Expenses for pets

[brendamc67]

WhatMoney: Do your cats vomit a lot with the wet food? I feed mine the Purina Indoors, and they don't vomit that much. If I switch to any other brand ... it gets much worse. I wouldn't mind switching to wet food, but with eight cats, I don't want to be cleaning up vomit everywhere.
Thanks!

[WhatMoney]

WhatMoney: Do your cats vomit a lot with the wet food? I feed mine the Purina Indoors, and they don't vomit that much. If I switch to any other brand ... it gets much worse. I wouldn't mind switching to wet food, but with eight cats, I don't want to be cleaning up vomit everywhere.
Thanks!

I have two cats, older males. One never vomits. The other chucks a hairball now and then, especially when the weather gets warmer and they shed their winter coat. (I need to comb them more often.) But no, vomiting is not a problem - although cleaning up a hairball can still be a pain if they had food left in their stomach.

I keep the portions small and feed the wet in three small (1-2 oz) portions a day. I think the pate is easier on stomachs then some of the chunky wet foods with gravy. If your cat has been eating mostly dry food you may need to go slowly when switching them to an all wet diet. And some canned foods just don't agree with some cats. I've always had good luck with the Friskies canned pate.

I have had a cat that occasionally vomited in the morning before a meal, but usually his stomach was empty so only clear fluid came up. That may happen when the cat is hungry and lack of food causes nausea or some sensation. But it was also an older cat (14 yrs) that was starting kidney failure.

Since I do not free feed wet food, the cats have to wait 8-10 hours between meals if I'm busy or sleeping. But I've also had cats that upchucked their dry food usually without any sign of chewing it, shortly after gulping it down.

I've had cats that upchucked right after eating when they ate too fast. This can happen if they gulp the wet food down - more like inhaling it. Lowering the portion size seems to stop that. Of course they usually just lick it back up (yuck) before I could clean it up - a good reason to feed them in the kitchen.

My mother has a cat that is on all wet, but the cat is a picky eater and only eats a little bit at a time, then comes back an hour later and snacks again. She has never had a vomiting problem with the canned Friskies.

The article I referenced has some suggestions on moving a cat from dry to wet. But I think portion control and an easy to digest, as in pate wet food, works best.

[mgmadara]

You are lucky to have an enlightened vet.

There will always be cat owners who think dry food is best for their cat, just like their will always be people who smoke and drink and sky dive until they are 95, and claim that proves there are no risk factors for doing it.

Has your cat ever had a UTI? Is your cat overweight? Will it develop Type II diabetes from the high carb diet in dry food?
Dr Pearson, DVM, says it best - check out her site:

http://www.catinfo.org/#My_Cat_is_Do...ne_on_Dry_Food



BTW, plain old canned Friskies Pate variety in assorted flavors, is cheap and good enough - poultry platter being the best for ingredients. I get mine on sale for around 35 cents/5.5 oz can, and one can a day is enough for a 14 lb indoor male cat (about 185 kcal per can).

Thanks for that great link. I also was under the impression that dry food was the best until about 10 years ago when my 8 year old, very obese cat died of a heart attack and my elderly cat developed thyroid problems and cystitis. After that we started feeding soft food twice a day and kept a bowl of hard food out all the time because I felt they needed the hard food to keep their teeth healthy.

About a year ago our 19 year old cat started with kidney issues and chronic renal failure. We had to give her fluids daily. She died Memorial Day weekend while we were away. We have 5 cats left, 1 is very obese, so we have decided to ween them off of the dry food and feed them wet food only. My parents have a cat that was fed dry food only and he is having kidney issues now, as well. BTW, our obese cat is the only one that eats more dry food than wet food. Coincidence? I doubt it... Again, thank-you for the link.

[WhatMoney]

BTW, our obese cat is the only one that eats more dry food than wet food. Coincidence? I doubt it...

No coincidence at all. Because most cats on high carb dry food are free fed, and since the amount is not rationed by most owners, cats on dry food get too many calories and can become obese. Just like humans with junk food, high carb diets often turn people and cats into blimps.

