- Joined
- Nov 7, 2012
- Messages
- 5,170
- Location (City and/or State)
- South of Southern California, but not Mexico
I only hate people when they start out saying "you'll hate me for this" or some such LOL .
That's the new Mazuri no doubt. In science every atom has a name, and every molecule has a name based on nomenclature, for the atoms its made up from.
I think what the big animal food companies do is build a bridge between economical/inexpensive sources of things, and the matrix of the nutrients the animal ought to get. So the idea is find out what the good diet is, find the stuff we can get, and bridge those lists. I'ts not bad just because they use components that meet nutritional needs.
However I in no way shape or form agree with the simplistic stochiometric way that diets like that are made. There are too many nutrients that the FDA does not recognize, not many scientists to say "hey there' eat these and you'll be fine". There are many macro-nutrients not satisfied by that kind of mentality.
This is fully evidenced by the disparity in diet based diseases around the world and what people eat.
One additional problem, and this too has been well documented is that tons/acre yield does not equal nutrients per acre yield. More tons per acres yield about the same density of nutrients so you have to eat more just to be as nourished. And we select for sweetness over most any other criteria so what we buy in the grocery store is okay, but not great.
Good grist for the TFO mill here.
That's the new Mazuri no doubt. In science every atom has a name, and every molecule has a name based on nomenclature, for the atoms its made up from.
I think what the big animal food companies do is build a bridge between economical/inexpensive sources of things, and the matrix of the nutrients the animal ought to get. So the idea is find out what the good diet is, find the stuff we can get, and bridge those lists. I'ts not bad just because they use components that meet nutritional needs.
However I in no way shape or form agree with the simplistic stochiometric way that diets like that are made. There are too many nutrients that the FDA does not recognize, not many scientists to say "hey there' eat these and you'll be fine". There are many macro-nutrients not satisfied by that kind of mentality.
This is fully evidenced by the disparity in diet based diseases around the world and what people eat.
One additional problem, and this too has been well documented is that tons/acre yield does not equal nutrients per acre yield. More tons per acres yield about the same density of nutrients so you have to eat more just to be as nourished. And we select for sweetness over most any other criteria so what we buy in the grocery store is okay, but not great.
Good grist for the TFO mill here.