The-Truth-About-Pet-Foods

WHOLE IS BEST:
WHY THE SUM OF SOME OF THE PARTS
DOES NOT EQUAL THE WHOLE
Within nature’s foods, in their whole and original state, lie many mysteries.
Food scientists and nutritionists can only boast an elementary hint
of the intricate inner “checks and balances” which nature built into all
foods. To separate off and use only a fraction of any food – even just part
of a simple grain of wheat (that’s what white flour and refined salt are, for
example) – upsets this “checks and balances” system and is a nutritional
mistake.
Because the three major components of food – protein, fats and carbohydrates
– account for the bulk or weight of food, many nutritionists
and scientists believed that this was all that was needed for good nutrition.
Such presumptuous conclusions lie at the root of today’s plague of degenerative
diseases.*
* Remarkably, such food disassembly is viewed as progressive and scientific.
Here, again, we find starting premises not properly examined.
The bad starting premise is reductionism. Because exploration of ever smaller
components in nature (reductionism) through chemistry, physics and biology
have led to so many remarkable and pragmatic advances, it’s assumed such an
approach can be applied everywhere. (If you like a hammer and use it exclusively,
you treat everything as if it were a nail.) Although reductionistic examination
of ever-smaller pieces may help explain why an engine does not work, or
how to synthesize a new plastic, or the nature of a toxin produced by a pathogenic
bacterium, it cannot answer broader, more fundamental and important
questions about nature.
For example, analysis of the minute metallurgic components of bomb shrapnel
does not answer why the bomb was dropped, killing and maiming the people in
the city. A study of the atoms in biochemicals does not reveal how life began.
Or, to our specific subject, a study of the chemical components of food does not
explain health.
You see, there is nothing about interactive forces between subatomic particles
(about as small as science has thus far been able to explore) that answers the
bigger questions. Quantum mechanics says nothing about why some foods
create health and others make disease.
Whole systems have features not explained by an examination of the parts. The
features of a knot in a nylon rope are not explained by exploring electron spin in
nylon molecules. Creative genius is not explained by an examination of electrical
conduction along myelin sheaths in the brain. Neither organic chemistry nor
origin of life biopoietic experiments explain why humans came to be self-aware.
And testing isolated nutrients does not reveal whole food merits.
The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. This is a perplexity that only a
few scientists admit. Unfortunately, the life sciences, in particular modern
medicine and nutrition, remain in the reductionistic Dark Ages.
PAGE 107