The-Truth-About-Pet-Foods

In the alternative, prohibit all claims just like the World Health Organization
(WHO) did with baby formulas. The analogy is practically perfect.
Breast milk is what babies genetically expect. It is raw, natural and
truly complete (provided mom is not eating too crazy). But no, nutritionists
know better. A baby’s tummy would never know the difference between
a chemist’s lab or food processor’s concoction and the real thing.
So along with the “Coca Cola-nization” of the third world, commerce
further “solved” their starvation with synthetic formula.* The results were
so disasterous the WHO interceded.
Singularly fed processed pet foods are just as synthetic and just as
disasterous.
So I will follow the WHO/UNICEF code on the marketing of breast
milk substitutes with an analagous pet food code that would truly make a
difference in pet health.
WHO/UNICEF CODE
1. No advertising of breast milk
substitutes.
2. No free samples to mothers.
3. No promotion of products through
health care facilities.
4. No company mother-craft nurses
to advise mothers.
5. No gifts or personal samples to
health workers.
6. No words or pictures idealizing
artificial feeding, including pictures
of infants, on the labels of the
products.
7. Information to health workers
should be scientific and factual.
8. All information on artificial feeding,
including the labels, should explain
the benefits of breast-feeding and
the costs and hazards associated
with artificial feeding.
9. Unsuitable products, such as
sweetened condensed milk, should
not be promoted for babies.
ANALOGOUS PROCESSED
PET FOOD CODE
1. No advertising of exclusively fed
processed pet foods (EFPPF).
2. No free samples of EFPPF to pet
owners.
3. No promotion of EFPPF through
veterinary clinics.
4. No EFPPF company sales people to
advise pet owners.
5. No gifts or personal samples of
EFPPF to veterinarians, staff or
veterinary colleges.
6. No words or pictures idealizing
EFPPF, or pictures of animals on
the products.
7. Information to veterinarians should
be factual and scientific.
8. All information on EFPPFs,
including labels, should explain the
benefits of fresh, raw, natural
feeding and the costs and hazards
of artificial EFPPF feeding.
9. Unsuitable products containing
predominantly food fractions and
additives should not be promoted
for animals.
* Lonsdale T, “Pet Foods’ Insidious Consequences,” 1993.
PAGE 73