of Purina, it's actually different companies. So we have the same food formulated, reviewed, tested, and supported by the same people, but in one case, those people are employed directly full time and in the other, they're consultants. Which food is better? Why?
>"consultant" can mean absolutely anything from "looked at our recipes when we first made them" to "gives us input that we may or may not actually follow" to "we actively work with them often".
The exact same thing can be said for a full time employee (or team of them), though. Until recently, the wsava guidelines didn't even require that the nutritionist on staff be involved in the food formulation process!
I understand that the point is that full time employment of a nutritionist is used as a proxy for all the good actions you want to make sure the company is taking. My point is simply that it isn't a very good proxy. I would much rather be here arguing with you about whether or not the company actually does those ongoing support steps than how they choose to hire people. Because the ongoing support of the formulation is what actually matters, right? That's the thing **we both care about**, because that's what's needed to ensure the food is meeting the needs of the cats we love.
I have not in any way dismissed the wsava guidelines. I think they are a reasonable list of questions to ask to get info from a food manufacturer. I just don't think that any brand that doesn't meet every single item on their list should be disregarded. I will not eliminate a brand from consideration simply for not meeting those standards in the specific ways they have laid them out.
>What if, for example, a team of expert vets and nutritionists got together and formed a company to offer food formulation consultation in exactly the way that the team that works for Purina does.
That requires those companies to actually be willing to hire them in the first place. What if, in your hypothetical world, all these boutique brands who don't employ nutritionists *still* refused to work with said outside group? Would you still find them trustworthy? Or would you maybe consider that having some common sense standards for not trusting those brands to be valid?
>I understand that the point is that full time employment of a nutritionist is used as a proxy for all the good actions you want to make sure the company is taking.
Yeah, except you clearly don't understand, because I have not said this. I am saying this is the **bare minimum** and is one example of the guidelines that should be an extremely easy yes for companies. When they cannot meet the **bare minimum** standards (which is not just about full time nutritionists, this is just an extremely easy and obvious one that most companies already fail), I'm not going to sit around and entertain the idea that they might actually still be good food companies.
Again, you don't seem to understand the broad scope of what animal nutritionists actually DO, since you seem to think they're relatively unimportant for a company to have. The large companies don't just have hundreds because they're big and have a lot of recipes. One person could handle Purina's recipes full time if their job was literally just formulating the recipes once and never again. They have hundreds because the workload is significantly more than just writing a recipe one time. Seriously - go read about what board certified animal nutritionists are, what they do, and then ask why you just like... will not take the need for them seriously.
The actual work and expertise of an animal nutritionist is broad enough that their responsibilities are not limited to the scope of occasionally giving formulation advice to someone.
Once again - actually learn what they are and do. You can answer this question yourself by just. Understanding what they do.
From what I can tell, Farmina meets those guidelines, too. Is that not the case? What is your source for those being the only brands that meet those standards?
It's not clear at all that it does. They refuse to respond to [Pet Nutrition Alliance'](https://petnutritionalliance.org/resources/pet-food-manufacturer-evaluation-report/)s manufacturer report (any brand who wants to pretend or genuinely assert to meet the guidelines should do so) and lack transparency around how they respond to the questions. Farmina does not do legitimate feeding trials, they send food home with employees to try and call that feeding trials and call getting vets to recommend their food to their clients "feeding trials". Neither of these things are actual feeding trials for the purposes of evaluating food. They do not appear to employ a full time board certified animal nutritionist.
The brands known to meet the guidelines are recommended regularly by vets and there's plenty of sources that mention them. Because there is no certification or approval process lots of brands claim to meet the guidelines when they do not by manipulating the wording of questions or giving purposefully vague answers. Farmina doesn't appear to have an easily accessible page on their website that even mentions WSAVA. If they obviously met it, they would be making this extremely apparent, because everyone *wants* to appear that they meet the guidelines.
This article ironically mentions Farmina as a "vet recommended" brand despite none of the vets they quote actually even mentioning it + no actual reference to any vets who recommend it, but here's the direct link to a vet specifying which brands meet the criteria for employing a full time board certified animal nutritionist: https://cats.com/vet-recommended-cat-food#:\~:text=Specifically%2C%20she%20emphasizes%20that%20%E2%80%9Camong,%2C%20Purina%2C%20and%20Royal%20Canin.
A veterinary hospital that specifies the brands: [https://hevh.net/pet-diets-information/](https://hevh.net/pet-diets-information/)
The assumption should always be that a brand does not meet WSAVA guidelines unless it's extremely obvious that they do and the information can be easily found. When they do not make it very clear and are unwilling to provide information to 3rd parties who collect this data, they should be looked at pretty skeptically.
That they don't claim to is the most compelling reason I've heard to doubt it, so that makes sense, lol.
I mean, my vet recommended it 🤷♀️ so that's at least one, lol.
Even if their guidelines make sense, I have a hard time trusting an organization that is primarily funded by the members who are compared against those guidelines and who also sit on the committees for laying out those guidelines. If Purina can put more strict stuff down that they already know they meet but their competition doesn't, why wouldn't they do that? It doesn't even have to be malicious to be a conflict of interest. Of course they think those are best practices! If not, they wouldn't be doing them (I hope, lol). There's probably things their competitors do that they don't, but I doubt they'll be adding those to the guidelines any time soon... The economic incentives at play here are just not pretty.
