# chicken meal vs. fresh chicken as 1st ingredient in kibble



## lindseycampbell358 (Jun 17, 2012)

I've heard many differing opinions on the matter of a named meat meal being a better ingredient in a dry kibble over a "fresh" meat ingredient. I've also heard that the heat and processing of the meat meals takes out much of the beneficial nutrients. I just want to know which is better? Thanks!


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

you do want a named meat meal. If it's just "chicken" it's a wet weight - it's a sneaky way to make it look like the chicken is at the top of the ingredient list when in reality after the water is removed it loses about 80 percent of its weight and moves way down the list.

If it's meal, it's already been dried, so the weight is true and the spot on the ingredients list is correct.

Yes, most of the nutrients of all the ingredients are removed in cooking. Normally they have to spray on ingredients at the end of the process to replace them.


----------



## doggiedad (Jan 23, 2011)

you can always add fresh food to your dogs kibble.


----------



## lindseycampbell358 (Jun 17, 2012)

Ok great, thanks to you both. 1 of my Shih Tzus & my GSD get a few ounces of raw with their kibble. I'm switching them from healthwise to natures variety instinct, & plan to start a feeding rotation with them with a few high quality dry & raw foods. Now I'll definitely be looking for foods with meat meals specifically. Also planning on putting in orijen & the grain-free fromm varieties in their rotation. Any opinions on those foods? Thanks!


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> Yes, most of the nutrients of all the ingredients are removed in cooking.


No.

If that was true we would all be in huge trouble.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

DaViking said:


> No.
> 
> If that was true we would all be in huge trouble.


If it WEREN'T true for dog food, they wouldn't have to add anything. People don't live on a diet of dried up nuggets that resembles nothing like real food.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> If it WEREN'T true for dog food, they wouldn't have to add anything. People don't live on a diet of dried up nuggets that resembles nothing like real food.


Depending on production method varying amounts of vitamins and enzymes are applied after extruding. Production methods have come a long way, there are all kinds of ways to extrude today. Time and temperature vary. You used the word "most" of the nutrients are removed in cooking. That is not true. If most nutrients are removed during cooking, man and beast, would be in trouble :wink:


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

This might explain, to those who think the nutrients remain, what happens to dog food when it is cooked down:



> According to the Animal Nutrition Group at Wageningen University in the Netherlands, studies show drying pet food at 160°C (320°F) to 180°C (356°F) can significantly reduce its nutritional value.
> 
> In the smaller size kibble used in the study (4 mm or about .16 inch), a drying temperature of 200°C (392°F) lowered concentrations of the following amino acids:
> 
> ...


and 



> Denaturation modifies the structure of protein. In the case of plant-based proteins like soy and corn, denaturation makes these biologically inappropriate foods easier for pets to digest. However, denaturation is only beneficial to meat-based proteins if the protein sources are substandard, which of course they are in the vast majority of popular dry dog and cat food diets. Rendered meat by-products are a common protein source in dry kibble, and they are indeed difficult for dogs and cats to digest and assimilate.
> 
> Unfortunately, denaturation of high quality, lean, whole cuts of meat used in superior quality dry pet foods also occurs. As you might guess, denaturation of biologically appropriate protein has the opposite effect of what is achieved with grain-based and low-grade animal meat. Denaturation makes these once healthy proteins more difficult for your dog or cat to digest and assimilate.
> 
> The change in the structure of healthy protein that occurs during exposure to high heat is a possible trigger for food allergies. Research shows the immune system may not recognize the altered protein structure and treats it as a foreign invader. *This may explain why pets allergic to a particular meat-based dry food oftentimes have no problem eating that same meat in whole, raw form.*





> According to the Animal Nutrition Group report, the extrusion process primarily destroys vitamin A, vitamin E and the B-group vitamins in dry food ingredient mixtures. No data on vitamins D or K was available for the report.
> 
> The percentage of vitamin loss during extrusion varies widely, from a low of 4 percent loss of thiamin to a high of 65 percent loss of vitamin A.
> 
> Keep in mind that B-group vitamins are water soluble, meaning your pet’s body can’t store them – they must be provided daily through diet


