Back in the 1940’s, a doctor named Francis Pottenger, Jr. did a landmark study on cat nutrition that should make us all sit up and pay attention to some of the trends in our modern society.
What does this have to do with beauty? Apparently, everything. What Dr. Pottenger found is that cats fed healthy diets had facial, skull and skeletal formations that were correctly structured. This means that the symmetry of their features was exactly as it should be for beautiful cats. They had perfect skulls, broad cheeks, well-developed palates and strong teeth. Their eyes were bright, and their coats were shiny. The cats were friendly and playful, and they were sociable with other cats.
The mama cats had easy pregnancies and smooth births. They nursed their healthy kittens with no difficulty, and the kittens thrived. As long as the kittens were fed a healthy diet, they followed in their parents’ footsteps, and each subsequent generation produced beautiful cats. They died mostly of old age.
When it comes to art and culture, beauty may be in the eye of the beholder. But scientific measurements of human facial features have shown that there are ideals in facial symmetry that are uniformly considered to be the most pleasing to the eye, as well as functionally ideal. i
When the cats were fed food that had adequate calories, but were nutritionally deficient, the story was the mirror opposite. The cats became sickly and died much younger. The kittens were lower birth weight and had poor formation of their faces and skulls. Their bones were spongy, their teeth weak and their lungs showed abnormal tissue. They had parasites and worms.
They were not sociable and fought other cats or clawed and scratched their handlers. The kittens were often stillborn, or died in a few days if too weak to nurse, or in a few weeks if unable to thrive. Subsequent generations suffered from infections. By the third generation few could reproduce and by the fourth generation the cats could not reproduce and the cat line died out. ii
The only supplement the cats received was cod liver oil. Otherwise they were given food and scraps meat and bones. The cats who were beautiful and healthy ate 2/3 raw meat and bones and 1/3 raw milk. The unhealthy cats were given 2/3 cooked meat and bones with 1/3 raw milk. That was the simple difference. The calories were the same, the protein grams were the same, and they both got cod liver oil. But the living factors in the raw meat made all the difference. The meat included organ meat, so the nutrient value of the raw meat was very high, particularly in 1940. This was before organic was a classification because the world had not become a chemical/pharmaceutical lab experiment.
What was the difference? After all, we eat cooked meat. But cats don’t eat cooked meat in the wild. There are nutrients that are destroyed by cooking that cats need. And modern commercial cat food doesn’t provide some essential elements, as evidenced by how much diabetes exists in domestic Western cats.
Dr. Pottenger went on to study nutrition in children. The results were very similar. Children who were malnourished due, not to lack of food, but from eating foods that had insufficient nutrient quality, had poor formation of the palette of the mouth and weaker and poorly-formed teeth. (How many kids today need braces and what if it’s the lack of correct nutrients?!) Their skeletal structure was less-defines as male or female and they had more social and behavioral issues. They were more introverted and less likely to excel and work hard.
So, apparently we can eat for beauty and success, and pass this to out children!
The health of the Western world, and the USA in particular, has plummeted in recent years. We can assume that something major has shifted because the statistics are appalling. Abundance in portions of food, and availability, but shocking increases in chronic disease, allergies, autoimmunity, obesity and major illness, not to mention mental health and the need for dental treatments. Maybe we are learning, in a giant scientific experiment, that chemical foods just don’t cut it. And the sharp decline in fertility also tells the story.
Medical doctors, with rare exception, have zero training in nutrition. Most of them are told that food has nothing to do with health. It’s kind of hard to imagine how some very bright people can actually accept that as truth.
We can do our own experiments. That doesn’t mean we need to eat raw organ meats! But we do need to find the most nutrient dense foods possible to make up for all the deficiencies we have due to modern farming methods and the lack of availability of foods like raw milk. I raised my kids on raw organic milk delivered from a farm near where we lived in Southern England.
Just imagine if all we really had to do to beat disease is go back to eating real whole foods. That’s an experiment that would be worth conducting. Whole organic foods should not cost so much, and they wouldn’t if farmers weren’t subsidized for growing corn and a host of other crops, mostly non-food commodities. Actually, now they call it “insurance” instread of subsidies and the federal government forks over five billion dollars to farmers to keep prices of crops low, instead of rewarding farmers for growing foods that nourish our health. iii We should support our farmers, of course, but it would be so much better if we supported the health needs of the people at the same time.
If you need tips on choosing nutrient-dense foods, let me know. Our kids, especially, need to be like the healthy kittens because their future, and their children's futures depend on it. We can start to reverse the downward trend in health right now!
Warmly;
Anne
ihttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facial_symmetry#:~:text=unnaturally%20small%20nose.-,Attractiveness,of%20attractiveness%20concerning%20female%20faces.
iihttps://price-pottenger.org/store/pottengers-cats-a-study-in-nutrition/
iiihttps://grist.org/food/our-crazy-farm-subsidies-explained/