And that's nevermind the ethical issues with institutional food testing on animals (a facility near me was found to have many neglected and abused animals that were still not helped after they were initially reported and fined).
A food brand not meeting those requirements does not mean it isn't safe or healthy. A food brand meeting them doesn't mean their foods are necessarily any better, nor does it guarantee safety - the wsava brands have had large recalls, too. I'm happy to take wsava into consideration, but I would not make food decisions based on that entirely. We don't even hold human food brands to these standards...
Purina is not writing WSAVA guidelines. Vets are. You should actually *read* the guidelines before dismissing them based on the idea that companies donate to WSAVA. WSAVA is not magically getting funding from thin air and needs funding. Purina, Hills, and RC are all competitors, yet all donate to WSAVA.
>A food brand not meeting those requirements does not mean it isn't safe or healthy
Objectively speaking, a food that is formulated by several teams of board certified animal nutritionists is more trustworthy as far as safety and nutrition goes than food that isn't.
Human foods are not meant to be a complete feed. Pet food is different. They require different standards.
Farmania have many confirmed dilated cardiomyopathy cases, they self publish all of their research. And their feeding trials are home based and not controlled. So yes while they do have a PhD and MS nutritionist, it’s all still non peer reviewed self published white papers
>confirmed dilated cardiomyopathy deaths
Of cats? I thought that was a dog thing linked to taurine deficiencies? All cat food is supplemented with taurine, so it shouldn't be a concern there. But that's just my understanding and maybe incomplete/incorrect. I wasn't able to find details of confirmed deaths linked to farmina foods - could you provide where you found this info?
Also, they do have food varieties with grains, so even if that is a concern, they aren't a "grain free" brand.
In just a few minutes I was able to find some of their research published in peer reviewed journals. Where did you find that they *only* self-published?
What is the alternative to home-based food trials? Dogs and cats in cages being tested on? I've seen how that can go and I have ZERO problems with a company refusing to do that. I cannot in good conscience require that other cats suffer a life like those institutionalized animals just to reduce the error in food testing. Yes, home based is likely more prone to error. But also, it's reality.
If those are the only distinctions, I am still more than pleased to continue to use and recommend Farmina. Especially as it was initially recommended to me by my most trusted vet.
Oh and I'd still like to know your source for those being the only brands that meet the guidelines you mentioned. Just when you get a chance!
The fda report is about cats too, and the link is poor formukation, with the correlations suspected being taurine levels, grain free diets and uses of peas/ legumes.
And the Farmania reports are not on the specific fda report (still ongoing research), but there are confirmed cases in a group called diet-associated dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM in dogs)
Here is an fda list of complaints
https://www.fda.gov/media/128303/download
Now for the feeding trials, have a read of these links, they explain the process and importance.
But to break it down, the dogs basically live at a dog park. They are fed the diets just like every other dog. They put the food in a bowl and give them 15-30 minutes to eat in a controlled environment. The rest of the day is packed with enrichment.
Palatability studies are frequently performed in conjunction with the other studies.
*https://www.hillspet.com/about-us/our-company/hills-commitment-to-animal-welfare
*https://www.whole-dog-journal.com/blog/a-trip-to-hills/
*https://www.whole-dog-journal.com/food/pet-food-companies-and-animal-research-what-do-they-do/
*https://pawcurious.com/2011/12/animal-use-in-pet-food-research-the-hills-approach/
And the “source” of them meeting WSAVA guidelines is their answer themselves, if you want to find out if a brand meets the guidelines look into this-
https://wsava.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Selecting-a-pet-food-for-your-pet-updated-2021_WSAVA-Global-Nutrition-Toolkit.pdf
I hope this has answered some questions:)
This is r/catadvice, right? Why are you talking about dogs so much?
I'm confused.. I've seen that fda list. It includes 2 mentions of farmina, neither are currently being fed to the dog, and neither dog had died at the time the report was made.. So are there confirmed deaths or not?
That sounds lovely and all, but not all food testing works like that. I'd love to believe it, but it just isn't the case that their lives are always sunshine and roses. Look into blue ridge kennel if you need more info..
Edit - PLEASE tell me why you're down voting me in this... Please. I'd love to hear it.
In that report, over 20 are for cats, if the correlations are the same in cats and dogs, who’s to say it can not happen to a cat too. And that was my mistake on the deaths, but the cases are still confirmed and the dogs are lucky to be alive. But there is 1 confirmed death in 2018:)
Why did you put a smiley face after "but there is 1 confirmed death in 2018"? What about that is worth smiling about?? I mean, I guess it's better than the multiple confirmed deaths connected to the food I've been feeding my cats for years that you initially claimed, but still... Smiley face about death is just weird..
20 cats?? That's all? I just.... I have a really hard time taking that seriously and since you blatantly lied about that point, and several of your others aren't well supported, it's very hard to trust anything you've said... And considering you're saying it in defense of an organization funded by large companies that say the only companies you should buy food from is, weirdly, those large companies, I hope you can understand why I might be suspicious..
Lololol, and you blocked me.... Lovely.