Why Dry Pet Food is Poor in Nutrition

This is what is added BACK into many people's favorite dog food, Acana:


> vitamin A supplement, vitamin D3 supplement, vitamin E supplement, niacin, riboflavin, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12 supplement, zinc proteinate, iron proteinate, manganese proteinate, copper proteinate,


----------



## Herzo (Feb 5, 2011)

lindseycampbell358 said:


> Ok great, thanks to you both. 1 of my Shih Tzus & my GSD get a few ounces of raw with their kibble. I'm switching them from healthwise to natures variety instinct, & plan to start a feeding rotation with them with a few high quality dry & raw foods. Now I'll definitely be looking for foods with meat meals specifically. Also planning on putting in orijen & the grain-free fromm varieties in their rotation. Any opinions on those foods? Thanks!


You might want to re think about feeding raw with the kibble. I have fed them a meal of raw then the next one of kibble but I don't feed it together. They digest at a different rate so it is best to feed them at least 12 hours apart. I do mix some fresh cooked with there kibble.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

Read the whole study, it can be download from their Dutch website. Karen Becker have made a career out of incomplete information, theories and speculation. Modern extruding methods doesn't come close to those numbers you copied and she fails to mention two important factors. Time subjected to high heat and nutrient amounts added take into consideration concentrations after whatever production method is used. Some low temperature forming is as low as 60 degrees celsius, which is much lower than most of us cook our food. However, most is probably not cooking at this low temperature. They would be in the 100 to 160 range, this does not affect amino acids or fatty acids. When you move above that range time becomes a big factor. Bottom line; bargain bin brands probably use old facilities with crappy ingredients and the results will be accordingly. The better brands use better ingredients, better manufacturing and well proven science to provide a healthy diet. *Most* nutrients are *not* removed during todays cooking/processing.

Here's a good link explaining a modern manufacturing process: http://en.engormix.com/MA-feed-mach...icles/pet-food-production-process-t177/p0.htm


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

I know, you always have reasons not to believe what you read if it doesn't agree with your ideal of dog food. Her article was based on a study, not something out of thin air.

Acana is supposedly a high quality food. If the nutrients are not cooked out, why do they add them?

Here is an article written BY the pet food industry. 



> ... it seems relatively obvious that *processing has some significant effects on petfood and pet nutrition*. While some process conditions are nutritionally beneficial to animals, in several areas, formulators must compensate with significant fortification to offset processing losses. The big three in order of importance are vitamins, followed by the often overlooked sulfur amino acids and finally essential fatty acids.
> 
> I*n several areas, formulators must compensate with significant fortification to offset processing losses.
> *
> *Today, we support nutritional adequacy by super-fortification before and nutrient analysis after the fact. Generally, this has proven effective, but occasional toxicities and deficiencies resulting in recalls occur. *This would suggest that we still need more comprehensive evaluation of the nutritional effects of thermal processing of petfoods with better models to support fortification needs.


http://www.petfoodindustry.com/Sub_Level_-_News/45708.html


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> I know, you always have reasons not to believe what you read if it doesn't agree with your ideal of dog food. Her article was based on a study, not something out of thin air.
> 
> Acana is supposedly a high quality food. If the nutrients are not cooked out, why do they add them?
> 
> ...


What, you ran out of arguments now? :wink:
I read the study, including the parts she left out! Why didn't she link directly to the study?
Of course some types of high temperature processing affects some categories of nutrients like vitamins, fats and enzymes. No one argues that fact but to say like you did that most nutrients are removed by cooking is simply not true. Read the link I added to the previous post and you'll get a picture of what need/should be added back in. It's everything from zero to 90% depending on vitamin, pressure, time, temperature and moisture. There is no one simple blanket answer as you like it to be.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

No, there's not. But even the "low temperature" dog foods have many nutrients added back. if they didn't need them, they wouldn't add them.

and since we all know those nutrients are in good quality meats, either they don't use good quality meats or the cooking removes them.

i never run out of arguments.

