</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
We have had help and advice from our vets but very little of the information provided by the so called scientific studies of wild gliders and their diets has been of any value.
Charlie H

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

[:"blue"]vets use these (why "so-called"? They're science all right!) scientific studies, as well as countless others, as the basis for their entire field! To write their manuals, dignose/treat illness and give advice to their patients. Without them veterinary medicine would truly be in the dark ages. So, you may not use the work directly, but it is being used for you, if you go to a vet.

For example, see the newest (9th ed.) Merck Veterinary Manual, published just this year. It's been around for over 50 years, and is updated periodically with the newest in vet science, AKA the "bible" or "grand old man" of vet medicine. It has an entire section devoted to gliders, including a description of the recommended diet for pet Sugar Gliders.

Quote: [:"red"]"Pet sugar gliders maintained on a mainly fruit diet are very susceptible to nutritional osteodystrophy. Treatment involves cage rest, administration of calcium, and correction of the diet. Use of a phosphorus-free calcium and a multivitamin supplement can help prevent nutritional disease."

"diets should contain a daily protein source-a commercial extruded protein pellet, mealworms, crickets, or small amounts of skinless cooked chicken if insects are unavailable-as well as fruits and vegetables."

"Dental disease is more frequent in sugar gliders fed diets high in soft textured carbohydrates. Feeding insects with hard exoskeletons can help maintain dental health."

"Another common condition associated with poor nutrition occurs in the eyes of juvenile sugar gliders if the mother has been fed a diet too high in saturated fat. White fatty deposits appear within the young glider's eye and can cause blindness."[/]

[:"blue"]These are the kinds of facts vets read when going to their manuals for info on <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/littleglider.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/littleglider.gif" alt="" />. They ALL come directly from scientific studies, I have the ref's if you want them. Good vets keep up with the latest data and bring it to their patients, I can see why they've been helpful...

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
"diets should contain a daily protein source-a commercial extruded protein pellet, mealworms, crickets, or small amounts of skinless cooked chicken if insects are unavailable-as well as fruits and vegetables."

"Dental disease is more frequent in sugar gliders fed diets high in soft textured carbohydrates. Feeding insects with hard exoskeletons can help maintain dental health

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

These are the kinds of statements that make me tell people not to consult a vet when it comes to a gliders diet. I totally disagree with the statement about feeding a commercial pelleted food. And there is no proof that the exoskeleton of insects clean a gliders teeth. Just because a vet uses the manual as a source of information does not make the information accurate. These are the same vets that are selling a brand of commercial dog food that most professional breeders will not touch. These breeders have learned through years of experience, not schools or advertisements. Because a vet or doctor has a certificate hanging on the wall does not make them have the ultimate answers for all questions about animal health and nutrition.

And as far as the studies that have been done on sugar gliders in the wild. One must take into consideration the source of the studies. Many of these studies are done by graduate students who are trying to write a theses. Quiet often these students have very little practical experience with the animals they are studying. These same papers are collected and rewritten then published under someone else's name. A person reading this material must be aware that it can contain inaccuricies and most are isolated studies. It can be very misleading when you read an article that has some truths mixed with some assumptions. Just as in the statement that the gliders diet should contain skinless cooked chicken. It fails to mention that the chicken given should be white meat and not red. It also does not explain that the chicken should not be fried. The statement also does not explain that the chicken should be boneless. There is also no explaination as to whether the mealworms and crickets should be live, frozen or canned. It does not make mention of which fruits and vegetables to feed and whether they should be canned, frozen, cooked or fresh. So the statement is very generic with too much latitude to be of much use. There are no percentages and no quantities. And this is supposed to be basis for formulating a glider diet? I don't think so!
Charlie H

[:"blue"]I didn't say it was the basis, I said it was a description. The details are in leadbeater's mix, and diets suggested by MANY other vet texts, this is just a new example that is affordable for common owners, as opposed to the hundreds of dolars most vet manuals cost. It is not by far the only one, most vets have many reference texts.

