Rethinking Food; Eartworms are not native to Northern US and Canada

[tspuckler]

To clarify- I'm the one who used the term 'junk food' and as I stated before, it was probably a poorly chosen term, but it was the term used by the Vet who was scolding me (A teenager) for feeding too many worms to my turtles.

I don't really care about "junk food" as a term being used. There are foods that humans eat that are referred to as junk food, and I don't think there's any harm in using it for snakes.

What's important here is:

1) What are the nutritional requirements of snakes.

2) What is the nutritional value of food items being fed to snakes.

Turtles may very well have different dietary requirements than snakes. I have 23 turtles and have been keeping them for a very long time (I've had one for 27 years). I have never heard of feeding a turtle too many earthworms, unless of course it causes the turtle to become overweight.

I have also dealt with a fair number of vets over the years - when it comes to reptiles, some know what they are talking about, while others clearly don't (in my opinion). So I wouldn't swallow everything a vet says hook, line and sinker.

So to get back to the topic at hand, without knowing the nutritional components of worms, how can they be termed an inferior food source? For all we know Euro-worms might be more nutritious than native worms...or they may not.

RodentPro has a chart on their website breaking down the nutritional components of vertebrate prey. If such a thing existed for invertebrate prey, then some comparisons could be made.

Of course in addition to the chart, we'd also need to know the nutritional requirements of garter snakes.

I think the issue here is that we have neither a chart which covers the nutritional components of invertebrate prey, nor a thorough understanding of what the nutritional needs of garter snakes are.

Having a theory that Euro-worms are somehow insubstantial is just that - a theory. Currently it cannot be proven one way or the other.

I will toss out this anecdote: There's a small snake native to the west coast known as a Sharptailed Snake. The Sharptail Snake feeds mainly on slugs. It will readily eat European garden slugs of the genus Arion and, in fact, seems to prefer them over native slugs (Rossi and Rossi, 1995). Shaw and Campbell (1974) state that the snake's range may actually be expanding due to the introduction of these slugs by humans.

And just for kicks, here's a Sharptail Snake that I found a couple years ago:

[Spankenstyne]

Here's a chart with some feeder inverts nutritional components. Something to note is that nightcrawlers are high in calcium with an ideal Ca:P ratio of 1.5:1 to 2:1, and as noted are high in protein. Again as with most inverts it's going to depend on what they've been fed & kept on.

http://www.nagonline.net/Technical%2...02MODIFIED.pdf

Not saying they're complete or perfect but imo they are a good food item. My point of contention here being with them being thought of as junk food or lacking nutritional value.

[Stefan-A]

When did I indicate that they were nutritionally complete?
When did I indicate that anyone should have faith in anything?

It was not an accusation, even if it might have sounded like one. It was a warning that it's easy to get suckered into believing that a lack of information is a free pass to make stuff up for yourself. This is also not an accusation.

Really? Someone relating their experiences isn't providing information?
You have a very different defination of "information" than I do.

No information regarding the correct keeping of an animal and only limited and unreliable information about that person's history of keeping animals.

So if someone raised garter snakes for several generations on earthworms, you'd call that "gut feeling. Speculation" and (my favorite) "At best, misleading." What's so misleading about it?

Let's say we are talking about garters. In captivity, you can have a new generation every 2-3 years, which is a short enough to time, that you could keep breeding them for several generations, while still feeding them "junk food". Hell, even humans manage to do that to themselves. If you eat hamburgers for breakfast, lunch and dinner, that heart attack at age 34 normally still won't kill you before you've managed to reproduce. You can't judge it only by the fact that you get a new generation before the previous one dies off, yet that is the only criteria for "successfully" breeding an animal.

Dude, no one claimed that the brian was a recording device.

No and they shouldn't. But the point is that we can't afford to treat it as one, either.

I offered up my experiences and opinions. What's your problem? People do the same thing on this forum all the time.

None whatsoever. You are free to offer your experiences and opinions.

This is not about you.