Here is what is added back to Orijen adult dog food, one of the low-temp foods:



> vitamin A, vitamin D3, vitamin E, niacin, thiamine mononitrate, riboflavin, d-calcium pantothenate, pyridoxine, folic acid, biotin, vitamin B12, zinc proteinate, iron proteinate, manganese proteinate, copper proteinate, selenium yeast


Of course that stuff is cooked out, or it was never included to begin with.


----------



## kaliberknl (May 9, 2012)

I define intelligence not by the number of arguments a person has won, but the number of times one has said, "This nonsense is not worth my time." — Dodinsky


----------



## kaliberknl (May 9, 2012)

My dogs are thriving on Orijen and Acana Pacifica. It does seem to have a high digestibility and my dogs eat a lot less of it than many other kibbles. Fromm also has a great reputation but I haven't tried it yet.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

kaliberknl said:


> I define intelligence not by the number of arguments a person has won, but the number of times one has said, "This nonsense is not worth my time." — Dodinsky


If you consider what you feed your dog to be nonsense, then I guess it's not worth your time.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> Here is what is added back to Orijen adult dog food, one of the low-temp foods:
> 
> 
> 
> Of course that stuff is cooked out, or it was never included to begin with.


Yeah, what you have there added back into Orijen is a selection of vitamins and chelated (proteinate) minerals. Chelated minerals is believed to be more effective in high protein formulas (like Orijen), and again, there is no argue that certain vitamins under certain conditions need to added back to the kibble. But it hardly make up *most* of the nutrients as you stated, it's a tiny fraction. And secondly, the same vitamins and minerals are still present in the kibble in its original state from it's original source (like functional ingredients) but not in sufficient amounts. That's why some is added back to balance the formula to whatever goal they have.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

This is what is added back to Ole Roy:



> Calcium Carbonate, Potassium Chloride, Choline Chloride, Ferrous Sulfate, Zinc Oxide, Vitamin D and E Supplement, Niacin, Copper Sulafate, Manganous Oxide, Vitamin A Supplement, Calcium Pantothenate, Biotin, Vitamin B12 Supplement, Pyridoxine Hydrochloride, Thiamine Mononitrate, Meadione Sodium Bisulfite Complex Source of Vitamin K, Calcium Iodate, Vitamin D3 Supplement, Riboflavin Supplement, Cobalt Carbonate, Folic Acid, Sodium Selenite, Folic Acid


yes, it IS more. But it's sure not THAT much more and some of it it's not even necessary. And we all know how Ole Roy starts out.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> This is what is added back to Ole Roy:
> 
> 
> 
> yes, it IS more. But it's sure not THAT much more and some of it it's not even necessary. And we all know how Ole Roy starts out.


So what's your point? Are you saying Ol'Roy is a good food after this stuff is added?


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

DaViking said:


> So what's your point? Are you saying Ol'Roy is a good food after this stuff is added?


No, I'm saying both dog foods add a substantial amount of nutrients back in to meet AAFCO standards.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> No, I'm saying both dog foods add a substantial amount of nutrients back in to meet AAFCO standards.


Hah, AAFCO is not a recipe book of good dog food. It's loose guidelines for some minimum and/or maximum requirements, in many cases open ended. What and how much is added back in varies greatly from formula to formula. I realize it's much more effective to apply the same arguments you use about foods like Ol'Roy, Dog Chow and similar crap towards all kibble formulas but it's simply not that easy.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

DaViking said:


> Hah, AAFCO is not a recipe book of good dog food. It's loose guidelines for some minimum and/or maximum requirements, in many cases open ended. What and how much is added back in varies greatly from formula to formula. I realize it's much more effective to apply the same arguments you use about foods like Ol'Roy, Dog Chow and similar crap towards all kibble formulas but it's simply not that easy.


I know what AAFCO is (and isn't). My point being that Ole Roy is getting up to the minimum AAFCO standards and if Orijen didn't add stuff back in they would be below those standards.

And when I say dog foods cook out most of the nutrients, I stand by that. Otherwise, they would not be adding it back in. 

i think low cooking probably doesn't change the protein as much as high cooking. That first article says that high cooking actually helps in the the digestion low quality meat but not high quality meat, so probably the reverse is true.