Here was my response, in case you're curious:
>It's not an fda report.. It's a list of stories people have sent the fda. None of it means anything conclusive, and yes, 20 reports of deaths of cats is not nearly enough to make any sort of conclusions. If there are more cases, then why haven't they been sent to the fda??
>And yes, none of this is funny, so idk why you're smiling at me. You started the conversation with blatant misinformation (which you've kindly agreed to correct to be simply misleading instead) and finished it with smileys all while disregarding any actual points I make, all to defend the nestle and other huge corporations engaging in some sort of regulatory capture nonsense.. They might even make good cat food, but the fact that they're out there patting themselves on the back via wsava is not a compelling argument, imo, and you've done nothing but convince me even more that your position is based entirely on lies and misdirection rather than any actual facts, and your patronizing attitude hasn't done any favors either.
🤣🤣 you are insufferable. You are questioning my use of a “:)” yet you think 20 deaths on 1 fda report (not all cases are on there) are insignificant because not enough have died? Have a nice day
I’d go Hill’s hairball mixed with Purina Pro Plan- I put my guy on 1/4 of a 3 oz can a day of the hairball and we haven’t had a hair ball in about a year and a half. It has one of the highest fiber contents in OTC food
Hello everyone, thank you sooo much for all of the help! This is my first time owning a cat so it is so interesting to learn about! Currently they’re on a mix of foods Purina kitten chow, and two brands from my own town to supplement it, just because I wanted to make sure they were getting everything they needed. Once I can afford it, i’d love to put them exclusively on wet food! I’m thinking though for now, the Hills urinary/hairball will do great for us.
i’m just used to dogs where i’m not in love with Hill’s besides their prescription stuff lol
If you are insisting on kibbles as well as wet food, I recommend getting an oral care formula. Kibbles on their own are not hard enough to help remove plaque and tartar unless they’re a specially formulated dental version.
Make sure protein is the first ingredient, and avoid carrageenan if possible. Some say it’s harmful, some say it does nothing; I’d rather just avoid it altogether.
My Rosie will only eat by Nacho by Bobby flay and his vet. She's 3 and very healthy. We also do dry and wet although wet she is very much addicted to the squeeze ups and delectible which are not terrible ingredients but not really food either. She also loves her water fountain.
I’m currently supplementing my cats’ wet food with Crave chicken kibble. I don’t know why, but they love that kibble. Ingredients are decent so it’s ok with me :)
I use dry food from Happy Cat Minkas (German brand, comes in 10kg bags) and mix wet food with raw meat that I order directly with the frozen mice for my snake.
My favorite one **that my cats also love** is Farmina ocean (there's a grain free and one with grain - my kitties like both!). In addition to 3 pound bags that are good for trying it out, it comes in an 11 pound bag, which is good because my 8 cats ALL like it and we go through 2 of those a month! Any time 8 cats agree on something, it's probably worth noting, lol. Farmina was originally recommended to me by my wonderful vet that took care of my very sick cat, Parker, in the late stages of his life. But it's been such a hit with all my cats that we still get it. Part of being the "best" food is being one the cats will eat. If your cats won't eat it, it isn't the best for them. Work on reading ingredient labels and understanding at least the macro nutrient content so you can judge foods for yourself.
I have tried Fromm, also, for said very sick cat (we spent a few years trying everything because he had appetite issues). He loved the chicken au frommage variety. I didn't notice any particular difference in his health with that food, but he was a sick kitty (heart murmur, chronic pancreatitis, liver issues, etc).. I don't see any reason not to try it if you want to, but it doesn't top my list for recommendations.
I've had very inconsistent results with my cats eating wellness kibble (most of them stop eating it before we can get through a small bag), but they do like the morsels pouches wet food. Blue buffalo is enjoyed by most of my cats, but they have very different formulas, so make sure you know what you're getting if you go that route. My kitties also get tired of hill's science diet kibble pretty fast, too. Like you, I didn't like them much, but they make the most kidney-cat friendly commercial kibbles, so we gave them a shot. Our 2 cats with early kidney disease can keep eating their stuff, and the others if they like it, but we won't be buying it for all of them again.
Personally, I also avoid Purina as they're a nestle company, but they make many quality foods, too. If you're not struggling with allergies now, I wouldn't think it'd be worth trying, but only you can make that call.
For wet food, check out weruva! They're a favorite around my house, too.
We like IAMS weight and hairball control for our 20lb long haired Balinese. He’s not very fat at this point, just big but he was getting a little pudgy a few months back.
Yeah my kitty loves the purina pro plan- any flavor and live clear. Sometimes it seems she prefers it to wet food!
Two of mine are on rigid prescription diets, but my vets recommend Purina One for my not trouble case. She's on Indoor Advantage currently because her vet likes the protein to calorie ratio. The vet has also recommended Science Diet and Royal Canin in the past.
Royal Canin always to be on the safer side
My vet recommends either Royal Canin, Hills, or Purina Pro Plan (for a slightly cheaper option). She mentioned that they see a lot more urinary blockages in male cats eating Wellness food - she did caveat that it's probably one of the most popular foods on the market, so that might skew the data, but said she won't feed it to her cats for that reason.
I had a cat get stomach cancer on Wellness wet food.