With cats it is much worse because the cat evolved to be an obligate carnivore. This means their natural diet is mostly protein and fat, and very little carbohydrates. A proper diet for a cat should only contain about 9% kcal (metabolizable energy calories) of carbohydrates. In nature the entire carb content for a cat comes from the stomach contents of the rodents and birds they eat.

Most commercial dry foods contain up to 50% kcal in carbs. A good quality wet cat food contains around 10%-15% carbs. Since insulin is needed to convert the carbs into useful blood glucose, an excess of carbs overloads the insulin receptors on a cat's pancreas. Cat's never evolved to need large production insulin receptors. So a high carb diet results in eventual damage to the insulin receptors, and the carbs end up as unmetabolized sugar in the blood stream and urine. The cat now has Type II diabetes. Once the carbs have destroyed the insulin receptors the condition is not reversible. The cat now will need daily insulin shots to survive, since without insulin there will be no blood glucose to feed the brain and muscle cells. Without insulin the cat will literally starve to death no matter how much it eats.

A cat fed only wet food, as close to it's natural diet as possible, will never develop Type II diabetes, and if portion control is done, will never become obese. Cat's thrive on the "Atkins' diet", which happens to be their natural diet. Many vets still are ignorant of this and keep selling the horrible Hills dry food (mostly ground up corn) as a healthy diet. The profits to the vets are high enough but that's about it.

Here's a very useful table comparing the nutritional value of commercial canned cat foods. Note that the "premium" foods are often no better than the less expensive brands:

http://binkyspage.tripod.com/CanFoodNew.html

You can also find dry food nutritional data at that link. There are very few dry foods that are anything near the ideal diet for a cat.

And Dr. Pearson's highly informative info on cat food here:

http://www.catinfo.org/commercialcannedfoods.htm

.

[hooferator]

I don't get the rabies shots for my indoor cats...never have. So many people think this is necessary but it's not.

If your cats never TRULY go outdoors, adn they already have a clean bill of health, there is no reason for them to get shots. Ask your vet. If your vet is honest, he/she will confirm this.

But I gotta say, I like you for being an animal lover.

ep

I agree with this in spirit--there are even stories of tumors forming at injection sites if the animal is getting too many and always in the same place. I agree that many vets push shots and pills worse than any used car salesman.

But one thing you have to keep in mind is that if you ever have an emergency, many vets won't let your animal stay at their facility for recovery unless they're up-to-date on shots. My old vet said it was for the other animals' protection, and, really, you wouldn't want your animal to stay in a room with potentially rabid ones, right? You can even be refused regular services if you don't at least have the rabies up to date. And kennels will never let you board unless you can provide vaccination proof. So if something ever came up, like you had to rush out of state for a funeral and no one was available to take care of your cats, you won't have time to get that done in order to board them.

For some people it would never come up. But I keep up on the 3-year rabies, plus I do distemper for peace of mind. I've been moving a lot, and distemper can potentially be "left behind" if the last tenant had a cat with it, brought in on my hands or clothes, or even one flea getting inside that carries it can transmit it to my baby. And you can definitely get fleas; one time a handyman doing work for my mother caused a total infestation even though we'd never experienced fleas in 25 years of pet ownership. I shudder to think what his home was like if he had enough on his person to cause that.

But I go to the cheap clinics, so the cost is negligible anyway.

[marie]

for the cat people among us

https://www.commoncat.com

this is a website my daughter has created. She is a single parent working through college and is trying to make a bit of extra income from the ads. Its fun and informative and won't cost you anything . Just take a look at the articles and have a little click or two on the ads.

Thanks for your help

[sdnatv]

One could argue the same point regarding children

But sometimes one must face the facts: if you can't afford to take care of so many pets, then maybe one should not own so many pets??? $400/mo is alot - and if you're filing bankruptcy its a pretty good assumption that you cannot afford it. Have you tried to find homes for any of your pets? I know they are like family - and its not easy. But it might be the best thing for them.

I just had to laugh when I read this response. I feel exactly the same way whenever I hear someone crying poverty and see them surrounded by four or five screaming toddlers. Let's face these facts: if you can't afford to take care of so many kids, then maybe one should not have so many kids??? $400/mo is alot - and if you're filing bankruptcy its a pretty good assumption that you cannot afford it. Have you tried to find homes for any of your kids? I know they are like family - and its not easy. But it might be the best thing for them.