All cooking seems to remove the important B vitamins. But anyone who thinks they are getting the value of a fresh blueberry or even a fresh piece of meat in dry dog food hasn't looked at the ingredients list.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> And when I say dog foods cook out most of the nutrients, I stand by that. Otherwise, they would not be adding it back in.


You can stand by it all day long, it will still be pure nonsense. The only place you can get away by saying something like that is in the DFC raw section. Cheap views and junk science like this seems to be accepted over there, at least among the raw members who still find it meaningful to post :wink: No one will bother you as long as you keep it there.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

DaViking said:


> You can stand by it all day long, it will still be pure nonsense. The only place you can get away by saying something like that is in the DFC raw section. Cheap views and junk science like this seems to be accepted over there, at least among the raw members who still find it meaningful to post :wink: No one will bother you as long as you keep it there.


No, it's not nonsense. If low cooking worked, they wouldn't be adding all the stuff back in. Cooking is cooking.

And you call it junk science because you don't agree with it, not because it's false. I continue to fail to understand how people can believe that the dried up brown chunks they feed their dogs are contain very much of what they start out with.

When you start lowering yourself to personal attacks, it doesn't become you. I haven't said a single word about raw food.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> No, it's not nonsense. If low cooking worked, they wouldn't be adding all the stuff back in. Cooking is cooking.
> 
> And you call it junk science because you don't agree with it, not because it's false. I continue to fail to understand how people can believe that the dried up brown chunks they feed their dogs are contain very much of what they start out with.
> 
> When you start lowering yourself to personal attacks, it doesn't become you. I haven't said a single word about raw food.


Where did I attack you? I said you are talking nonsense, that's not an attack.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

Go back and read your post. If I hadn't said it often enough, i recommend dry dog food to lots of people. But not Acana or Orijen because it's so expensive and I don't think the cost is worth it.

You aren't going to relegate the facts about dry food to the raw section just because you don't want to hear it. No matter how much you would like to believe most of the nutrients in food stay after cooking, it's just not true. It's not totally true for people, either, only our food mostly still resembles food after it is is cooked.


----------



## meggels (May 30, 2010)

kaliberknl said:


> I define intelligence not by the number of arguments a person has won, but the number of times one has said, "This nonsense is not worth my time." — Dodinsky


I really like this quote, I had to learn this lesson recently lol!


----------



## PDXdogmom (Jun 30, 2010)

This discussion makes me think of cereals in the grocery store aisle. Some brands like Kashi have very little added vitamins/minerals but the ingredients seem to be well-chosen and of good quality. Many other brands have the full array of vitamins/minerals added in (some having good or not so good ingredients) so that maybe half or even 100% of the daily total needed of some vitamins is supplied.

If all I ate were cereal, I'd choose a brand with a full dose and array of vitamins/minerals. Since I eat many fresh foods in the day, I'm fine with just choosing a cereal with good ingredients and very little if any synthetic vitamins added. I still want to make sure I'm choosing the cereal with the best possible food ingredients - a whole grain as opposed to rice flour, etc.

So, it seems to make sense for a dog that primarily eats kibble (top quality or not) to have a decent dose of vitamins added.


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

xellil said:


> No matter how much you would like to believe most of the nutrients in food stay after cooking, it's just not true. It's not totally true for people, either, only our food mostly still resembles food after it is is cooked.


You are just going in circles. Unless you can provide some science to support that *most* of the nutrients going into a good brand of kibble are gone coming out the other side of extruding/baking you are talking nonsense. Adding in a portion of the AAFCO recommended vitamins and minerals is not *most* nutrients. Kibble is made up of nutrients in the form of proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, water and vitamins & minerals. Add to that so called functional ingredients to target special functions or issues such as mussels, seaweed, fos/mos, etc. What's added back in of vitamins and minerals is certainly not "most" Pick any good quality kibble and provide us some links that shows that most of the nutrients are gone after extruding or baking. I'd love to see the evidence since it would be close to revolutionary to discover that our dogs really have survived mostly on vitamins and minerals added back in after extruding. According to your logic *most* of the rest carries no nutrition then.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

what is NOT affected by either the cooking or drying process?



