Nancy M

There’s so many incorrect and false presentations of information in this book, that is undermines everything the author says, quite frankly I do not trust a word that this book says. Who knows what’s fact vs fiction. For example the “pounds of pet food recalled from 2012-2019” graph. The graph fails to control for so many factors such as how much pet food of all these types is on shelf, how much is a serving for this pet food. The author is saying how kibble dominates the pet food industry - so of course there’s a lot more kibble out there to be recalled… so naturally this graph is meaningless. Why did the authors not present this graph accounting for pounds of pet food available for example by using percentages (% of raw food recalled out of all raw food, vs % of kibble recalled out of all kibble). Likely they did not do this as it would not have supported their narrative. Most of the time it feels like this book is a bunch of big words, no references, and just confuses the reader to the point they go “they use smart words so they must be right”. Don’t get me wrong, some parts are true… but presented with so much nonsense it’s hard to pull apart. I think I’ll go back to digesting scientific articles from google scholar any-day before I pick up this book again. At very least they should be putting the references of information with the information! That’s basic science 101?! They make it very difficult for readers to check the facts - again because some of their facts aren’t so factual…