The Myth Of 100% Complete Processed Pet Food
November 9th, 2007 at 05:13pm Under Pet Food
By Dr. Randy Wysong
Every day, people by the millions pour food from a package into
their pet’s bowl. Day in and day out, meal after meal, pets get
the same fare. This strange phenomenon is not only widely
practiced, but done by loving owners who believe they are doing
the right thing. Why? Certainly because it is convenient, but
also because the labels state that the food is “complete and
balanced,” “100% complete,” or that the food has passed various
analytical and feeding test criteria. Furthermore, manufacturers
and even veterinarians counsel pet owners about not feeding
other foods such as table scraps because of the danger of
unbalancing these modern processed nutritional marvels. The
power of the message is so great that pet owners en masse do
every day to their pets what they would never do to themselves
or their children -offer the same processed packaged food at
every meal.
Think about it: Our world is complex beyond comprehension. It
is not only largely unknown; it is unknowable in the “complete”
sense. In order for nutritionists and manufacturers to produce a
“100% complete and balanced” pet food, they must first know 100%
about nutrition. However, nutrition is not a completed science.
It is, in fact, an aggregate science, which is based upon other
basic sciences, such as chemistry, physics, and biology. But
since no scientist would argue that everything is known in
chemistry or physics or biology, how can nutritionists claim to
know everything there is to know about nutrition, which is based
upon these sciences? This is the logical absurdity of the “100%
complete and balanced” diet claim. It is the reason a similar
venture to feed babies a “100% complete” formula has turned out
to be a health disaster.
Claiming that anything is 100% is like claiming perfection,
total knowledge, and absolute truth. Has pet nutrition really
advanced that far? Does a chemist make such a claim? A
physicist? Doctor? Professor? Did Einstein, Bohr, Pasteur,
Aristotle, Plato, or any of the greatest minds in human history
make such claims? No. Has the science of pet nutrition advanced
to the point where everything is known about the physiology,
digestion and biochemistry of animals, or that everything is
known about their food?
Certainly not.
The fact of the matter is that the “100% complete” claim is
actually “100% complete” guesswork. At best, one could say that
such a claim is the firm possibility of a definite maybe. Each
time regulatory agencies convene to decide how much of which
nutrients comprise “100% completeness,” debate always ensues and
standards usually change. This not only proves that what they
claimed before was not “100% complete,” but this should also
make us highly suspicious about what they now claim to be “100%
complete.”
Additionally, consider that in order to determine the minimum
requirement for a certain nutrient - say protein - all other
nutrients used in the feeding trials must be adequate and
standardized. Otherwise, if vitamin E, for example, is in excess
or is deficient, how would you know if the results of the study
were because of the effects of protein or due to something amiss
with the level of vitamin E?
If the minimum requirements for all 26+ essential nutrients
were all set and absolutely etched in stone, then there would be
no problem. But they aren’t. They are constantly changing. This
means each time any nutrient requirement is changed, all test
results for all other nutrients using the wrong minimum for this
nutrient would then be invalid. Most nutritionists simply ignore
this conundrum, feeling like cowboys trying to lasso an octopus
- there are just too many loose ends. But they continue to
perpetuate the “100% complete” myth, and excuse themselves by
saying they make adjustments when necessary.
The point is, don’t believe the claim on any commercially
prepared pet (or human) food that it is “100% complete and
balanced.” It is a spurious unsupported boast, intended to build
consumer trust and dependence on commercial products - not
create optimal health.
Unfortunately most people think animal feeding is a mystery. It
is not. Animal nutrition is not a special nutritional science to
which common sense human nutrition principles cannot be applied.
Use the same common sense in feeding your pets that you use for
feeding your family. Nutrition is not about some special
ingredient or the absence of some boogeyman ingredient. Fresh
foods fed in variety are always superior to processed food
artifacts.
If you feed processed foods, use discernment since just about
anyone can create a commercial pet food. The pet food industry
has hundreds of brands with officious and beguiling labels, all
stamped with the approval of the FDA, USDA, State Feed
Regulatory Agencies and the American Association of Feed Control
Officials (AAFCO). Business profiteers and the occasional movie
star are the most common force behind the labels. All one needs
is a little money and they can go to any number of toll
manufacturers and have them slightly modify a shelf formula.
Dress it all up with a fancy package, a clever brochure and some
advertising and voilà, another brand is added to the
20-billion-dollar pet food industry.
Nutrition is serious health business. The public is not well
served by exclusively feeding products from companies without
any real commitment to health … or knowledge of how to even
achieve that.
For the past 25 years I have been a lonely voice in the
wilderness trying to get people to understand the deadly health
consequences of feeding processed pet foods exclusively. People
want convenience in a bag and the industry wants the flow of
billions to continue uninterrupted. In the meantime the
scientific literature offers compelling proof that millions of
animals have been maimed and died as a result of feeding
thoroughly tested “100% complete” foods with the full imprimatur
of government regulation. (Exactly the same thing that abounds
in the FDA-pharmaceutical industry.) Examples of pet food
disasters include dilated cardiomyopathy from taurine
deficiency, potassium imbalances, fatty acid and carnitine
deficiencies and numerous other problems that would be expected
on a steady diet of dead, devitalized, carbohydrate-based
processed foods. Moreover, the whole panoply of human chronic
degenerative diseases such as cancer, obesity, arthritis,
autoimmunities, dental deterioration and organ failure are at
epidemic levels in the pet population … as should be expected on
such a diet.
Not only is feeding the same processed food day in and day out
a formula for disease, it is a cruelty to our pets. We take them
from their interesting and active wild setting and confine them.
That is one thing, but to not even offer them interesting
natural meal variety is really quite inexcusable. The answer,
like everything else good in life, is a little attention and
common sense. Knowledge is the best beginning point.
To learn more, obtain a copy of my book, The Truth About Pet
Foods. I will also see to it that you get a free copy of my CD,
“The Thinking Person’s Master Key to Health,” and the brochure,
“How to Apologize to Your Pet,” which will give you specific
guidelines for how to prepare meals and treats to achieve
Optimal Pet Health.
About the Author: Dr. Wysong: a former veterinary clinician and
surgeon, college instructor in human anatomy, physiology and the
origin of life, inventor of numerous medical, surgical,
nutritional, athletic and fitness products and devices, research
director for the present company by his name and founder of the
philanthropic Wysong Institute. www.wysong.net
Source: www.isnare.com
Permanent Link: www.isnare.com/?aid=5749&ca=Pets
By Fred Add comment
