Raw or cooked??????
- Thread starter jim barry
- Start date
One cannot begin to compare the nutritional aspects of "live" foods supplied via a hobbyists hands, to what these fish would typically consume in the wild. I have yet to see a hobbyist replicate anything that I would personally consider natural, in a home aquarium, from the water the fish swim in, to the food they consume. In my mind the moment that a fish is placed in a glass box the term natural no longer applies.
Feeding farmed shrimp from Asia or Central America doesn't come even remotely close, either. There are far better fresh/frozen options than farmed shrimp.
While a well balanced diet cannot be had from a single live food, it most definitely can be found in a single prepared food. Nutrient fluctuation to mimic the seasonal changes can be done by witholding food during portions of the year, creating more of a natural feast or famine environment as found in the wild during the rainy to dry season.
One does not need to vary a high quality premium pellet food, in fact I would challenge anyone here to prove otherwise.
http://www.healthandyoga.com/html/food/effect.aspx
http://www.livestrong.com/article/289808-the-effects-of-cooking-on-the-nutritional-value-of-food/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/26089785/Effect-of-Cooking-on-Food
http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-2a.shtml
Here are a number of articles which anyone can read. Yes cooking affects foods.
Is the net effect harmful to fish? That can depend on what your fish needs from the food, how the food is cooked, how long the food is cooked, and at what temperature the food is cooked.
Generally speaking the only time the fish will get more value from cooking is when the cooking increases digestibility of the food without losing more desired content while cooking.
Since there are many species of fish, many types of foods and many ways of cooking, it's difficult to make a sweeping statement on raw versus cooked. Protein and certain vitamins which are not water soluble or destroyed by heat (e.g, Vitamins A-D-E-K are both stable in water and heat), and minerals are not lost in moderate cooking for short periods of time.
Feeding cooked food does have risks that other vitamins are being lost, so as long as the animal's regular diet includes some broad based nutritious pellet / supplement, there is probably minimal risk.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/289808-the-effects-of-cooking-on-the-nutritional-value-of-food/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/26089785/Effect-of-Cooking-on-Food
http://www.beyondveg.com/tu-j-l/raw-cooked/raw-cooked-2a.shtml
Here are a number of articles which anyone can read. Yes cooking affects foods.
Is the net effect harmful to fish? That can depend on what your fish needs from the food, how the food is cooked, how long the food is cooked, and at what temperature the food is cooked.
Generally speaking the only time the fish will get more value from cooking is when the cooking increases digestibility of the food without losing more desired content while cooking.
Since there are many species of fish, many types of foods and many ways of cooking, it's difficult to make a sweeping statement on raw versus cooked. Protein and certain vitamins which are not water soluble or destroyed by heat (e.g, Vitamins A-D-E-K are both stable in water and heat), and minerals are not lost in moderate cooking for short periods of time.
Feeding cooked food does have risks that other vitamins are being lost, so as long as the animal's regular diet includes some broad based nutritious pellet / supplement, there is probably minimal risk.
I have personally watched fish develop health issues (specifically related to excess fat storage and liver failure) related to feeding single 'premium' diets before that we solved over time by varied diet of natural live foods, frozen foods and man made made diets. Varied diet is key to do our best to keep healthy livestock.
I'm not exactly sure how that disproves my opinion, Matt? I can easily say the same thing about feeding a varied diet.
I have personally watched fish develop health issues (specifically related to excess fat storage and liver failure) related to feeding "varied" diets.
There, I just said it.
It all depends on the fish (species, as well as specific growth stage of species) the food being fed, and how that food is being delivered. You can keep chanting the same mantra for as long as you like, but unless you can show me some peer reviewed studies that disprove my statement then this discussion becomes a moot point. There are people who can feed the exact same diet to the exact same species, and end up with the exact opposite in overall health results. That may, or may not have anything to do with the diet itself, but the amount being fed on a daily/weekly basis. Excessive fat deposition in and around the organs is often related to how much is being fed, just as much (or possibly more so) than what is being fed. It's not as though a fish can't become obese from eating healthy foods, in that sense calories are calories, and just like in humans the excess calories have to go some where. Some people just can't properly measure an adequate amount of feed to give to a fish in captivity, especially with some of the more nutrient dense feeds currently on the market. I see the same thing in dogs all the time.
I have personally watched fish develop health issues (specifically related to excess fat storage and liver failure) related to feeding "varied" diets.
There, I just said it.