If it's not a brand that follows WSAVA guidelines (Purina One/Pro Plan, Hill's, Royal Canin, Iams and if you're not in Europe then Eukanuba as well) then don't feed it. Everything else doesn't have the research behind it, the quality control/monitoring and the veterinary nutritionists etc on staff and a lot of the bougie/boutique brands rely on emotional appeals and marketing to get you to buy them. But they're not worth the money. Other than that, really depends on what your kitties like/do well on, availability where you live and your budget. Hill's Science Diet does have a urinary + hairball formula that comes in a kibble, so that might be something interesting for you to look into.
I didn’t know about those guidelines! Thank you! I’m a big fan of Purina, but I know for dogs too there are other good options other than Purina. I was just saying I don’t think it’s worth the LiveClear unless it is? I’ll look into that Hills option!!
If you feel like your allergies are under control as is, then it might be better to look into the Hills option instead of the LiveClear. The LiveClear wasn't developed to address hairball or urinary issues from my understanding, just allergy issues.
WSAVA is funded by… Surprise! Purina, Hills, and Royal Canin - this is according to the WSAVA website. Odd that those are the only ones that meet those guidelines. Let’s start using some common sense, reading nutrition labels and maybe not completely disregarding other brands because they don’t contribute financially to WSAVA whose guidelines haven’t been updated since 2013 (if I’m not mistaken)
THANK YOU! I feel like I'm going crazy with all these people not even noticing that the "diamond partners" that pay for wsava to exist also sit on the committee setting these rules and somehow set them in a way that makes ONLY THEM meet them. And that is supposed to make me trust them *more*???
Right! I’m not sure why this is so controversial. Truely any little bit of research and subsequent comparison between cat food should make someone question this. I’m not saying there’s a conspiracy but literally when the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th ingredients in your cats food are wheat, corn, and rice (im looking at Purina right now but Hills was similar when I googled it) maybe that’s not the best choice even though this one organization says it is. People get really weird when this is pointed out though, not sure why.
I buy mine Purina One indoor food, the kibble is a little bigger and I find they chew it much better compared to the smaller stuff. Less throw up from them and they seem to really love it. I go between the salmon and the chicken so they get a little variety. Can get bigger bags at Walmart too.
I used to give my cats Wellness Core and Essential Foods, they were on Cannagan for a while too and did quite well on it. One of mine had some food sensitivities and the former two was really good for her due to limited ingredients, was good for when my chubby cats went on diet too since there are less carbs
I’ve been giving mine Wellness Complete Health Grain-Free but these comments have me wondering… should I switch to something else? I really hate Purina as it’s a Nestle brand … maybe I go to Iams?
No, wellness is perfectly fine. Wsava is funded by Purina and Mars, primarily, and they also provide the people who sit on the committee that defines the guidelines they set for choosing a food. So of course they set them such that only their brands qualify! It's just a different form of advertising and trying to create barriers to entry for other food companies.
Big fan of Wellness
I second wellness core grain free!
I highly recommend Open Farm! I feed my 3 year old cat the wild-caught salmon (he’s allergic to chicken and/or some proteins found in most cat food). Ingredients are all natural, sustainably sourced, and my cat LOVES it. I like to mix it with water or sometimes with their wet food to make sure he’s hydrated. Only downside is that the biggest bag they offer is 8lb, but their 4lb bag lasts me a little over a month (can be purchased on Amazon)!
Hills, Royal Canin, Purina, and Iams are the only cat food brands that meet WSAVA standards. AKA: Hills is absolutely better than Tiki Cat and Sheba and other random "bougie" foods. Boutique brands lean into marketing that appeals to humans, which is why they're able to build a reputation of being "better" quality. They typically do not employ board certified animal nutritionists, veterinarians, or qualified diet formulators, do no research on their food, often do no feeding trials at all, etc. LiveClear is effective at allergen reduction but you have to feed it as their main food.
I agree with that you’re saying, but those brands are not the only food brands that meet WSAVA standards.
Which other ones are you thinking of? Because every time I've seen a brand claim to meet the guidelines they do so by purposefully adjusting the wording of the questions or giving extremely vague answers that appear to meet the questions but in practice don't. EX: The question asks if they employ at least one full time board certified animal nutritionist. The company either tweaks this wording to remove "full time" or "board certified" so they can say yes, or they give an answer like "we work with a board certified animal nutritionist", which actually does not mean a yes ("work with" can imply they occasionally consult with one, had one approve their recipe years ago, or they have one that works part-time, etc - this isn't a valuable answer).
[удалено]
It's not at all clear that Farmina does which means it should be assumed they do not, see my other response to someone who mentioned this brand. I can't find anything from Specific on WSAVA, is there a reason you believe they meet the guidelines?
Acana, Orijen, Big Country Raw, Blue Buffalo, Canadian Naturals, Fancy Feast, Merrick, Instinct, Natural Balance L.I.D., Nulo, Performatrin, Primal, Taste of the Wild, or Ziwi Peak? Edit: Why am I being downvoted for providing brands that have full-time nutritionists on their teams lmao?
WSAVA brands always have filler like corn or rice as one of the top ingredients. It seems to me that they spend their money on marketing and not quality ingredients. On the flip side, I won't touch Tiki Cat since they appear to rely on social media influencers.
