When it comes to choosing the best food for your furry friend, the label on the dog food bag can be your first clue. However, not all labels are created equal. There are some red flags you should be aware of that could indicate the quality of the food may not be up to par. In this post, we’ll explore five red flags to look for on a dog food label, helping you make more informed decisions about what to feed your beloved canine companion.
Ingredient Splitting
Missing AAFCO Statement
Incomplete Nutritional Profile and Information
Based on Human Diet Trends
Emotional Marketing
Ingredient Splitting in Pet Food
Ingredient splitting is a sneaky tactic used by many pet food manufacturers to make their products appear healthier and more meat-focused than they are.
This involves breaking down a single ingredient into smaller components and listing them separately on the label.
For example, instead of listing “Oats” as the main ingredient, a label might list “Oats,” “Oat Meal,” “Oat Flour”, and “Rolled Oats” separately. In doing so, a single meat source (such as fresh chicken, which is mostly water) can move to the top of the ingredients list.
This can give the impression that there is more meat in the finished food than there is.
Identifying this practice can be challenging, as at times a dog food company may only use parts of a whole ingredient (for example, pea fiber + pea protein). That can be a normal aspect of proper formulation.
However, if you see a whole version of the ingredient split multiple ways, that’s a red flag (for example, whole peas, yellow peas, pea protein, pea flour, pea fiber, green peas).
U.S. Based Pet Food With No AAFCO Statement
The Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) sets standards for pet food nutrition and labeling. A reputable dog food brand will include an AAFCO statement on its label, indicating that the food has been formulated to meet the nutritional requirements established by AAFCO.
The absence of this statement could mean that the food has not undergone rigorous testing or does not provide complete and balanced nutrition for your dog.
Pet foods that do not contain an AAFCO statement also make it hard for pet parents to determine if the food is formulated specifically for their pet’s life stage and size.
Here are some examples of AAFCO statements that you want to see on your pet’s food bag:
“This product is formulated to meet the nutritional levels established by the AAFCO Dog Food Nutrient Profiles for all life stages.”
“This product is formulated to meet the nutritional levels established by the AAFCO Dog Food Nutrient Profiles for growth, including growth of large size dogs (70 lbs or more as an adult).”
“Animal feeding tests using AAFCO procedures substantiate that this product provides complete and balanced nutrition for adult dogs.”
“Formulated to meet the nutritional levels established by the AAFCO Dog Food Nutrient Profiles for growth and reproduction.”
Limited Nutritional Profile Information
Transparency is key when it comes to choosing the right dog food. If a brand is not forthcoming about the nutritional profile of its products, it’s a major red flag. Look for brands that provide detailed information about the ingredients used, the guaranteed analysis (including protein, fat, and fiber content), and any additional nutritional benefits. Limited access to this information could indicate that the brand has something to hide.
If you have a large or giant breed puppy under the age of two, look for the calcium level on the bag. If you have to chase this information down, look elsewhere.
It’s concerning how many individuals inadvertently feed their large puppies the wrong food, often with excessively high calcium content, due to the lack of readily available information on the packaging.
Just like with human food trends, there are trends in the pet food industry too. Some brands may capitalize on these trends by marketing their products as being based on popular human diet trends, such as gluten-free, grain-free, paleo, or keto.
While these labels may appeal to health-conscious pet owners, it’s important to remember that dogs have different nutritional needs than humans. It’s also important to note that most registered dieticians agree, and will argue with sources, that diet trends are damaging and dangerous.
Choosing a dog food based solely on human diet trends without considering your dog’s specific dietary requirements could lead to nutritional deficiencies.
Watch out for dog food labels that rely heavily on emotional marketing tactics rather than factual information about the product.
While heartwarming images of happy dogs, roasted meats, and fresh vegetables seem appealing, they do not necessarily reflect the quality or nutritional value of the food. Instead, focus on the facts presented on the label (such as nutrition information), and look into the value of the company making the marketing claims.
Does the company have a qualified nutritionist on staff?
Do they have strict quality control?
Additionally, steer clear of companies that use negative marketing in their promotions.
Negative marketing refers to the practice of promoting a product or brand by disparaging or criticizing competitors or their offerings.
This can include directly attacking competitors’ products, making false or exaggerated claims about their shortcomings, or using fear-based tactics to undermine their credibility.
Instead of focusing on the merits of their products, companies engaging in negative marketing seek to gain a competitive edge by highlighting perceived flaws in rival offerings. While this approach may attract attention in the short term, it can ultimately damage the brand’s reputation and erode consumer trust.
5 Red Flags to Look for on a Dog Food Label
When it comes to choosing the right food for your dog, it’s important to be an informed consumer. By keeping an eye out for these five red flags on a dog food label – ingredient splitting, absence of an AAFCO statement, limited access to the nutritional profile, reliance on diet trends, and emotional marketing – you can ensure that you’re making the best choice for your furry friend’s health and well-being. Remember, a little extra scrutiny now can lead to a happier, healthier pup in the long run.
It’s no secret that I’ve become a passionate advocate for good nutrition when it comes to my dogs. At one time I fell for some very common dog food marketing gimmicks and my dogs suffered as a result.
As a matter of fact, my experience seeing my heart dog harmed by a popular ‘high quality’ dog food sent me down a huge rabbit hole that I will not soon dig out of.
There are 300-400 new dog food brands every year in the U.S. All of them are trying to get the money out of your wallet, and will tell you what they have to in order to make it happen.
Are you wanting to avoid being confused or even scammed by pet food industry marketing tricks and misinformation? This post is for you!