I definitely do not condone hoarding of any sentient beings, human or otherwise, but I do resent the dismissive attitude society has towards pets. Having a child is still (thankfully) a legal choice in this country, just as owning a pet is, so any expenses required in the care of either "child" should be considered equally.

[helpmeout]

I just had to laugh when I read this response. I feel exactly the same way whenever I hear someone crying poverty and see them surrounded by four or five screaming toddlers. Let's face these facts: if you can't afford to take care of so many kids, then maybe one should not have so many kids??? $400/mo is alot - and if you're filing bankruptcy its a pretty good assumption that you cannot afford it. Have you tried to find homes for any of your kids? I know they are like family - and its not easy. But it might be the best thing for them.

I definitely do not condone hoarding of any sentient beings, human or otherwise, but I do resent the dismissive attitude society has towards pets. Having a child is still (thankfully) a legal choice in this country, just as owning a pet is, so any expenses required in the care of either "child" should be considered equally.

You really can't compare pets to kids. Let me be clear, I love cats. I have a cat. And have had a cat for most of my life.

But what I feel for them in no way compares to what I feel for my kids. My kids are incapable of taking care of themselves at this time.

My cat is more than capable of taking care of himself (not that I would just abandon him), but then, he's a predator. And is biologically ready to be on his own a whole lot sooner than my 8 & 10 year old, btw,he was on his own and doing quite well when the animal shelter found him (he's a very friendly cat). If I had to choose between my kids and my cat, I would choose my kids. And find another home for my cat.

In other words, you can't argue the same point with kids.

[sdnatv]

You really can't compare pets to kids. Let me be clear, I love cats. I have a cat. And have had a cat for most of my life.

But what I feel for them in no way compares to what I feel for my kids. My kids are incapable of taking care of themselves at this time.

My cat is more than capable of taking care of himself (not that I would just abandon him), but then, he's a predator. And is biologically ready to be on his own a whole lot sooner than my 8 & 10 year old, btw,he was on his own and doing quite well when the animal shelter found him (he's a very friendly cat). If I had to choose between my kids and my cat, I would choose my kids. And find another home for my cat.

In other words, you can't argue the same point with kids.

Ok, I've reread my original post, and it was intended to be a tongue-in-cheek respone to any trustee trying to discount my legitimate pet expenses. I will clarify the point I was trying to make in bullet format.
1. I am not comparing animals to people based on their ability to survive without assistance. The focus here is on the debtor providing that assistance.
2. You, the debtor, CHOSE to accept responsibility for any and all expenses associated with the financially dependent being you adopted and/or bred. It doesn't matter if it's a child under 18, 2 week old puppy, or your blind, invalid, 99 year old grandmother. It is irrelevant whether or not the creature you are claiming the expense for can catch it's own dinner in the back yard. What does matter, is that you made a commitment to care for this creature's well being for as long as it requires your help. So, even though your cat could hunt by the time it was 6 months old (10 in human years), it will never be able to pay for any medical care if it gets sick or injured. You are the only one who's going to pay a vet bill. Your children, however, might qualify for state or federal aid, even if you can't afford it.
3. Under our current bankruptcy system, the debtor is granted a much higher allowance for food, shelter, medical care, ect...if their additional family members are human. Since pets are viewed as soulless pieces of property, they and their associated expenses are regarded as luxuries. Having a pet is not a necessity, therefore, the debtor's acceptable household expenses will only include it's human dependents.
4. This is the important part: Children, like pets, are NOT necessities. When you decide to add a child or a pet to your family, you should be fully aware of how much that addition is going to cost you and be able to support it financially for the entire time it resides with you. Before anybody starts to protest about the necessity of procreation to keep the species alive, hear me out. I'm not saying you can't have kids, I'm just saying the bankruptcy court shouldn't give your dependents special consideration when you go broke just because they're human. If you were financially stable when had your kids, then suffered a set back, you will not be asked to "give up" your kids to reduce your monthly expenses, so don't ask me to give up mine.

