11.02.2015 Views

The-Truth-About-Pet-Foods

The-Truth-About-Pet-Foods

The-Truth-About-Pet-Foods

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

your last letter where researchers gave massive doses of vitamin C to<br />

dogs and putatively had negative reactions, is an abuse of the scientific<br />

literature since in real life nobody would give such amounts to their animal.*<br />

Company D: As proof that different breeds have different requirements,<br />

it is proven that some breeds require only certain<br />

amounts of copper. Collies, for example, require 270 IU of<br />

vitamin D. Your foods do not show this certain and correct<br />

knowledge.<br />

<strong>Truth</strong> Response: IU’s of vitamin D or mgs of copper in collies and<br />

Bedlington terriers misses the point. Your statement, for example, “collies<br />

require 270 IU of Vitamin D per kilogram” (Are we sure its not<br />

270.015375948 IU’s) , demonstrates that your position is no different<br />

than the rest of the pet food industry which believes scientists can create<br />

100% perfect foods because they “know” how many IU’s of vitamin D a<br />

dog needs. You have fallen victim to the myth of the 100% manufactured<br />

diet and so will pet owners who follow your lead. Such fabricated diets<br />

based on specific requirements (only valid until the scientific board meets<br />

the next time) have caused immeasurable disease and suffering for companion<br />

animals. We have obvious logical differences in nutritional paradigms.<br />

All of the various “breed-specific” arguments are reducible to one<br />

thesis: You think you know exactly what each breed of dog requires in<br />

terms of IU’s, micrograms and milligrams. We think you don’t. On the<br />

face of it, your assertion is absurd since any thinking person knows that<br />

certainty such as you impute to yourself cannot be justified because – as<br />

explained in the previous letter – science is constantly evolving and not at<br />

an end point in any discipline. Since your foundation thesis is erroneous,<br />

all of the reductionistic specifics based upon it about which breed requires<br />

which exact dosage of certain nutrients are invalid.<br />

It is apparent from these few examples (volumes could be written)<br />

that truth does not prevail in the pet food marketplace. Marketing, propaganda,<br />

sensationalism, absurdity and myth displace common sense.<br />

* Cornell Vet, 1979; 69(4):384-401.<br />

PAGE 193

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!