AllAboutFeed - News: Research: Kibble quality of extruded dog food


> Kibble durability was affected by drying temperature: the highest temperature (200°C) resulted in a decreased durability compared to 80°C.
> 
> The drying time had no effects on the level of individual or total amino acids or on the proportion of reactive lysine. In 4 mm kibbles, drying temperature of 200°C lowered only proline, total lysine and reactive lysine concentrations: the reactive to total lysine ratio in kibbles dried at 120°C was higher than that of kibbles dried at 200°C.
> 
> ...


Pet food production. Process description - engormix.com



> Animal proteins generally do not contribute structurally to extrusion cooked pet foods. During their preparation they are often subjected to a high degree of thermal processing which renders than “nonfunctional.” The exception would products that are used in their fresh form or are processed in a manner to preserve the protein solubility such as spray dried blood meal.





> Vitamins are an important category of minor ingredients. Each vitamin has its own characteristic behavior during thermal processing, and some are unstable during storage. Vitamin stability during extrusion cooking is affected by moisture, pressure, shear, and temperature. Fat soluble vitamins, which include vitamins A, D, and E, are fairly stable during extrusion, although 15 to 20 percent losses have been experienced (Table 2)ii. The extrusion moisture level has the single greatest effect on vitamins retained. As a general rule, higher moisture levels yield more vitamins retained.



AllAboutFeed - Processing: Vacuum coating for better liquid intrusion


> In production of pet food diets made from extruded pellets, there has been a great development over the past decade. An important part of the development is the addition of different liquid additives such as digest improver, vitamins, fat and appetite improver to mention a few.


Best Quality Dog Food Processing Methods



> It's important to remember, however, that most kibbles contain meats primarily in meal form. Meat meals are rendered products that may have been cooked for up to an hour at temperatures up to 270 degrees Fahrenheit.
> 
> Rendering separates the fat, removes the water content, and kills bacteria and parasites. It also destroys all enzymes and many heat-sensitive vitamins and alters proteins by damaging some of the amino acids.
> 
> The fact that meat meals are then cooked a second time with the rest of the kibble further degrades their nutrient profile. That's why the best quality dog foods contain a substantial amount of fresh meat.





> Baking kibble is usually promoted as a healthier processing method than extrusion, but is it the best quality dog food processing one?
> 
> Many would therefore think this would be the best quality dog food processing method.
> 
> ...


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

:facepalm: Read the whole study.

Nutritional wise, except for the information about *parts* of the vitamin and mineral mix rendered inactive during cooking (and I was the one who provided you with that link in the first place...), there is nothing relevant to your claim there Xellil, unless you feed Ol'Roy. In a good kibble *most* nutrients are *not* gone as you claimed. That's the whole point here. Enzymes could be another relevant point but atm it is highly debated. Yes, parts of the vitamins need to be added back in due to processing, what part of that not being argued don't you get? Did you notice how they used the word "minor ingredient"? All cooking, including the cooking you do at home, destroys some vitamins and minerals. Do I really care if half of the vitamins is to be added back in? Nope. Do I really care if my falafel sandwich don't look like anything natural? No I don't!
I wonder where the nitrogen in this nutrient depleted kibble is coming from, hmmmm...

still waiting for your evidence that shows most of the nutrients are gone post extruding from any good kibble of your choice.


----------



## Caty M (Aug 13, 2010)

I think you just have to look at the ingredients.. in a food like Ol'Roy where the majority of the main ingredients do NOT have a whole lot of nutritional value- ie, whole grain corn, grain flours, rice, etc- you can be pretty sure that the majority of the vitamin and mineral content is added afterwards.. but in a food that does contain a larger percentage of meat like Orijen, EVO, etc I would think that not only does it have a higher digestibility it also retains a large amount of (non added in) vitamins/minerals. The ingredients themselves are higher quality (meat products as opposed to grain) so are higher in nutrients, plus they are likely to be more modern and responsible in their processing practices. Some nutrient degradation happens but before the addition of the vitamins, Orijen is still much more nutritious than Ol'Roy. The better brands also use chelated minerals, unlike Ol'Roy.

