The-Truth-About-Pet-Foods

anything can be called “natural” since atoms are natural and everything is
made of atoms. This stretches definitions but at least demonstrates that
the word can lose meaning and be manipulated to seduce consumers.
There is also the feeling that what is produced by technology is superior,
more complicated, more scientific, more proven than the natural (using
the word in its original sense). However, technology is simply based
upon discovery of the laws and substances of nature. Technology is a
crude and dim view of the infinite technology of nature. Nature is the
ultimate technology.
A NUTRITIONAL SYLLOGISM:
1. Food comes from nature.
2. Life comes from nature.
3. Things equal to the same things are equal to each other.
Natural life requires natural food.
Fig. 44. Because food in its original sense is natural, and life itself is
natural, a loose syllogism exists which argues that life requires natural food.
Though reductionistic technology (focusing on parts and pieces – such
as % protein, % fat, % vitamin A, etc.) may discover some nutritional
diseases and cure them with synthetic vitamins, there is little reason for
applause. Nutritional diseases are caused by reductionistic technology in
the first place, that is by fractionating (reducing) foods through food processing.
The cause is credited with the cure.
THE POWER OF PARADIGMS
It is true in any science (which commercial pet feeding is, kind of), that
once a theory achieves the status of general acceptance as a paradigm, it
will not be declared invalid unless a better alternative is available. In this
case, such an alternative is available – varied feeding including home meals.
But since this would mean economic loss to the industry, it cannot be
enthusiastically embraced. Lack of congruence between the “100% complete”
paradigm and the real world (such as a host of degenerative and
nutritional diseases) is not sufficient to cause change. These are seen as
mere foibles, idiosyncrasies to be solved by future modification, excuses
and other circularly reasoned articulations.
PAGE 97