I indicated two things in my post:

1) If you do not know the nutritional components of various food items, it's not really valid to consider one of those food items "junk food."

It's also not valid to consider the opposite true on the same grounds, yet this is something many people do. Again, this is not an accusation towards you.

Do you want to duscuss that, or do you just want to continue to make up your own definitions to words and misprepresent what I said in my post?

Why not just focus on the issue, instead of taking any and all arguments as personal attacks?

Having a theory that Euro-worms are somehow insubstantial is just that - a theory. Currently it cannot be proven one way or the other.

Except that theories are tested and testable concepts that explain observations. This isn't a theory, it's a hypothesis.

[tspuckler]

It was a warning that it's easy to get suckered into believing that a lack of information is a free pass to make stuff up for yourself.

True. But what kind of "stuff" was made up? I stated some of my observations. Are you saying they were "made up?" A lack of information is precisely why no one can state the dietary requirements of garter snake. Both a lack of information of the nutritional value of foods as well as the lack of information of what garter snakes need nutritionally. This is a point that I've made over and over again in this thread. Do you agree with it or not?

No information regarding the correct keeping of an animal and only limited and unreliable information about that person's history of keeping animals

That sentence makes absolutely no sense.

If you consider a person who gives information on how they keep their animals "unreliable" what's the point of having a forum? As far as I can tell this forum contains quite a bit of information and advice from people explaining how they keep their snakes. Is all that information "unreliable?" Should we simply disregard most of the posts here? As I stated, we do not have scientific evidence to back up many aspects of garter snake keeping. Sometimes all we have to go on is other people's experiences as a guideline. Do you have a problem with that? I never made any indication that how I keep my snakes is "scientifically fact based." I think most people here are hobbyists.

You can't judge it only by the fact that you get a new generation before the previous one dies off, yet that is the only criteria for "successfully" breeding an animal.

I never made any judgment. I simply stated my observations. I never mentioned any "criteria." And I never mentioned "a new generation before the previous one dies off." If you took the time to grasp what I said, it's that we do not know the nutritional requirements of garter snakes (and I've said it repeatedly). Despite that, hobbyists have been successful at keeping and reproducing them. If you want to call hobbyists "unsuccessful" that's your prerogative.

Getting back to the original person who posted: I did some thinking and I reckon some turtles mainly eat vegetarian diets, some eat a ratio of vegetation to meat, and some are mainly carnivorous. If you were feeding your turtle too much meat (worms) and not enough vegetation, then I can see why your vet referred to worms as "junk food" (this of course would depend on what type of turtle you have), as you were giving turtle things that were "bad" for it.

Green Iguanas will eat insects and other meat items, but these could be considered "junk food" to a primarily vegetarian reptile.

I don't think you can extrapolate a turtle's dietary requirements and extend it over to a snake's. You're talking about two different orders of reptiles.

[mb90078]

I think there is room for a healthy debate over whether or not Earthworms are good or sufficient for the majority diet of earthworms.

What I believe is a leap, is to reach that conclusion based on whether or not they are native, rather than the actual nutritional information.

[Stefan-A]

True. But what kind of "stuff" was made up? I stated some of my observations. Are you saying they were "made up?"

Again, this is not about you. It's simply about how the brain works. It's constantly looking for patterns, it fills in gaps based on an individual's expectations and above all, it doesn't remember positive and negative experiences equally well. There's a reason why we conduct blind experiments; Observer and participant bias.

If you consider a person who gives information on how they keep their animals "unreliable" what's the point of having a forum?

That is exactly the best reason to have a forum and not just an info page written by some self-appointed authority. I expect everyone here to take everything written here with a grain of salt, regardless of who's written it.

As far as I can tell this forum contains quite a bit of information and advice from people explaining how they keep their snakes. Is all that information "unreliable?" Should we simply disregard most of the posts here?

Yes and yes. What you can do to partially counter that problem, is to practice source criticism.

As I stated, we do not have scientific evidence to back up many aspects of garter snake keeping. Sometimes all we have to go on is other people's experiences as a guideline. Do you have a problem with that?

