Fwiw, the cats that respond to it by coming to you are likely socialized with humans , and friendly enough that you can pet them. Which is always a plus because petting friendly animals is good for you.
The ones that run away, or just ignore you, are likely either feral or at least not human friendly, which means you at least know how to avoid getting scratched, by not trying to mess with it.
All of that is pretty damn obvious, but it really is a good way to determine what to do with a cat you don’t know in your vicinity. If you’re involved with spay and release in any way, it helps sort out where you’ll need to deploy traps.
I’ve wondered that myself. Afaik, there’s no real information about historical vision acuity beyond the extreme end where it amounts to being blind.
I have to think that some percentage of people had vision deficits that were bad enough to need glasses and from there up to being not-quite-blind. I know that we hover around 20+ percent of the world population being myopic nowadays. If it was even half that for millennia, how could that not influence damn near everything?
I’m usually more attracted to women with prominent noses than other types. Not to the exclusion of any other varieties, it isn’t a dealbreaker. But on average, women that get nose jobs end up being less attractive to me, which is what made me aware of the preference. So I started paying attention to that initial impression I get that triggers attraction and degree of attraction.
What it came down to is that I value a face that’s distinctive, and a prominent nose is the biggest factor in that when that unfiltered reaction is in play.
Jennifer Grey was the actress that made me aware of it.
But, it’s enough of an unconscious preference that the little signals that ping “attraction” will register even when other features aren’t as conventionally “pretty”.
I have a theory about why. It’s the same reason I tend to react very strongly to scent and voice with partners. Back when I was young, my vision was horrible, and it wasn’t discovered until long after it should have been. So, I think that things that stood out in an otherwise blurry blob of a face helped me recognize people, and thus the girls I could recognize were what I came to think of as pretty.
Bigger eyes, bigger noses, very full lips, and bigger hair styles. Though the hair thing faded after I got glasses lol. But, out of all that, bigger noses don’t get as much love by most people.
Well, your question as asked has the answer of yes, and then no.
Canning absolutely does not destroy or otherwise remove “nutrition” totally. And, as such, if the food that is canned was not empty calories to begin with (which is a kinda bullshit term tbh, since the only thing that covers is sugars only, and maybe fats only, which nobody cans), then the food inside the can is not empty either.
As others have said, the process of canning does break down some nutrients. However, so does cooking to some degree. But, cooking also makes some things easier to extract from the food as it goes through digestion, so it isn’t like raw things are inherently better than their cooked versions by virtue of being raw.
So, in general, canned foods are going to be “good enough” on average, when it comes to vitamins and minerals. Some things will be better than others in that regard, so you’d have to look things up as you go and figure out what is going to be reduced enough to merit going through extra effort to obtain and store frozen/raw.