I hardly ever watch commercial television anymore being that I gave up my cable TV. For entertainment, I stream my shows from the internet now. As a consequence, I miss out on seeing so many of today's commercials. That's not a bad thing though. When I do see television, it seems like the commercials are almost all either pharmaceutical ads, whose products I don't partake of, or some kind of food that doesn't fit into the whole foods, plant-based way of eating.
But tonight, I did see some television and I saw a commercial for dog food that kind of amazed me. As I recall it, the ad focused on some people who had an older dog, and the ad talked about how the dog wasn't as much fun anymore because of mental decline that the dog had over the years. But the dog food manufacturers came to the rescue and created a dog food that would reverse the dog's mental decline. And as a result of that reversal, the dog was now more fun for its owners.
Isn't that interesting? That is, isn't it interesting that a manufacturer of dog food would go on mainstream television and make the claim that food and food alone could reverse brain disease in a dog? And people watching the ad will accept that statement and go out and buy the dog food for their dog in hopes of reversing their dog's mental decline. You know they will because big companies don't waste money advertising products that they don't think their ads will sell.
So, I find this really interesting because making a claim like that for human beings is considered to be a radical thing. I heard that just today from someone. Managing disease, which is what doctors do, is what most of the public accepts and believes. And if I say that your diabetes or your heart disease can be managed by your doctor using prescription medications with all kinds of side effects, well you'll accept that and believe it. But if I say that your diabetes or your heart disease can be reversed (as opposed to just managed) and that reversal can come about through the foods you eat, well you would, if you were the average person, say that's really a radical statement and under what kind of authority could I make such a statement.
But it apparently is not radical to say and act on the idea that a dog's brain disease can be reversed through diet alone. Why? We're both mammals. We have basically the same internal organs and our bodies operate in much the same way. So, why is it that it can be mainstream thinking to think that a dog can reverse its diseases through diet while we humans can only manage our diseases through prescription drugs?
For example, let me mention a study that Dr. Greger talks about in his book How Not to Die. In a sixteen week double-blind trial, Alzheimer's patients with mild to moderate dementia who took saffron were found to display significantly better cognitive function over those who took a placebo. But if I went to a memory care unit and suggested that its patients' mental declines could be reversed by including saffron in their diet, I'd more than likely be shown the door and told not to come back. Nobody would believe me. That would be a totally radical idea to the average person.
But apparently, when the same type of suggestion is made for a dog, then people buy into it without question. Isn't it time we start to recognize the power of food in our own lives? I think so.