I’ve noticed that oftentimes people who feed their pets a biologically appropriate diet don’t feed themselves a biologically appropriate diet. I’ve also seen this in reverse.
Example A: Jane Smith loves her cocker spaniel and feeds her dog a carnivorous diet filled with raw meat, bones, organ meats, and the occasional raw egg. However, she feeds herself a cooked chicken breast with rice and frozen veggies for dinner.
Example B: Jack Doe eats a raw vegan diet and insists on feeding that to his family since he thinks it’s the healthiest diet for humans. However, not wanting to inflict more cruelty to animals, he feeds his retriever a processed vegan dog food.
It just seems like both of these clash. If you are feeding your dog a biologically appropriate diet of raw meat, why wouldn’t you feed yourself a biologically appropriate diet of raw fruits, veggies, seeds, and nuts? If you yourself eat a biologically appropriate raw vegan diet, why wouldn’t you want to feed your dog what’s biologically appropriate for him, which is raw meaty bones?
I’m not saying that I’ve seen this on this forum, but I’ve seen it many places. I just think it would make the most sense to feed a carnivorous animal a carnivorous diet and an herbivorous animal an herbivorous diet.
Please give me your feedback and thoughts, I’d love to read them. My above argument is based on the premise that neither dogs nor humans are omnivores. I think biological evidence shows that dogs are carnivores and humans are herbivores. While both species can survive on an omnivorous diet, neither thrive on it.