People every day subject their beloved pets to monotonous, repetitive routines that they wouldn't allow for themselves. Yet, they unthinkingly pass these actions off as being beneficial for their pets.
Every day, people by the millions pour food from a package into their pet's bowl. Pets get the same food day in and day out. Pet owners who love their pets and believe they are doing the right things often practice this strange behavior.
Why? Certainly because it is convenient, but also because the labels state that such foods are "complete and balanced," "100% complete," or that they have passed various analytical and feeding test standards. 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 - force-feed the same processed food at every meal.
It's amazing, just think about it. It is difficult to comprehend the complexity of our world. It is difficult to comprehend, and it is also difficult to know 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. Nutrition is not an exact science. Nutrition is an aggregate science that is based on other sciences such as biology, chemistry, and physics. However, no scientist would claim that all of biology, chemistry, and physics are known. How can nutritionists claim to be able to understand nutrition, which is based on these sciences? This is why the claim of a "100% balanced and complete" diet is absurd. It is the reason a similar venture to feed babies a "100% complete" formula turned out to be 貓店長 a health disaster.
After enough disease and death had resulted in trying to reduce the human breast to an ornamental appendage, the government intervened and took control of the commercial hype. Doctors, nurses, and baby formula manufacturers cannot claim that these products are perfect or that they are superior to breast-feeding. They are doing a great job. (They should have been proactive in preventing the disaster from ever taking root and not just intervened after there were enough deaths.
Pet food regulators continue to ignore this warning. Instead of preventing pet food producers from claiming a processed food concoction is 100% complete, they in effect promote the death and disease-dealing specious claim by setting bogus standards that supposedly justify and authenticate the claim. They legitimize sloppy science in order to win consumer confidence. A manufacturer only needs to guarantee that the food's percentage of protein, fat, and other nutrients meets National Research Council standards. Alternative options include feeding tests on laboratory animals in a cage for a few days, measuring blood parameters and monitoring growth and weight.