The Myth of 100% Complete Processed Pet Food

[Guest guest]

You have permission to publish this article electronically

or in print, free of charge, as long as the bylines are

included. A courtesy copy of your publication would be

appreciated - send to wysong@....

Title: The Myth of 100% Complete Processed Pet Food

Word Count: 1133

Author: Dr Randy Wysong

Email: wysong@...

Article URL:

http://www.submityourarticle.com/articles/easypublish.php?art_id=1715

The article is preformatted to 60CPL.

The Myth of 100% Complete Processed Pet Food

Copyright 2005 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.

About the Author:

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.

Dr. Wysong is 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. He is

author of The Creation-Evolution Controversy now in its

eleventh printing, a new two volume set on philosophy for

living, several books on nutrition, prevention and health

for people and animals and over 15 years of monthly health

newsletters. He may be contacted at Wysong@... and a

free subscription to his e-Health Letter is available at

http://www.wysong.net.