Every day people subject their loved animals to repetitious monotony that they would never allow for themselves, and yet, unthinkingly pass their actions off as beneficial for their pets.
People pour food out of a box into the bowls of their pets every day. Day in and day out, meal after meal, pets get the same fare. 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. Manufacturers and veterinarians advise pet owners not to feed their pets other foods due to the risk of unbalancing modern processed nutritional marvels. This message has such power that pet owners force their pets to eat the same processed foods at every meal.
Think about it. Our world is complex beyond comprehension. It is not only largely unknown, it is unknowable in the "complete" sense. To produce "100% complete, balanced and balanced" pet food, nutritionists and manufacturers must be 100% knowledgeable about nutrition. However, nutrition is not a completed science. It is, in fact, an aggregate science, which is based upon other sciences, such as chemistry, physics, and biology. However, no scientist would claim that all of biology, chemistry, and physics are known. How can nutritionists claim to be able pet supplies to sell to understand nutrition, which is based on these sciences? This is why the claim of a "100% balanced and complete" diet is absurd. This is why a similar attempt to feed babies a 100 percent complete formula proved to be disastrous for their health.
In that instance, after sufficient disease and death resulted from attempting to retire the human breast to a mere appendage of adornment, government stepped in and controlled 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. (Although they should have been proactive and prevented the disaster before it ever took root, not have merely stepped in after enough deaths accrued.)
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. To win consumers' trust, they legitimize poor science. All a manufacturer has to do is guarantee that their percentage of protein, fat and the like 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.