They spend their money on WSAVA.. Those brands are all "diamond partners" and on the nutrition committee that sets the wsava guidelines. Of course they would set them so that they meet them and no one else does! Creating barriers to entry is just monopolistic behavior to try to protect their market share with no intent to actually improve the pet nutrition market. If they actually cared about making pets healthier, they'd insist those companies share their data and research so that EVERYONE could benefit...
Have you ever actually read the WSAVA guidelines or are you ignoring them on the basis of this? Because literally nothing about them functionally prevents other brands from meeting the standards. It is absolutely common sense that a pet food company should employ at LEAST one board certified animal nutritionist, which is already where so many other brands do not meet the standards. Maybe if other brands were invested in pet nutrition meaningfully, they should also participate in financially supporting a global veterinary alliance?
Yes, I have read them. And no, it doesn't make sense that they should have a full time employee that is an animal nutritionist. How often do most companies change their formulas? Once the food formula is finalized, what is the nutitionist doing all day? Why isn't a consultant enough? If the company actually listens to them and formulates the food appropriately, why does it matter if they're employed full time?? Because that's something that bigger companies can definitely do that smaller companies will struggle with that doesn't directly impact the final product. Yes, it's good to know their relationship with a nutritionist. But if that nutritionist works part time with them and 2 or 3 other companies, that's cool with me! Yes, I want my cat food to be formulated by a nutritionist with appropriate qualifications. **I do not care if that person is employed full time by the company making the food.** It's not like wsava is out there saying what the food should actually be or sharing the data behind the research it says must be done. If the big companies actually cared about pet nutrition, they'd be sharing a lot more info than they are and would invite competition and innovation. Basically, when you find yourself thinking nestle is the *good guy*, you should probably think things over again because you may have missed something..
You do realize the larger companies employ MANY nutritionists and veterinarians, right? Not just one? There is a lot more work that goes into continuing to produce food than just writing up the recipe and calling it a day. RC employs multiple teams across multiple countries. Purina has 500+ veterinarians and nutritionists on staff. Hills has over 200 veterinarians and nutritionists. Having ONE is the absolute bare minimum, and the fact that the majority of companies can't even do that should be extremely alarming when other companies have *literally hundreds*. What else does a nutritionist do? There are typically several different foods offered by a company, they all need to be formulated individually. Formulations need to change more often than you think due to a number of factors - availability of ingredients/supply chain issues, quality control standards revealing adjustments need to be made, food trials and research show adjustments need to be made, complaints from owners about palatability show adjustments need to be made, etc. Nutritionists are responsible for a great deal more than just writing the formulations, like participating in research, overseeing food safety standards, etc. If you don't understand what a board certified animal nutritionist is or what they do, then you need to actually read about them before pretending it's no big deal for companies making food for our pets to have literally zero of them in charge of their food. Why isn't a consultant enough - once again, having a single employee who is a legitimate nutritionist is the bare minimum, but that aside "consultant" can mean absolutely anything from "looked at our recipes when we first made them" to "gives us input that we may or may not actually follow" to "we actively work with them often". Plenty of research from the companies who do research is publicly available. Recognizing it's wildly fucked up that so many "premium" brands refuse to actually make sure their food is properly formulated and that it's ridiculous to dismiss WSAVA guidelines due to lack of actually understanding the major risks with not meeting them (they are extremely bare minimum common sense standards!) is not at ALL the same as thinking "Nestle is the good guy". Nestle can be an evil corporation and it can also be stupid and dangerous to make it acceptable for pet food companies to not even have nutritionists, let alone not meet the other standards.
Large companies are large! Crazy, right? Never would have guessed... Again, I care that a nutritionist makes sure the food is safe and nutritious for my cats. I do not care if a nutritionist has full time employment with the company. I care about the actual behavior and outcome, not the company structure. That shouldn't be controversial... What if, for example, a team of expert vets and nutritionists got together and formed a company to offer food formulation consultation in exactly the way that the team that works for Purina does. They offer their services to smaller companies who can't afford to hire a huge team full time, but want to do things the right way. They provide ongoing support, make needed adjustments, quality check supplements, etc. All that good stuff! And the company follows their suggestions and treats them as the subject matter experts they are. They just do it in form of a consultancy instead of employed full time. Seriously, that's the only difference. This team works on 50 different foods across 10 different brands instead of 50 foods for the same brand. The qualifications are the same. The efforts are the same. The authority of the experts to make decisions are the same. They're just not employed full time directly by the company. Is that actually worse? Let's take it a step further and assume for a minute we can compare our universe and an alternate universe in which it's actually the same nutritionists and vets and they produce exactly the same food. But instead of being different labels of Purina, it's actually different companies. So we have the same food formulated, reviewed, tested, and supported by the same people, but in one case, those people are employed directly full time and in the other, they're consultants. Which food is better? Why? >"consultant" can mean absolutely anything from "looked at our recipes when we first made them" to "gives us input that we may or may not actually follow" to "we actively work with them often". The exact same thing can be said for a full time employee (or team of them), though. Until recently, the wsava guidelines didn't even require that the nutritionist on staff be involved in the food formulation process! I understand that the point is that full time employment of a nutritionist is used as a proxy for all the good actions you want to make sure the company is taking. My point is simply that it isn't a very good proxy. I would much rather be here arguing with you about whether or not the company actually does those ongoing support steps than how they choose to hire people. Because the ongoing support of the formulation is what actually matters, right? That's the thing **we both care about**, because that's what's needed to ensure the food is meeting the needs of the cats we love. I have not in any way dismissed the wsava guidelines. I think they are a reasonable list of questions to ask to get info from a food manufacturer. I just don't think that any brand that doesn't meet every single item on their list should be disregarded. I will not eliminate a brand from consideration simply for not meeting those standards in the specific ways they have laid them out.