The things you pointed out as having too much "latitude" are not mentioned b/c they ALL have answers that are common sense to vets and most people, or are STATED in other, more general parts of the vet texts, and don't need to be repeated or explained in the little page space dedicated to gliders. There are scientific marsupial texts that DO go over all these details, if you heppen to need them, like Hume's Marsupial Nutrition.

So, to answer those concerns= canned produce is bad, all other forms are fine,fresh is best...all fruits okay for humans are fine for omnivore mammals...dark (there is no red meat in chicken, unless you mean undercooked? or tendons/ligaments attached to the bone? or organ meat?) chicken meat is fattier and contains more metabolic by-products than white, but actually presents no danger in small amounts...is better boneless, but they EAT WHOLE BIRDS AND RODENTS so some bone would be okay and wouldn't be eaten most of the time anyway...frying adds tons of saturated fat, which we all know is BAD (who frys foods for their pets? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/frown.gif" alt="" />)...live bugs are best, preserving them (canning/drying...there are no frozen bugs offered here?) adds salts and other preservatives, but it's better than starving them of protien...Feeding a glider pellated food is suggested as ONE possible sourse to provide some the protein they need, and if you don't feed bugs,(or chicken)it's a great source, there's nothing wrong with it, period,and since PROTEIN deficiancy is listed as one of the most common glider ailments treated by vets, it needs to be there.

The claim about "no proof" of exoskeletal dental benefits is wildly innacurate, there are countless studies (NOT by mere grad students) that show just that working for numerous mammal insectivores. I guess that doesn't constitute proof if you feel doctors, vets and scientists are full of it, but that's "proof" in court and in civilized society. There's overwhelming evidence for this interaction, and yet we're supposed to ignore it because somebody heard "there once was a glider with a piece caught between his teeth" hogtales? How can that possibly be considered a good way to make choices?

Zoology/biology grad students usually have quite a few YEARS of experience with the taxon they're studying, in fact we are told as GS's to become THE expert in our species/topic, and most of us know more about them than our prof's, b/c we set out to, and HAVE TO, to get our degree.

It takes an average of 4 years to a master's and 10 years (after a B.S. degree which takes 5 years on average in the life sciences) to get a PhD, so please don't imply that these studies are written by novices, nothing is further from the truth. BTW, most of the marsupial studies are done by a few, dedicated old men & women that spent their entire careers on "the pouched ones", and their grad students who studied under them to learn from the best, and carry on their work. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/heartpump.gif" alt="" />

It would be professional suicide to publish someone else's work under your name, or to allow you work to be stolen thus, and I can't imagine what makes you think it's common. There is so much documentaion nowadays, throughout the years of a study, it would be impossible. Grad students publish their thesis work papers as FIRST AUTHOR, with their major advisor and any other workers as second etc. authors.

"Certificate on the wall" makes it sound like they sent away a cereal box top to get it, when in fact it takes years of post-graduate study and work experience to become a vet (or a doctor). This is not to say they're perfect or infallable, but I'd listen to my mechanic about a car before I'd listen to the car salesman, and I'd listen to my dentist before I listen to a mouthwash ad. Credit should be given where credit is due, and any field or endevor that requires this amount of time, $, talent, dedication and fotitude to pursue cannot be dismissed so easily. I don't know what dog food you're reffering to, but see my above post about seals of approval by independant agencies.

Taking an anti-science stance leaves one with nothing but rumor, UNTESTED ASSUMPTION, and gut instinct to go by, and I can't imagine a more dangerous way to go.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Taking an anti-science stance leaves one with nothing but rumor, UNTESTED ASSUMPTION, and gut instinct to go by, and I can't imagine a more dangerous way to go.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

I totally agree, Marla.

Mikey <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dance.gif" alt="" />

<img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/agree.gif" alt="" />

College education is learned from text books and lectures mostly. A person leaves college, hopefully with the basics to go out into the world and continue their education by putting to practice the things they have learned. Meanwhile the people who are living with and caring for countless animals on a daily basis are learning through hands on experience. Personally, I would trust the person with years of experience over the newly graduated person with mostly only book learning. Especially since most of the text books are filled with opinions and the results of inadequate studies. You can study for years but until you are actually involved you will still be a novice. And a lot of what you learn depends on the particular professor teaching the class. Each professor has his own personal agenda and quiet often they are very different.