It all depends on the fish (species, as well as specific growth stage of species) the food being fed, and how that food is being delivered. You can keep chanting the same mantra for as long as you like, but unless you can show me some peer reviewed studies that disprove my statement then this discussion becomes a moot point. There are people who can feed the exact same diet to the exact same species, and end up with the exact opposite in overall health results. That may, or may not have anything to do with the diet itself, but the amount being fed on a daily/weekly basis. Excessive fat deposition in and around the organs is often related to how much is being fed, just as much (or possibly more so) than what is being fed. It's not as though a fish can't become obese from eating healthy foods, in that sense calories are calories, and just like in humans the excess calories have to go some where. Some people just can't properly measure an adequate amount of feed to give to a fish in captivity, especially with some of the more nutrient dense feeds currently on the market. I see the same thing in dogs all the time.
I have been off MFK for a while now because too many people who really don't know what they are talking about when it comes to basic fishkeeping, let alone the complexities of Potamotrygonidae, talk as if they are experts, and where others fail to disclose real conflicts of interest.
It would seem to me to be an ethical thing for the person who sells pellet food for a living to declare that interest before making any statements about any benefits of pellet foods, especially when that person doesn't keep rays and no pellets are made/designed for rays. You know who you are! declare your interest and reveal your bias!
It would seem to be a wiser thing to accept the advice from an experienced professional AZA fish ( ray) keeper like Zoodiver who is gracious enough to keep posting despite the trolls, and who is highly experienced and cares about fish first , over the advice of a shill with no practical experience with rays but who has a vested interest in pellets and who cares about $$'s first.
This is exactly why the forum gets less and less visits from the real experts any more.
It would seem to me to be an ethical thing for the person who sells pellet food for a living to declare that interest before making any statements about any benefits of pellet foods, especially when that person doesn't keep rays and no pellets are made/designed for rays. You know who you are! declare your interest and reveal your bias!
It would seem to be a wiser thing to accept the advice from an experienced professional AZA fish ( ray) keeper like Zoodiver who is gracious enough to keep posting despite the trolls, and who is highly experienced and cares about fish first , over the advice of a shill with no practical experience with rays but who has a vested interest in pellets and who cares about $$'s first.
This is exactly why the forum gets less and less visits from the real experts any more.
Gee, why do I get the distinct feeling that was directed at me, David? 
Funny enough I was thinking of you when I posted in this discussion, wondering how long it would take for you to join the fray and once again with your amazing psychic powers inform fellow members what species I personally have experience with, and how clearly I must have a bias with anything that has to do with fish food.
I have no intention playing tit for tat with you again, it was boring the first few times - but I will offer you this. I do have experience with rays, and I have been out of the fish food game for some time now. So, no conflict of interest, in fact I never even mentioned any brand names.
I meant absolutely no disrespect towards Zoodiver, I simply do not agree with his position, or his reasoning stated for that position. If you have a problem with that, David, that's your problem.
Cheers!
Funny enough I was thinking of you when I posted in this discussion, wondering how long it would take for you to join the fray and once again with your amazing psychic powers inform fellow members what species I personally have experience with, and how clearly I must have a bias with anything that has to do with fish food.
I have no intention playing tit for tat with you again, it was boring the first few times - but I will offer you this. I do have experience with rays, and I have been out of the fish food game for some time now. So, no conflict of interest, in fact I never even mentioned any brand names.
I meant absolutely no disrespect towards Zoodiver, I simply do not agree with his position, or his reasoning stated for that position. If you have a problem with that, David, that's your problem.
Cheers!
You comments that the pellet only diet works until someone will prove you wrong. I was just stating I have seen it not work. You suggested that you can vary the amount of food to simulate the season changes, however that is not correct. By variation of the same amount of a pellet you are not changing the ratio of nutrional components that the animal is getting, only the amount. Problems like fatty liver disorder have been directly related to poor diet and the lack of change withint the diet's components.
You state that you have seen rays with health issues related to varied diet. Was it a HEALTHY and NATURAL replication of the diet, or was is a variation of bad foods? You're quote "It's not as fish can't become obese from eating healthy foods" is well worded and factual, but a bit off point. It's just as much about eating healthy foods as it is eating foods in a healthy manner. That falls directly on the abilities of the ray keeper.
I have fed my rays frozen cooked prawn for 4 years now as a supplement(since they love it). It is not part of the main diet wich is pollock. Here in Norway you can not even buy raw shrimp, then you have to climb a fisherboat before it comes to shore(since they cook em on the boat). I do not se any ill effects on my rays. As for reading about nutrition lost in cooking, it is mostly vegetables and fruits they mention, not meat.