[geye]

Now, I don't have a dog in this fight (or cat ), but isn't support of an adult child that's capable of taking care of themselves not an allowed expense?

If so, shouldn't the same apply to your pets? If they're kittens, the expense would be allowable. But if they're full-grown cats, it would be perfectly acceptable to tell you that it's time to stop supporting them.

[nickifan]

This turned into a fascinating thread...on the city-data Cat forum there often are little flame wars about what to feed pets! Not that this has become one, but owners can be passionate on the topic. Right now, I'm just happy that Mr. Rollback at WalMart is selling Fancy Feast for 30 cents a can!

To the poster(s) who just skip the rabies shots...isn't it required in every state to have all pets vaccinated for rabies??? Even if they are only indoor pets...what if the cable guy/plumber/painter/electrician/firefighter (god forbid you need the latter) comes inside and gets bit?? If you can't prove the pet is up to date, I think you know how they test to be sure the cat doesn't have it? Just askin'.

[NoMoreCards]

Walmart has Fancy Feast at .30 a can?? Holy Beans! I am going shopping tonight! Thanks for that tip.

I asked my vet what she would do if she was bitten by a patient that did not have a rabies shot. She said she would monitor the animal for 10 days to be sure it acted and maintained "normal", therefore it would not need testing.
However if there were any signs that were not normal, the animal would be tested.

Just thought I'd share the info, and thanks for the tip about Mr. Rollback! Lol!

[nickifan]

Walmart has Fancy Feast at .30 a can?? Holy Beans! I am going shopping tonight! Thanks for that tip.

I asked my vet what she would do if she was bitten by a patient that did not have a rabies shot. She said she would monitor the animal for 10 days to be sure it acted and maintained "normal", therefore it would not need testing.
However if there were any signs that were not normal, the animal would be tested.

Just thought I'd share the info, and thanks for the tip about Mr. Rollback! Lol!

You're most welcome....I'm in Texas but I can't imagine that the rollback isn't a national price. Holy Beans for sure...the first time I saw it I nearly screamed in the aisle! The best price I'd seen before that was 55 cents at PetSmart -- FORGET ever picking it up at the drugstore if you're in a pinch -- it can be 99 cents a can!! Just goes to show what the profit margin must be, unless WalMart is taking a short-term bath on FF just to get us in the store. (Hence the term, "Loss Leaders"...?) My two loved Elegant Medleys but even at WallyWorld it's 70 cents a can (for 3 oz) and that's just too much for me now.
As for the rabies issue...I asked because I'm flirting with disaster myself. Mine were due for the "one year booster" in May and I just cannot spend $220 on a vet visit for them both. I may look into low-cost vaccine one-day clinics...sometimes those can be found. When I can get them in, I want the Three-Year vaccine...though I imagine they charge 3x the annual cost for it!
I can see sometimes how responsible people who are broke feel they need to give up their pets...doing it "right" can just be cost-prohibitive.

[NoMoreCards]

Rabies info:

The 3 year vaccine and the 1 year vaccine are the exact same vaccine, including the same dosage.

When the first shot is given, it has a shorter life span...meaning it only works reliably for 1 year. When that shot expires, the next shot is a 3 year because it is more of a booster. Problem is when too much time is between the expiration of the 1st shot and the administration of the 2nd shot...it is only considered a 1 year shot again.

So save yourself $$ and get the Rabies just BEFORE they expire, that would allow it to be a 3 year shot.

[nickifan]

Rabies info:

The 3 year vaccine and the 1 year vaccine are the exact same vaccine, including the same dosage.

When the first shot is given, it has a shorter life span...meaning it only works reliably for 1 year. When that shot expires, the next shot is a 3 year because it is more of a booster. Problem is when too much time is between the expiration of the 1st shot and the administration of the 2nd shot...it is only considered a 1 year shot again.

So save yourself $$ and get the Rabies just BEFORE they expire, that would allow it to be a 3 year shot.

I'm scratching my head on this, but then I am feeling dense today.
My girls are over 5 years old, so they've had several rabies shots...the last in May 09. But they'd had all their stuff regularly before that...so in practicality are they already enjoying three years of protection?
I was sent only one reminder by the vet's...maybe is that why they aren't going berserk on me?