Simply because a person is not gullible enough to believe everything he reads does not mean he is anti-scientific. It means that he is intelligent enough to recognize discrepancies and evaluate them. Marla referred to what she terms the vets Bible with a statement about sugar glider diets. Not a very good reference for this thread since there is no mention of pollen, acacia gum, or nectar. Nor does it coincide with the highly touted Leadbeater's diet. We can't just jump around from one reference to another and pick out the parts that suit us and hope to come up with a proper diet.
Charlie H

Excellent points Charlie. I mis-stated that my self awhile ago by saying "....QUESTION Authority...." what I meant was to DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH, that way you OWN that knowledge. Thats how half the Worlds Tyrants managed to hoodwink the populace, we generally seem to take it on faith if it's in print!

Here is a TEXT version, un-corrected, from an OCR scan....

Sure, it's good to question authority within certain reason.
There is a point at which it is counterproductive unhealthy....

To some degree it makes sense to trust a person with more experience. The problem I see with that is that someone can have tons of "experience" but may have been doing things wrong for the whole term of their "experience" For example, should I just go out and build my own house without first studying with a builder? Probably not.... Being self taught has it's advantages and disadvantages, but what is the point of undermining formal schooling? Formal schooling can eliminate years of "trial and error" style learning. Also, I'm not sure if you know this, but in vet school and medical school you have to learn "hands on" there is no other way. You have to be an intern/resident for a period of time. Most people studying animals have to do some sort of research which includes "hands on" learning and direct observation of animals. I'm sure everyone here agrees to evaluate information sources for yourself. However it gets frustrating to see the same people bring skepticism to every debate while finding ways to creatively discredit everything...... I honestly would appreciate it if you would tell me what we should be reading, what you have been reading, and what/who are credible sources for glider knowledge.

If everything is so in-credible then by all means please start your own research project so that we may have something of scientific merit by which to base our glider keeping. Charlie, I don't recall anyone ever telling you that your ideas were baseless, "junk science" and terming your opinions "so called" If you find a discrepancy point it out politely. I don't understand why one must be so defensive about this research being presented? It doesn't make sense to me.

! OUCH ! I did it again!

Ern, I'm sorry. What I meant to say, revised, was what you sort of said: Question the people who have the knowledge, to learn how to duplicate the research yourself. Anything you understand via text is only more understood by doing.....

Maybe I should just take a communications class. Then maybe even my Wife would understand me!

lol, well, I think you're a good communicator Shaun!
Just in this instance you're confusing yourself! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/roflmao.gif" alt="" />

I do agree with your revised statement very much <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumb.gif" alt="" />

Bringing this back on topic, I read a good amount about pollen and it's effectiveness as a food source for both gliders are humans. Through my use of pollen as a food source for my gliders I have definitely noticed a more lively existence among my army and they have definitely been thriving well! Whether or not there are seasonal discrepancies in the research about gliders eating pollen in the wild or whether one believes presented scientific research, the fact is, my gliders have done exceptionally well and continue to do so as a result of including "native" food items. My own personal experience has proven to me that they do better with these items than without.

I just have to add that Bee Pollen and Acacia Gum are two of the ingredients in The Pet Glider Vitamin, and I am IN LOVE with that vitamin. Seriously, you can check out my post about it here: Bald Heads & Pricilla's Vitamins

I honestly think that this is a phenomenal thread, and a very interesting piece of research.

Also just want to add that my girlfriend(friend only) is a Zoology major and she practically had to spend more time in the field at a zoo doing "hands on" work than in the classroom!

Sorry, but I'll put my faith in a scientist/vet way before I put my faith in a breeder. Once again the difference between surviving and THRIVING.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
College education is learned from text books and lectures mostly....