That being said, I do still think it's important to add fresh raw, cooked or canned meats to the diet on occasion, too


----------



## Caty M (Aug 13, 2010)

If everything is cooked out, there would be no difference in feeding a high quality to a low quality food, and we do know that's not true at all.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

You are not paying any attention, because you don't want to. Isn't it funny when I look on "low temperature" dog food websites there is never a comparison of how much is lost compared to higher temperatures.

yes, the proteins are better quality in a better food. Which is why the cooking temperature DOES matter.

There is not sawdust, or Vitamin K, or crap corn, many grains, etc. in good dog foods. That's the main difference. It probably doesn't have melamine or aflatoxin in it either. But sometimes it does.

I didn't notice your link DaViking. 

And yes, it changes when we cook it too. That's why most people take vitamins.



> Okay, now on to the effects of heat.
> If you burn your finger, what happens? The skin tissue dies. Overly apply heat to food and the nutrients are progressively killed/destroyed. It should be well understood and recognized in scientific literature that heat breaks down vitamins, amino acids and produces undesirable cross-linkages in proteins, particularly in meat.
> 
> *At 110 degrees Fahrenheit (approximately 43 degrees Centigrade), two of the 8 essential amino acids, tryptophan and lysine, are destroyed.
> ...


Cooked Vs. Raw Food


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

Yet another quote from a site the quotes other sites that in turn quotes even more sites. None of them really scientific or peer reviewed or similar, they read something on a website so therefor it must be true. Go back to your original Dutch study and read again what they say about lysein in petfood at varying temperatures and sizes.



xellil said:


> And yes, it changes when we cook it too. That's why most people take vitamins.


There you go. :thumb:
Indeed, or eat some raw fruits and vegetables. Apples is great for dogs too, just go easy on the core.


----------



## xellil (Apr 4, 2011)

DaViking said:


> Yet another quote from a site the quotes other sites that in turn quotes even more sites. None of them really scientific or peer reviewed, they read something on a website so therefor it must be true. Go back to your original Dutch study and read again what they say about lysein in petfood at varying temperatures and sizes.
> 
> There you go. :thumb:
> Indeed, or eat some raw fruits and vegetables. Apples is great for dogs too, just go easy on the core.


Funny how when you disagree with it you poo poo it.


That's my whole point. The nutrients don't stay in cooked meat. It seems the only great thing cooking does is make the vegetable matter more digestible but how much remains in them after the cooking process? 

I will go back and read the study again. But basically what it says is that cooking at lower temps doesn't destroy as much and it destroys more if the pieces are smaller. And it doesn't address cooking at all - only drying. Even the best dog foods use meals, which are cooked to death before they even become part of the process.


----------



## lindseycampbell358 (Jun 17, 2012)

Herzo said:


> You might want to re think about feeding raw with the kibble. I have fed them a meal of raw then the next one of kibble but I don't feed it together. They digest at a different rate so it is best to feed them at least 12 hours apart. I do mix some fresh cooked with there kibble.


Thanks Herzo, I didn't realize that about the digestion rates. I will take your advice. On a side note, Gorgeous dog in your picture!


----------



## DaViking (Sep 27, 2011)

> Funny how when you disagree with it you poo poo it.


Read poo poo in, I poo poo out. It's true everywhere, man, beast and the internet. 


Oh well Xellil, one day you will understand *most" nutrients are *not* gone after processing. When you feel a strong urge to think those thoughts ask yourself, did those dogs just finish the Iditarod on half a ration of added vitamins and minerals? Next time you see a SAR dog in total control and balance in the worst urban disaster area possible, surrounded by nothing but chaos and mayhem, ask yourself, is that possible on a life of mostly half a ration of added vitamins and minerals? Next time you hear of a king charles dying a happy pup and of natural causes at the age of 18 eating nothing but dog chow his entire life ask yourself maybe all these formulas do not have most nutrients destroyed by processing? You'll figure it out some day.


----------

