A couple of things, first, you do not know that yet. You now know that a diet of whole prey items is and continues to be very very successful and handy. After you have it work great for you and your monitors, then you will know a diet of whole prey items is great. Thats if the rest of your husbandry is ok.



Once you decide to test the two, then you can compare and understand which is "better".



The problem is, there are thousands of opinions, and 99% of those opinions are merely peoples ideas that have never been proven by them, just passing on someoneelses opinion. This is very confusing to those who are actually interested in a diet that actually works, when applied. Not a diet that sounds good, but fails in some way when applied.



For instance for me. Turkey diet or SDZ turkey diet WAS FRIGGIN HORRIBLE. Let me explain, I actually keep and breed many species throught many generations of varanids for a long time. That means, I have a handle on the rest of husbandry. That gives me the ability to judge what a diet does. I already know how to be successful, I do not need to attribute success or failure on a diet.



I have tested a varied diet, and basic diet, a turkey diet, dogfood, etc on animals that were already successful to the highest degree.



I rate the turkey diet very near the bottom. Sadly, the biggist reason has little to do with how good it is for the monitors. The crap stinks like heck. That is, if the monitors do not eat it right off, it ripens and smells the whole place up and bad. And it does so quickly, like like a giant petry dish. It makes a old rotten bloated mouse smell good.



Well, thats fixable hey. Not when you have dozens of cages. To me, that rotten smell was the straw that broke the camels back. The actual diet showed no benefit over mice(what its suppose to mimic) All it showed was, worse then, not better then. So I do not like it. Not in the least. In fact, the thought of it makes me gag. hahahahahahahahahaha true.



The point is, why do these folks say what they say? Do they have actual results and what is the quality and quanity of those results. And, what are the restrictions. If they have nothing to show, then what is their point? The truth is, most of these people are merely taking sides and have not real experience.



You see, your job as a reader of this stuff is to RESEARCH. Not by reading a bunch of opinions, but instead research why these people say what they say. Then you must decide if that material is enough to support what these people say. In most cases, they do not have reason to say much of anything. In many cases, these people do not even keep monitors or are very very poor at it.



The actual truth is, in any endover, there are those that are good, some great, and those that are OK, and those that suck. It does not matter what field your in. There is always a range of ability. The problem seems to be, those that are not so good, squeak the most.



The problem with the internet is, all those people are equal. They can equally say anything they want. So you should be aware, they are not the bad guy, as they are commonplace. Your the bad guy for not checking into their actual results. So here the table is turned. Your task is to ask for and recieve Proof that what is said has merit.



In most cases, if you ask for proof, they change the subject or attack you, or simply disappear. it appears to offend many to have to support what they say.



So in the end, do not listen to anything without asking for support or proof. Then you can judge and see if the results or quality of those results, fits your needs. Cheers

[ Show Entire Thread ]