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

[:"blue"]This could not be more untrue of science,and particularly, biology secondary ed. I went through science undergrad and graduate education myself, and now I teach at a university, so I've seen it from both sides. There is a huge amount of "hands-on" work REQUIRED at the undergraduate level. The lab units alone require thousands of hours spent DOING biology, not reading about it, not to mention undergrad reserch, where you do your own project and publish your results w/a professor. It's not just some passive funnel where prof's shovel it in and students swallow; that's the beauty of science, it REQUIRES critical thinking and challenging old ideas with new data. A poor student could conceivably get a B.S. with a barely passing gpa and not have paid enough mind to know how to do anything, but in that (hypothetical) case, they sure don't go on to be researchers. They'll have spent a lot of $ for a piece of paper that won't get them anywhere, b/c bio jobs and med/vet/grad schools require good grades and undergrad research. 65% of applicants to vet schools are rejected, b/c they have such HIGH standards.

And that's just at the B.S. level, graduate ed. is almost NO CLASSES in science, but rather years of applied medical, field and/or lab work. We have the best secondary science education level in the world (although many US educated scientists are going back to their home countries and making them science-strong) and put out far more science per capita than any other country. Before a vet, doctor or Ph.D biologist ever gets to practice THEY HAVE BEEN "caring for countless animals [(humans, or plants, or fungi, whatever living thing, depends on the biologist's focus)] on a daily basis...learning through hands on experience" for years.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Personally, I would trust the person with years of experience over the newly graduated person with mostly only book learning.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

[:"blue"]This might describe a student w/ a B.A. in some non-science, or even a really poor student of biology that barely graduates, but neither of those possibilities did this research or wrote these studies & vet texts. They're writen by vets, or Ph.D's with years of experience, and a few are by grad students on their way to their M.SC or Ph.D. One of the most known is Dr. Cathy Johnson-Delaney, who happens to be my vet, here is a brief bio on her from sugargliders.org:

[:"red"]"Dr. Cathy Johnson-Delaney has been doing avian/exotic animal work since graduating from Washington State University in 1980. She practices in the Seattle (Puget Sound) area. She teaches small mammal medicine at Oregon State University, and has authored numerous articles in journals as well as sections in medical textbook on sugargliders and other marsupials. Her special interests are in the areas of nutrition and pharmacology. She has conducted field studies on sugar gliders in Austraalia. She is on several advisory boards for exotic rescue organizations, animal product companies, and professional publications."[/] 25 years! Hardly "book-learning".

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Especially since most of the text books are filled with opinions and the results of inadequate studies.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

[:"blue"]They are not opinions, they're results. There's a difference: The results of taking my temperature when I have a fever will show that I am 101*F...my opinion is that I feel hot. The first is objective, measured by scientific instrument, repeatable, testable and challengable and is therefore a result, the second is entirely subjective, unmeasurable, untestable and thus an opinion.

How are they innadequate? This is a very easy charge to make, but the reality is they're rigorous and peer reviewed and torn apart repeatedly, long before they're ever published. There's a reason it's called "defending" when you present your thesis! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/roflmao.gif" alt="" />

True, they're not focused on "ideal captive glider diet", what they're studying is in the title of the paper, but we can gleen data from the studies to help our pets. That's research, and I do hope ALL GCer's do their own.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Simply because a person is not gullible enough to believe everything he reads does not mean he is anti-scientific. It means that he is intelligent enough to recognize discrepancies and evaluate them.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

[:"blue"]There were no discrepancies, and Mikey and others explained, only misunderstandings. It's highly irrational to claim that it is intellegent to refuse to see the truth when it's backed up by good data and countless tests. You said before you and others have been "researching glider diets for years", how did you do that if you didn't either a) use scientific studies or b)do your own tests consistant with science protocol? Anything else isn't research, just untested assumptions heaped one upon the other, and opinions based on anecdotal experience. Talk about innadequate.

