Yah, or maybe because it smells like bullshit. All data is based on surveys from "normal" people (non-scientists), on a topic that is highly politicized, and by practitioners of one side often followed with what looks like religious fervor. The participants distribution is neither 50/50 for the compared options nor representative for the general populace of cat owners. It is pretty safe to assume bias in the reporting. Not a single cat was actually examined by the "researchers". This has almost all the hallmarks of bad science. That it is published in a purportedly peer reviewed magazine, does not reflect well on that magazine.

True at least maybe from readily available plant foods or at the concentrations that might be typical in plant foods. I don’t think that’s stopping anyone from creating something that doesn’t contain meat but achieves the needed quantities of nutrients cats need through processing or synthesis.

That said, I’m not feeding my cats any of the currently available forms nor am I in a hurry to.