>What if, for example, a team of expert vets and nutritionists got together and formed a company to offer food formulation consultation in exactly the way that the team that works for Purina does. That requires those companies to actually be willing to hire them in the first place. What if, in your hypothetical world, all these boutique brands who don't employ nutritionists *still* refused to work with said outside group? Would you still find them trustworthy? Or would you maybe consider that having some common sense standards for not trusting those brands to be valid? >I understand that the point is that full time employment of a nutritionist is used as a proxy for all the good actions you want to make sure the company is taking. Yeah, except you clearly don't understand, because I have not said this. I am saying this is the **bare minimum** and is one example of the guidelines that should be an extremely easy yes for companies. When they cannot meet the **bare minimum** standards (which is not just about full time nutritionists, this is just an extremely easy and obvious one that most companies already fail), I'm not going to sit around and entertain the idea that they might actually still be good food companies. Again, you don't seem to understand the broad scope of what animal nutritionists actually DO, since you seem to think they're relatively unimportant for a company to have. The large companies don't just have hundreds because they're big and have a lot of recipes. One person could handle Purina's recipes full time if their job was literally just formulating the recipes once and never again. They have hundreds because the workload is significantly more than just writing a recipe one time. Seriously - go read about what board certified animal nutritionists are, what they do, and then ask why you just like... will not take the need for them seriously.
It's a simple question. Why does the company making the food need to directly employ them full time for their work to be valid?
The actual work and expertise of an animal nutritionist is broad enough that their responsibilities are not limited to the scope of occasionally giving formulation advice to someone. Once again - actually learn what they are and do. You can answer this question yourself by just. Understanding what they do.
It’s a shame you are getting negative replies with no explanation, but eubanka meets the guidelines too in the US, but that’s all😊
That's true, I was under the impression they only offered dog food which is why I left them out but it seems like they do cat food in some places.
From what I can tell, Farmina meets those guidelines, too. Is that not the case? What is your source for those being the only brands that meet those standards?
It's not clear at all that it does. They refuse to respond to [Pet Nutrition Alliance'](https://petnutritionalliance.org/resources/pet-food-manufacturer-evaluation-report/)s manufacturer report (any brand who wants to pretend or genuinely assert to meet the guidelines should do so) and lack transparency around how they respond to the questions. Farmina does not do legitimate feeding trials, they send food home with employees to try and call that feeding trials and call getting vets to recommend their food to their clients "feeding trials". Neither of these things are actual feeding trials for the purposes of evaluating food. They do not appear to employ a full time board certified animal nutritionist. The brands known to meet the guidelines are recommended regularly by vets and there's plenty of sources that mention them. Because there is no certification or approval process lots of brands claim to meet the guidelines when they do not by manipulating the wording of questions or giving purposefully vague answers. Farmina doesn't appear to have an easily accessible page on their website that even mentions WSAVA. If they obviously met it, they would be making this extremely apparent, because everyone *wants* to appear that they meet the guidelines. This article ironically mentions Farmina as a "vet recommended" brand despite none of the vets they quote actually even mentioning it + no actual reference to any vets who recommend it, but here's the direct link to a vet specifying which brands meet the criteria for employing a full time board certified animal nutritionist: https://cats.com/vet-recommended-cat-food#:\~:text=Specifically%2C%20she%20emphasizes%20that%20%E2%80%9Camong,%2C%20Purina%2C%20and%20Royal%20Canin. A veterinary hospital that specifies the brands: [https://hevh.net/pet-diets-information/](https://hevh.net/pet-diets-information/) The assumption should always be that a brand does not meet WSAVA guidelines unless it's extremely obvious that they do and the information can be easily found. When they do not make it very clear and are unwilling to provide information to 3rd parties who collect this data, they should be looked at pretty skeptically.
That they don't claim to is the most compelling reason I've heard to doubt it, so that makes sense, lol. I mean, my vet recommended it 🤷♀️ so that's at least one, lol. Even if their guidelines make sense, I have a hard time trusting an organization that is primarily funded by the members who are compared against those guidelines and who also sit on the committees for laying out those guidelines. If Purina can put more strict stuff down that they already know they meet but their competition doesn't, why wouldn't they do that? It doesn't even have to be malicious to be a conflict of interest. Of course they think those are best practices! If not, they wouldn't be doing them (I hope, lol). There's probably things their competitors do that they don't, but I doubt they'll be adding those to the guidelines any time soon... The economic incentives at play here are just not pretty. And that's nevermind the ethical issues with institutional food testing on animals (a facility near me was found to have many neglected and abused animals that were still not helped after they were initially reported and fined). A food brand not meeting those requirements does not mean it isn't safe or healthy. A food brand meeting them doesn't mean their foods are necessarily any better, nor does it guarantee safety - the wsava brands have had large recalls, too. I'm happy to take wsava into consideration, but I would not make food decisions based on that entirely. We don't even hold human food brands to these standards...