How far should we be willing to go using those guidelines? What risks should we be prepared to take on the basis of nothing more than anecdotes?

I never made any indication that how I keep my snakes is "scientifically fact based." I think most people here are hobbyists.

That's a total cop out. Being a layman doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't apply what you have learned about biology.

I never made any judgment. I simply stated my observations. I never mentioned any "criteria." And I never mentioned "a new generation before the previous one dies off." If you took the time to grasp what I said, it's that we do not know the nutritional requirements of garter snakes (and I've said it repeatedly). Despite that, hobbyists have been successful at keeping and reproducing them.

If you took the time to grasp what I've said, you'd see how it ties in with what that whole issue.

And for the last time: This is not about you.

[tspuckler]

Again, this is not about you. It's simply about how the brain works. It's constantly looking for patterns, it fills in gaps based on an individual's expectations and above all, it doesn't remember positive and negative experiences equally well. There's a reason why we conduct blind experiments; Observer and participant bias.

You didn't answer my question. And I don't think the topic here is "how the brain works," rather it's can a person relate what they feed their snakes and not be considered "unreliable" or "making things up."

That's a total cop out. Being a layman doesn't mean that you can't or shouldn't apply what you have learned about biology.

When did I ever say that things learned in biology shouldn't be applied?

Your responses to my posts are pretty much "cop outs" where you don't say anything of relevance, keep trying to change the subject and try to turn my simple relating of observations and eperiences into something they're not - which is dishonest. What's your problem?

And I like how you keep saying "this is not about you." Well a heck of alot of other people state their experiences and observations, without all the false insinuations coming from you as a response to their stating those experiences and observations.

If this is not about me, why don't you respond to them with the same nonsense that you've wasted my time with on the thread?

[drache]

never mind

[Stefan-A]

You didn't answer my question. And I don't think the topic here is "how the brain works," rather it's can a person relate what they feed their snakes and not be considered "unreliable" or "making things up."

I DID answer your question and that IS the issue we're discussing here; I provided the justifications for my statement and you better start accepting that. If it went over your head, just skip the rhetoric and say so.

When did I ever say that things learned in biology shouldn't be applied?

The second you started separating the relevant sciences from the hobby. More specifically, in the text I quoted in the previous post.

Your responses to my posts are pretty much "cop outs" where you don't say anything of relevance, keep trying to change the subject and try to turn my simple relating of observations and eperiences into something they're not - which is dishonest.

Your failure to see the relevance of what I've said, even after I've spelled it out for you, is not my problem. I wash my hands of it. But you are trying my patience and I can't help but wonder if it's intentional.

And I like how you keep saying "this is not about you." Well a heck of alot of other people state their experiences and observations, without all the false insinuations coming from you as a response to their stating those experiences and observations.

What false insinuations? I have stated a number of facts that don't have anything to do with you (meaning that they don't apply to you any more or any less than they do to everyone else) and I've repeatedly pointed out to you that they're not accusations. Yet for some reason, you just won't get that. Is there anything you can discuss without bruising your ego?

If this is not about me, why don't you respond to them with the same nonsense that you've wasted my time with on the thread?

Because the value of experiences and observations are rarely discussed, but now they were and I thought you might deserve a response. Shame on me.

[mustang]

To clarify- I'm the one who used the term 'junk food' and as I stated before, it was probably a poorly chosen term, but it was the term used by the Vet who was scolding me (A teenager) for feeding too many worms to my turtles.

Please see my previous comment (The excessively long one) for further clarification.
My apologies for using an unintentionally inflammatory term.
I hope we can return to healthy discussion and friendly debate here.

i am gonna be real honest with you some vets go way outa controll over little problems they shouldnt reac like yours did they should be kind a suttle....and offer suggestions like making your turtle work for worms(chase em) to work off some extra fat or somethn. at least thats how i as a vet would react even if it was as fat as a hog...if anything id emphisize exercise and a better diet...but im not a vet...YET....but im well on my way even as a highschool student