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Marla referred to what she terms the vets Bible with a statement about sugar glider diets. Not a very good reference for this thread since there is no mention of pollen, acacia gum, or nectar. Nor does it coincide with the highly touted Leadbeater's diet. We can't just jump around from one reference to another and pick out the parts that suit us and hope to come up with a proper diet.
Charlie H

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

[:"blue"]I can't take credit for this term, both my vet and the lab coordinator for my zoology class (used to be a vet herself) call it that. Most of the space is dedicated to those pets that vets see most often (cats, dogs) and it is a clinical practice manual, designed to guide vets on testing & treating animals brought in for illness. The section on gliders in new this year, b/c they're still relatively uncommon pets. The section is three pages long, I didn't want to type every word. It is a great ref for vets, not the end all be all of glider diets. I personally would love to see it expanded, maybe if we ask nice they'll do it when they print the next edition ~ 9 years from now. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumb.gif" alt="" />

It does mention much more than I wrote, mostly about medical treatment. There are several husbandry (as opposed to clinical) vet texts that DO go into minute detail and address gum/pollen/Leadbeater's, and they are where most of the many vets I've found get their diets (which are not "new", they've been used for decades). The Exotic Companion Medicine Handbook is an example. The texts are small printing and so $200-300. I was just showing how a much more common ref backs up what the study at hand, and others like it, were saying.

Back to pollen: something I think is very interresting about this paper is it shows that the old idea that a mammal had to have special digestive adaptations to extract the protoplast (the inside part where all the good stuff is, under the hard cell wall) from a pollen grain is NOT the case, and in fact <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/littleglider.gif" alt="" /> <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/littleglider.gif" alt="" /> are really efficient at cracking them (66% was the highest of the species they studied). I just love how these studies teach us about our gliders and at the same time glider biology teaches us about mammals in general. They also used gliders in a study of socially mediated resource-based depression, as a MODEL system for human depression! They're so facinating! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dance.gif" alt="" />

Big Ern, FYI. My only interest is protecting the captive gliders. The ideas being presented like the Katy Johnson-Delaney diet, bee pollen, and acacia gum are not new ideas. These are things that have been presented and for the most part been rejected in the past by most glider owners. These subjects will die down and then there will be a new group come along and start the same old thing over again. And they are usually influenced by Hume's writings or some site they have visited. Guess I am a minority of one these days as the vetrans don't seem to care to post any more. I have been attempting to keep you people from regressing into some of the things that are potentially dangerous to be added to glider diets. I see people adding and taking items away from diets and formulating new diets as a result of some of these posts. And without doing any type of analysis on the overall diet. People are picking one or two items that they are intrigued with and adding them to an existing diet without knowing how much to add or altering the existing diet to compensate for the new items. You guys have started a dangerous trend in the glider community by influencing newer members to experiment with diets. If you feel comfortable with your actions, go for it! I have seen too many gliders ill and dieing as a result of diet experimenting. Good Luck with your venture.
Charlie H

[:"red"]I see where you are coming from with that last post, Charlie, but to be honest my conscience is clear as air. I'm not going to underestimate the intelligence of glider owners across North America by assuming they may be dumb enough to order a large pack of pollen and simply mix it with some fruits/veggies, a dash of vitamins, and water![/]

[:"purple"]What gets me Charlie is that in all these years that you speak of where you have had to undermine the "native glider diet" movement, you haven't even taken the time to borrow a copy of or spent the money to buy a copy of Hume's publication. Charlie, you're not the only one so I'm not referring to you alone (as I appreciate that you among the veterans still summon up the will to debate such things for the good of the glider).[/]

[:"blue"]It doesn't make sense to me that all these people frown down upon the ideas presented by us folks who've done the research (or even a small degree of it) and only present the facts that we've read, while not having explored the literature at all! How can a person have an ground to say that certain ideas are fallacious, when it is largely unexplored territory by that person?[/]

[:"green"]I know the factors that must be taken into account when approaching the captive glider diet (I debated with Bourbon over MSN for close to 4 hours that one time, and I respect her stance as she has read the literature), but what disturbs me is that many who argue against the "native diet" movement aren't aware of certain details regarding the specifics of the glider digestive system (like the specialized caecum, for instance). It's a close-minded, naiive, and rather crippled approach to understanding and caring for our little ones. I feel to fully appreciate and enjoy your gliders one must be fully aware and educated in all areas as possible on even the smallest details, and that ofcourse includes the very biology of our little ones.[/]

