Dr. Marty Gold stein's Nature’s Feast Raw Diet: a glance at the Infomercial
A client recently asked one among my colleagues for an opinion on an infomercial by Dr. Marty Gold stein for his new commercial raw cat chow, Nature’s Feast. There was little new or surprising during this video, but since Dr. Gold stein features a lot of prominence within the media, cat owners may meet this video and be inclined to believe the claims made in it, so I felt it worthwhile to supply some context.Who is Dr. Marty Gold stein?
I have written a touch about him before as a contributor to the propaganda film the reality About Pet Cancer, which I have previously critiqued intimately.
Dr. Gold-stein is another celebrity participant, a veterinarian to the celebs. he's also a robust advocate of the bait-and-switch referred to as “integrative medicine.” this suggests he will sometimes use science-based treatments, on the other hand often gives the credit for any improvement to homeopathy, acupuncture, raw diets, herbs, and other alternative treatments he also employs.
Dr. Goldstein, very similar to Jean Dodds, is one among those alternative practitioners who is so nice and caring and revered (at least by celebrity clients and medicine advocates) that it's considered almost taboo to means that much of what he sells is unproven at the best and, in some cases, complete nonsense. His use of homeopathy demonstrates his lack of concern for a science-based approach to medicine, and most of the claims he makes about nutrition are unproven at the best or wrong at the worst.
He justifies his claims almost entirely with personal anecdotes and beliefs, not with any objective scientific evidence. I even have discussed the unreliability of anecdotes repeatedly, also as many of the flimsy arguments he uses during this infomercial, like the Appeal to Nature Fallacy, so I will be able to only address them briefly here. Dr. Goldstein is convinced that his personal experience and beliefs are sufficient evidence for rejecting the conclusions of the research project and nutrition experts, which alone makes any claim he makes suspect.
The most egregious story he tells us a few dogs named Kaiser. Dr. Goldstein convinced this dog’s owners to modify the form of a billboard to a homemade diet. For a few weeks then, supposedly anybody who touched the dog developed a rash, then the dog’s hair all fell out. instead of seeing this as a drag or a symbol of great illness, Dr. Goldstein interpreted it as a symbol the dog was “detoxing,” releasing harmful chemicals through its skin thanks to the diet change. Such a dangerously bizarre interpretation of probably serious symptoms doesn't suggest a rational or reliable medical judgment.
As for the precise claims he makes in his infomercial, here are a couple of of the foremost important.
Grains are Bad for Cats
Grains are popular villains in alternative narratives about nutrition lately. The ratio of the three macronutrients—carbohydrates, fat, and protein— is a key element within the formulation of pet diets. None of those are inherently “good” or “bad,” and while the precise balance among them does have health implications, especially in pets with specific medical conditions, like diabetes or renal disorder, the thought that commercial diets generally contain “too much sugar” or other carbohydrates which this causes the disease is just not according to the evidence.
Unlike humans, dogs and cats can accept little or no carbohydrate in their diet. However, they will also use this class of macronutrient perfectly well as a source of calories. Some non-digestible carbohydrates (often referred to as “fiber”) can have beneficial effects on the microbes that sleep in our pets’ guts, which may influence health, also as on weight, stool consistency, and other aspects of health. Demonizing a whole class of nutrients isn't rational or justified.
As far because the claims that dietary carbohydrates of grains cause cancer or another disease in pets, these are pure speculation. There are only a couple of studies watching diet and cancer risk in dogs and cats, and most of those rely upon owner recollections for data about diet, which has proven an unreliable approach in people. There are not any studies in the least showing restricting dietary carbohydrates that reduce the danger of developing cancer in dogs and cats.
There are lab animal studies and epidemiologic research in humans which suggest possible relationships between carbohydrates within the diet and cancer. There are interesting features of the metabolism of cancer cells that suggest diet may need some influence on cancer progression and response to treatment. But there's no real-world, clinical test evidence that supports the claim that dietary carbohydrates cause cancer in pets or that lower carbs will prevent or help treat cancer.
Carbohydrates are often seen as particularly dangerous to cats, who are truly obligate carnivores then would naturally eat a high-fat/high-protein diet with few carbohydrates or grains in it, aside from those found within the gastrointestinal system of herbivorous prey animals. However, research has demonstrated that cats can make use of carbohydrates in food as an energy source, which isn't a big risk factor for diabetes or other diseases often blamed on an excessive amount of carbohydrate in commercial cat chow.
Perhaps the pet food ingredients most reviled in criticism of economic pet foods are corn and wheat. The obsession in popular human nutrition lore about gluten has certainly contributed to the present. However, many of the fears about gluten, inhuman and animal health, are unfounded. People with the disorder can have negative health effects related to eating gluten, and there are documented genetic cases of gluten sensitivity during a few dog breeds.
However, even as most of the people aren't harmed by eating gluten, there's no evidence that this is often a risk factor for disease in dogs and cats. Abandoning wheat as a macronutrient source due to such fears simply results in the substitution of other sources, and there's no guarantee these are safer or healthier. there's even some evidence that avoiding gluten can cause problems in people that don't have the disorder.
I have also heard advocates of other diets mention “the menacing power of corn” as if it were inherently poisonous. this is often simply silly, and it ignores decades of nutrition research showing the contrary. Like every other food ingredient, corn isn't inherently good or bad. It can contribute calories, protein, and essential fats to the diet, and it is often a secure ingredient during a diet for both dogs and cats. it's not appropriate because the sole food source for our pets, but nobody is suggesting we use it that way, and claims that pet foods are “mostly corn” are demonstrably untrue.
0 Comments