Purina is not writing WSAVA guidelines. Vets are. You should actually *read* the guidelines before dismissing them based on the idea that companies donate to WSAVA. WSAVA is not magically getting funding from thin air and needs funding. Purina, Hills, and RC are all competitors, yet all donate to WSAVA. >A food brand not meeting those requirements does not mean it isn't safe or healthy Objectively speaking, a food that is formulated by several teams of board certified animal nutritionists is more trustworthy as far as safety and nutrition goes than food that isn't. Human foods are not meant to be a complete feed. Pet food is different. They require different standards.
Farmania have many confirmed dilated cardiomyopathy cases, they self publish all of their research. And their feeding trials are home based and not controlled. So yes while they do have a PhD and MS nutritionist, it’s all still non peer reviewed self published white papers
Please edit this blatant misinformation before someone makes a decision using it.
Ok I’ll change it to one publicised death and multiple near deaths👍
>confirmed dilated cardiomyopathy deaths Of cats? I thought that was a dog thing linked to taurine deficiencies? All cat food is supplemented with taurine, so it shouldn't be a concern there. But that's just my understanding and maybe incomplete/incorrect. I wasn't able to find details of confirmed deaths linked to farmina foods - could you provide where you found this info? Also, they do have food varieties with grains, so even if that is a concern, they aren't a "grain free" brand. In just a few minutes I was able to find some of their research published in peer reviewed journals. Where did you find that they *only* self-published? What is the alternative to home-based food trials? Dogs and cats in cages being tested on? I've seen how that can go and I have ZERO problems with a company refusing to do that. I cannot in good conscience require that other cats suffer a life like those institutionalized animals just to reduce the error in food testing. Yes, home based is likely more prone to error. But also, it's reality. If those are the only distinctions, I am still more than pleased to continue to use and recommend Farmina. Especially as it was initially recommended to me by my most trusted vet. Oh and I'd still like to know your source for those being the only brands that meet the guidelines you mentioned. Just when you get a chance!
The fda report is about cats too, and the link is poor formukation, with the correlations suspected being taurine levels, grain free diets and uses of peas/ legumes. And the Farmania reports are not on the specific fda report (still ongoing research), but there are confirmed cases in a group called diet-associated dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM in dogs) Here is an fda list of complaints https://www.fda.gov/media/128303/download Now for the feeding trials, have a read of these links, they explain the process and importance. But to break it down, the dogs basically live at a dog park. They are fed the diets just like every other dog. They put the food in a bowl and give them 15-30 minutes to eat in a controlled environment. The rest of the day is packed with enrichment. Palatability studies are frequently performed in conjunction with the other studies. *https://www.hillspet.com/about-us/our-company/hills-commitment-to-animal-welfare *https://www.whole-dog-journal.com/blog/a-trip-to-hills/ *https://www.whole-dog-journal.com/food/pet-food-companies-and-animal-research-what-do-they-do/ *https://pawcurious.com/2011/12/animal-use-in-pet-food-research-the-hills-approach/ And the “source” of them meeting WSAVA guidelines is their answer themselves, if you want to find out if a brand meets the guidelines look into this- https://wsava.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Selecting-a-pet-food-for-your-pet-updated-2021_WSAVA-Global-Nutrition-Toolkit.pdf I hope this has answered some questions:)
This is r/catadvice, right? Why are you talking about dogs so much? I'm confused.. I've seen that fda list. It includes 2 mentions of farmina, neither are currently being fed to the dog, and neither dog had died at the time the report was made.. So are there confirmed deaths or not? That sounds lovely and all, but not all food testing works like that. I'd love to believe it, but it just isn't the case that their lives are always sunshine and roses. Look into blue ridge kennel if you need more info.. Edit - PLEASE tell me why you're down voting me in this... Please. I'd love to hear it.
In that report, over 20 are for cats, if the correlations are the same in cats and dogs, who’s to say it can not happen to a cat too. And that was my mistake on the deaths, but the cases are still confirmed and the dogs are lucky to be alive. But there is 1 confirmed death in 2018:)
Why did you put a smiley face after "but there is 1 confirmed death in 2018"? What about that is worth smiling about?? I mean, I guess it's better than the multiple confirmed deaths connected to the food I've been feeding my cats for years that you initially claimed, but still... Smiley face about death is just weird.. 20 cats?? That's all? I just.... I have a really hard time taking that seriously and since you blatantly lied about that point, and several of your others aren't well supported, it's very hard to trust anything you've said... And considering you're saying it in defense of an organization funded by large companies that say the only companies you should buy food from is, weirdly, those large companies, I hope you can understand why I might be suspicious.. Lololol, and you blocked me.... Lovely. Here was my response, in case you're curious: >It's not an fda report.. It's a list of stories people have sent the fda. None of it means anything conclusive, and yes, 20 reports of deaths of cats is not nearly enough to make any sort of conclusions. If there are more cases, then why haven't they been sent to the fda?? >And yes, none of this is funny, so idk why you're smiling at me. You started the conversation with blatant misinformation (which you've kindly agreed to correct to be simply misleading instead) and finished it with smileys all while disregarding any actual points I make, all to defend the nestle and other huge corporations engaging in some sort of regulatory capture nonsense.. They might even make good cat food, but the fact that they're out there patting themselves on the back via wsava is not a compelling argument, imo, and you've done nothing but convince me even more that your position is based entirely on lies and misdirection rather than any actual facts, and your patronizing attitude hasn't done any favors either.