[:"orange"]I don't think this "native glider" movement that you refer to exists to completely take over those who prefer to stick with the artificial diets, and to convince newbies to choose the native glider diet route. Instead, I feel it provides glider owners with an alternative.[/]

[:"orange"]I think the reason why it's caused so much controversy in the past is because it is always met with great retalliation, and it causes both sides to throw out the strongest of points, and it turns into a huge mess, resulting in locked threads and sour mouths. It shouldn't be this way.[/]

[:"red"]Within the canine community, there is an alternative feeding program for those who don't want to feed overly processed dry kibble to their dogs and it's called the B.A.R.F. diet, where one blends up a series of fresh and raw meats and materials for the dogs to feed on. I don't understand why such a thing (more natural and widely used) can be deemed acceptable within the dog community, while we folks who favour more natural alternatives for our little ones (or in my case atleast being interested in how I might be able to go about applying it to my gliders' diet) get met with negativity.[/]

[:"purple"]To tell you the truth, with only 30 years under our North American belts, and the majority of human experience in glider husbandry existing on that island called Australia, it doesn't make sense that many feel the current diets they provide their gliders are so nutritionally perfected that they have a right to point fingers at different dietary approaches (whether they be the "native diet" movement or otherwise) and say with certainty that they will lead to a glider's doom.[/]

[:"blue"]I feel the only person I've met on here who opts for the more non-native diet and has any right to say that a native glider diet (which incorporates the naturals, like acacia gum, pollen, aphids for manna, eucalypt and banksia flowers, etc) is inadequate is Bourbon. I have had discussions with her and her stance is that she has her focus on captive glider diets (not wild glider diets) and that though she isn't against native botanicals incorporated in captive glider diets, she knows that there are a variety of factors that must be taken into consideration (like specific species of botanicals, and being able to obtain fresh supplies of the native stuff on this side of the globe, convenience factors and practicality of the average North American, etc), and that there are issues with a variety of commercially available diets containing native flora in it. She did however point me in the right direction for further research on native diets and those who do feed more native diet alternatives (like Pockets) incase I wanted to continue pursuing that route. Needless to say, her directional hand certainly did help heaps (as they say in Oz)![/]

[:"green"]Overall, there is a difference between being a rehabillitator that is against poor feeding programs (because he sees the results of bad diets) and being a rehabillitator that is against any diet which deviates from the particular diet he trusts (because he assumes that no amount of junk science can come up with a diet as superior as the diet that's worked for him), and in your case, Charlie, it's BML. What about the years in which Big_Ern has successfully reared his vibrantly healthy gliders on native foodstuffs? How about Pocket's success at it? I'm sure we don't have to ask if you've had to rehabillitate any of their gliders.[/]

Mikey <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dance.gif" alt="" />

Darcy and the rest of my gliders LOVE apple blossoms, dandelions, and clover flowers, although the actual amount of pollen they get would probably only count as environment enrichment, rather than a protein source.
Still, I feel that healthy treats are important to their overall quality of life. And besides, Darcy looks so darn CUTE with his nose buried in a dandelion <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Mikey, in due respect I do not think I need a lesson from your on glider anatomy or how their digestive system works. And I have never stated that some of the items from the wild gliders diet would not work for the gliders. My concern is that people come on the board posting about certain elements and recommend incorporating them into the captive gliders diet without a full explanation of how to incorporate these items or how much. Or how these items will interact with the diet they are feeding. They also do not address the possible dangers involved. And can it be proven that these items are a necessary part of the gliders diet or just someone's opinion. Since we have US captive glider diets that have been proven to work for years why should we start importing foreign products? The items in the captive gliders diets used in the US can be purchased locally at a minimal cost.

