On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 20:30:26 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>In article >,
says...
>>
>> On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 19:53:32 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>>
>> >In article >,
>> says...
>> >>
>> >> Yikes! I better quit feeding Dinky, who has eaten Purina foods for his
>> >> entire 13 years of life, that nasty stuff! hehe, just yanking your
>> >> chain, Ranée. My other cat, Bammers, who also ate Purina his entire
>> >> life, lived in great health for 19 years.
>> >>
>> >> I think, IMHO, the negativity behind Purina's so-called contamination
>> >> is just nonsense spread by their competitors.
>> >>
>> >> Have you any cites for this Purina contamination from anyone who lists
>> >> the testing done? I'd be very interested to read them.
>> >
>> >
>> >http://www.fda.gov/animalveterinary/...drawals/ucm129
>> >575.htm
>> >
>> >or
>> >
>> >http://tinyurl.com/y8sl6ty
>> >
>> >Janet
>>
>> The link has no mention of Purina unless its in the multitude of links
>> within the page.
>>
>> I asked specifically for data that supports the *Purina* scare as
>> being exclusive to any other brand.
>>
>> Do any of those other links mention Purina specifically?
>
> Yes. The FDA lists all affected brands.
> Would you like a splint for your finger?
>
> Janet
No, my finger is fine. An accusation was leveled against Purina, and
links given that supposedly show Purina as being exclusively having
the problem. No mention of Purina was in either link.
I'm not searching through 20 *other* links to try to prove your case.
I'll just assume its nonsense until you provide what was asked for.
When you claim something, are asked for proof and provide no proof but
links that contain some sort of proof *somewhere* in the attached
links within the links you gave, it tends to make your argument pretty
lame and really unsupported. "Oh, here ya go. The information for MY
argument is buried somewhere in this list of links. Go find it
yourself." hahahaha, sorry, I'm not doing your work to support your
argument. I'll consider your argument unsupported with evidence until
you provide that evidence that shows Purina EXCLUSIVELY containing
problem ingredients. The problem, as I heard it, was with many types
of pet foods and only for a short time.
Thanks anyway. I know its nonsense anyway. I have had two cats who
have eaten Purina food for their entire lives. Ages 13 and 19. The 19
year old was as healthy as can be, right up to dying of old age
problems that were due at his age. The 13 year old is in fine health
and still eating his Purina food.
If the cats can live what are above average lengths of time, then I
guess all that bad stuff in the food didn't really hurt anything.
Or wait, yeah, only the food from Purina that MY cats ate was
unaffected, right? Sorry, couldn't resist.
I hate bashing of successful companies. The Walmart Bashing, The ATT
bashing, Purina Bashing....the list goes to any business that was
savvy enough to be a leader in industry and get very rich.
Hell, lets bash Bill Gates some more. He made what was the most
important discovery in the world until now and has been bashed for
being such a bad person to actually get rich from it. Bad Boy!
Everyone seems to love bashing anyone or any group that succeeds. It
gets boring to me. Whenever you hear of someone getting famous for
anything, the bashers are the next thing you hear.
Here's the bashers:
"I hate Walmart"
"I hate Microsoft"
"I hate Bill Gates"
"I hate AT&T"
etc, etc, etc, etc........
Hell, why not just say "I hate anyone who succeeds in business so I
can sound cool to all the other net bashers"?
ANY story that comes out that will put even the tiniest blame towards
ANYONE in business is jumped on by all the bashing junkies on the net
as gospel and exaggerated into a crime that deserves boycotting the
business by the entire planet.
How boring.