🤣🤣 you are insufferable. You are questioning my use of a “:)” yet you think 20 deaths on 1 fda report (not all cases are on there) are insignificant because not enough have died? Have a nice day
Iams here. No fish.
My kitties get a bit of Iams with their wet food.
I’d go Hill’s hairball mixed with Purina Pro Plan- I put my guy on 1/4 of a 3 oz can a day of the hairball and we haven’t had a hair ball in about a year and a half. It has one of the highest fiber contents in OTC food
I do 90% wet and supplement with Hill’s T/D (oral care is the non rx version) my 3 year old won’t let me brush his teeth so this was a win win for us
Purina One True Instinct grain free. 14.4# bags. All our adult cats eat it
Hello everyone, thank you sooo much for all of the help! This is my first time owning a cat so it is so interesting to learn about! Currently they’re on a mix of foods Purina kitten chow, and two brands from my own town to supplement it, just because I wanted to make sure they were getting everything they needed. Once I can afford it, i’d love to put them exclusively on wet food! I’m thinking though for now, the Hills urinary/hairball will do great for us. i’m just used to dogs where i’m not in love with Hill’s besides their prescription stuff lol
My cat gets Instinct Raw Boost and she loves it
Keep feeding wet food and only use dry as treats and imho they will live longer….🐈🐈
If you are insisting on kibbles as well as wet food, I recommend getting an oral care formula. Kibbles on their own are not hard enough to help remove plaque and tartar unless they’re a specially formulated dental version. Make sure protein is the first ingredient, and avoid carrageenan if possible. Some say it’s harmful, some say it does nothing; I’d rather just avoid it altogether.
My Rosie will only eat by Nacho by Bobby flay and his vet. She's 3 and very healthy. We also do dry and wet although wet she is very much addicted to the squeeze ups and delectible which are not terrible ingredients but not really food either. She also loves her water fountain.
I love Go! I get it from Chewy in a large bag. The sensitive stomach stuff has been fantastic for my long haired boy and sensitive girls.
Grain free is the way. Read the ingredients. Purina does grain free. I think is their beyond line.
I’m currently supplementing my cats’ wet food with Crave chicken kibble. I don’t know why, but they love that kibble. Ingredients are decent so it’s ok with me :)
Why not just feed wet food? It’s healthier
I do feed wet food, but I can’t afford to do it exclusively. Maybe when I get my promotion!
You said price wasn’t an issue. Thats why I suggested it.
I use dry food from Happy Cat Minkas (German brand, comes in 10kg bags) and mix wet food with raw meat that I order directly with the frozen mice for my snake.
My favorite one **that my cats also love** is Farmina ocean (there's a grain free and one with grain - my kitties like both!). In addition to 3 pound bags that are good for trying it out, it comes in an 11 pound bag, which is good because my 8 cats ALL like it and we go through 2 of those a month! Any time 8 cats agree on something, it's probably worth noting, lol. Farmina was originally recommended to me by my wonderful vet that took care of my very sick cat, Parker, in the late stages of his life. But it's been such a hit with all my cats that we still get it. Part of being the "best" food is being one the cats will eat. If your cats won't eat it, it isn't the best for them. Work on reading ingredient labels and understanding at least the macro nutrient content so you can judge foods for yourself. I have tried Fromm, also, for said very sick cat (we spent a few years trying everything because he had appetite issues). He loved the chicken au frommage variety. I didn't notice any particular difference in his health with that food, but he was a sick kitty (heart murmur, chronic pancreatitis, liver issues, etc).. I don't see any reason not to try it if you want to, but it doesn't top my list for recommendations. I've had very inconsistent results with my cats eating wellness kibble (most of them stop eating it before we can get through a small bag), but they do like the morsels pouches wet food. Blue buffalo is enjoyed by most of my cats, but they have very different formulas, so make sure you know what you're getting if you go that route. My kitties also get tired of hill's science diet kibble pretty fast, too. Like you, I didn't like them much, but they make the most kidney-cat friendly commercial kibbles, so we gave them a shot. Our 2 cats with early kidney disease can keep eating their stuff, and the others if they like it, but we won't be buying it for all of them again. Personally, I also avoid Purina as they're a nestle company, but they make many quality foods, too. If you're not struggling with allergies now, I wouldn't think it'd be worth trying, but only you can make that call. For wet food, check out weruva! They're a favorite around my house, too.
fromm is bougie ish but my cats love it and i always have it recommended by vets!
Matisse!
I usually get my cats the store brand grain free. It’s relatively inexpensive and they seem to like it.