But you guys are jumping back and forth and have never really settled on what you would consider a workable diet. One is even pushing items from the wild diet and at the same time posting about one of KJD's diets that includes the use of extruded pellets. And another pushing the use of the HPS which contains a soy protein source. You guys need to get on the same page.

As far as Hume's book, I think I have seen enough articles posted from it that I feel I have read it several times. But quiet honestly I am more interested in the research and studies that have been done and are still being done on the captive gliders in the US. We are raising and breeding captive gliders, not wild gliders. Regardless of what your thoughts are on evolution and how it effects the sugar glider I feel that we can and have come up with better diets than the gliders received in the wild.

Question: If wild glider diets are so great why would the people feeding them still suggest the incorporation of vitamin/mineral plus calcium supplements?
Charlie H

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Question: If wild glider diets are so great why would the people feeding them still suggest the incorporation of vitamin/mineral plus calcium supplements?

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">

You mean native foods incorporated into a captive diet. One couldn't possibly duplicate a wild glider diet, but one can incorporate native materials, in which case, any missing vitamins/minerals (which would normally be covered by the more unattainable food stuffs like specific arthropods, and difficult to obtain plant matter/exudates, not to mention plant matter that may have the benefit of growing in native Australia hence possibly possessing a greater vitamin/mineral content than if it were grown in our soils/climate, etc) are covered by the suppliment, just as it functions to cover any missing vitamins and minerals in an artificial diet.

Mikey <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/dance.gif" alt="" />

</font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr />
Big Ern, FYI. My only interest is protecting the captive gliders. The ideas being presented like the Katy Johnson-Delaney diet, bee pollen, and acacia gum are not new ideas. These are things that have been presented and for the most part been rejected in the past by most glider owners. These subjects will die down and then there will be a new group come along and start the same old thing over again. And they are usually influenced by Hume's writings or some site they have visited. Guess I am a minority of one these days as the vetrans don't seem to care to post any more. I have been attempting to keep you people from regressing into some of the things that are potentially dangerous to be added to glider diets. I see people adding and taking items away from diets and formulating new diets as a result of some of these posts. And without doing any type of analysis on the overall diet. People are picking one or two items that they are intrigued with and adding them to an existing diet without knowing how much to add or altering the existing diet to compensate for the new items. You guys have started a dangerous trend in the glider community by influencing newer members to experiment with diets. If you feel comfortable with your actions, go for it! I have seen too many gliders ill and dieing as a result of diet experimenting.

<hr /></blockquote><font class="post">Don't single me out Charlie. There have been many other valid points made by many other people that you should confront before confronting me. Dangerous trend, lol? Tsk tsk Charlie..... Have you analyzed my diet? <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shocked.gif" alt="" /> Nope..... How can you evaluate it and make any claims as to it's effectiveness? You don't know. I assure you it is well balanced and I have done plenty of research and have run it by a couple of vets and glider veterans. Oh, wait they don't know anything anyways! Oops! If you aer going to state that there are potential dangers, then by all means point out the dangers! What danger could befall our creatures by consuming pollen or acacia gum? I'd be amazed if you could find one toxicity issue associated with either item.

What veterans are you speaking of that should be posting about the subject? As far as I know most of the veterans to which you could be referring are not in entire agreement with you and are not against these ideas that are "new" or according to you not so new that have been around for ever.

There are a large number of people that I shall leave anonymous that support these items and have expressed positive reception towards my diet and others. you'd be surprised to know who they are!

I'd bet a large amount of money that the ill gliders that you've taken in have never been supplemented with these exotic native items. It's not every ordinary Joe off the street that can get these items and those that do must be motivated enough to not neglect their gliders.

Please wish us luck with our ventures and leave it at that.
I don't knock you for doing what you do, please do the same.
It's not your job to protect me and my gliders from my own "ignorance" thanks for your concern. No disrespect intended but I honestly think you could benefit from doing more research before approaching these topics. You have not read the publications being discussed and I believe that your opinion would have more validity if you did.

The original poster of this thread has asked that it be closed as it has strayed from the original topic. This thread was intended to be an offer to share some research, and was not intended to be a debate about diets. I am now going to lock this thread.