I'll repost here part of what I posted to Forrest earlier today on a local forum, after watching his video on this food.
The sales spiel being used to promote this food is utter nonsense. Specifically, "the latest scientific information on big fish is that they need less protein and fat, but more fiber as adults". Really? Show me this "latest science". I love to learn new stuff.
Certainly adult fish require less protein & fat (far less than the 45% protein & 18% fat that is found in this food) but they sure as hell don't require anything remotely close to 15% fiber.
And, if what this person states about protein & fat is true for adult fish (which it is) then why on earth is he selling food with 45% protein & 18% fat? Are you freaking serious? This guy is talking straight out of his arse, and I can't believe that after all of this time you would buy some BS line from some guy selling food on the interweb. His numbers read like a generic trout chow used to pump a fish up in the least amount of time humanly possible.
You think that this is health food?
As far as fiber content, here's todays lesson on fiber/fibre in food designed for FISH.
The following is an excerpt from the Nutrient Requirements of Fish, written by some of the worlds leading experts on the subject of fish nutrition, and published by the National Research Council.
Fiber refers to indigestible plant matter such as cellulose, hemicellulose, lignin, pentosans, and other complex carbohydrates found in feedstuffs. These components are indigestible unless bacterial action occurs within the digestive tract. Fish do not secrete cellulase (Lindsay and Harris, 1980; Bergot, 1981), therefore cellulose digestion does not play an important role in their nutrition.
Fiber provides physical bulk to the feed. Cellulose and hemicellulose have been used as diluents and binders in experimental fish diets. Dietary fiber improved gastric evacuation time of rainbow trout fed purified diets (Hilton et al., 1983). Buhler and Halver (1961) reported that small amounts of supplemental cellulose increased growth and the efficiency of protein utilization in laboratory diets. Most fish can tolerate up to 8 percent fiber in their diets, but higher concentrations (8 to 30 percent) depress growth (Buhler and Halver, 1961; Leary and Lovell, 1975; Edwards et al., 1977; Hilton et al., 1983; Poston, 1986). The poor performance of salmonids fed certain types of fiber may result from a combination of factors including poor digestion and faster gastric emptying rates, which in turn affect feed intake and utilization of nutrients (Davies, 1988). In natural ingredient diets that contain 3 to 5 percent fiber (derived mainly from plant ingredients), adding fiber is unlikely to have any measurable benefit. In most cases the concern is to formulate diets without excessive fiber content, which may reduce the nutrient intake and increase fecal waste production. To limit environmental pollution from aquaculture waste, an important strategy is to use highly digestible feed ingredients and limit the fiber content of the diet.
Sometimes I think that some people see what they want to see, and obviously anyone can believe what they want to believe, but it seems that in the absence of facts experts abound.
Also, Forrest hasn't been feeding this food long enough to prove anything one way or the other. Quite frankly this entire thread was pointless.
edited to add: Forrest actually contacted me earlier today about this food, this thread, and his video, and he now realizes the error of his ways. He is no longer endorsing its use.
I sent him, (the maker of Max Attack) a lengthy email asking a lot questions, to where the main thing that he said was, and I quote. "Everything that I want people to know about my food and its ingredients is on my aquabid page." I dont know about you but there is not much info there regarding the food, the ingredients, or how it is made. I asked very easy questions, and I felt that he came off offended that I asked them.