5 Dog Food Marketing Gimmicks
#1 Dog Food Marketing Gimmick: “Family Owned”
A common phrase seen from dog food companies is the word “Family Owned and Operated”.
This statement makes dog owners feel like they are supporting a small business, helping a neighbor, or purchasing from a company that is run by people, not corporations. It feels good to purchase from “family owned” companies that appear to have been passed down from generation to generation.
I hate to burst your bubble here, but this is a big gimmick.
Of course, many pet food brands and manufacturing facilities have been passed from one family member to the next generation. This happens in a lot of businesses and it’s great, sure.
Small ‘family owned’ operations are just as susceptible to cutting corners as the big guys.
Unfortunately, small business playing in the big world of pet food are more likely to cut corners, because they just don’t have the clout or affordable access to resources, funding, research, and the supply chain that bigger companies do.
We see this at play with Fromm Family Foods. This family organization employs a lot of people and sells millions of dollars worth of food each year, yet, they don’t have a single qualified nutritionist on staff and never have. They do no feeding trials and their research efforts dried up circa 1990.
We can reasonably assume that isn’t the only place they are keeping their operation lean!
Midwest Pet foods (the makers of Sportmix, Earthborn, Ultimates, Venture, CanineX and Unrefined) actively market that they are a “family owned” business. They have been under fire from the FDA for sanitation practices at their plants that have resulted in harm or death to over 300 dogs to date. Midwest does not employ a single qualified nutritionist, either.
A lot of dog food companies rely on smaller ‘family owned’ manufacturing plants (that as above, employ 100’s of people and qualify as medium to large businesses) and a lot of those plants absolutely do have problems.
Family owned sounds nice on paper, but as above, just because Bob Junior now owns the plant instead of Bob Senior does not mean that they are actually producing something better for your pet. Chances are, they are just as money-driven as any other business out there.
#2 – Pet Food Brands with “No Recalls”
A lot of people mistakenly believe that “no recalls” is an indication that a pet food company is higher quality.
Many times however, companies issue recalls voluntarily out of an abundance of caution. They should, too, because the alternative to issuing recalls is literally to sweep issues under the rug and hope it doesn’t become a problem.
Of course, sometimes a company will have a very negative recall history. There is a huge difference between that and a recall that a big company issues for quality control reasons. It’s important to figure out how to sort out the difference.
Primal Pet Foods and Darwins are examples of brands with inexcusable recalls who have received some damning warning letters from the FDA as a result of sanitation and nutritional practices at their “family owned” plants.
Champion Pet Foods (the makers or Orijen and Acana) knew they had food on the shelves made with beef tallow that had been contaminated with euthanasia drug. Instead of recalling it from pet owners who had already purchased the food, they quietly pulled pallets from the supply chain and didn’t say a word otherwise.
People unknowingly fed it to their pets…and while no pets appear to have been harmed, the ethics of it are appalling.
A company attempting to uphold a history of “no recalls” is going to be much less likely to recall products for small (but notable) issues. Your pet gets to be the guinea pig.
My point here is this. “No recalls” doesn’t always mean that a company is operating ethically, safely, or with transparency.
So instead of judging a book by that cover, look at the nature of the recalls, how quickly they were responded to, and why they happened in the first place. Some companies should absolutely be avoided. Others? There is more to the story.
Thank those companies for recalling instead of letting pet owners bear the brunt of a human mistake.
#3 – A “Team of Highly Qualified Nutritionists & Veterinarians”
Did you know that the solid majority of pet food brands on the market don’t have a single qualified nutritionist on staff?
But if you look at their website, you’d be made to believe that the company has a massive team of highly qualified and highly educated people sitting in their home office, dedicating their time to formulating food for your pet.
I’m sure you’re starting to catch on here, but this too is a marketing gimmick.
With rare exception, what companies really mean when they say they have a ‘team’ of qualified people, is that they pay off-site 3rd party consultants to look over their recipes.
In many cases, those “highly qualified” nutritional consultants may do nothing more than check a box and verify that on paper, the food is nutritionally complete.
Off-site nutrition consultants have no allegiance to the brand or the formulas being marketed. A solid majority of foods on the market are actually generic recipes that were spit out by a computer.
While this usually results in foods that are generally good at keeping pets alive, it’s a far cry from the nutritional research and formulation processes of companies who actually have qualified people on staff.
This practice of marketing the idea of a ‘team of nutritionists’ is also very, very misleading to pet parents who want to know that a lot of dedication was actually made to their pet’s food!
Our recommendation? Look for food brands that have board certified Veterinary Nutritionists or at minimum, people with a PhD in Animal Nutrition on staff.
Tread cautiously though, because companies use all kinds of slick language to bypass actually saying that they don’t employ people for nutritional formulation and food science.
If they didn’t reply to the Pet Nutrition Alliance or refused to answer? Run. Transparent companies have nothing to hide.
#4 – The “Good” Ingredients List
Marketing has taught all of us to be very, very wary of the ingredients in our dog food.
As a matter of fact, it was Blue Buffalo who largely pioneered this concept when they launched their ads showing pet parents how to compare ingredients.
The problem? Most “good” ingredients lists only look that way because of…you guessed it…marketing gimmicks!
Not only have companies strategically rearranged their ingredients lists to appeal to pet parents, they have intentionally replaced a few highly nutritious ingredients with “nicer sounding” foods that don’t provide anywhere near the same energy, fiber, protein, fat, mineral, or vitamin content.
Piggy-backing off the previous section of this blog, it’s important to keep in mind that many of these “nice” sounding ingredients lists and “quality” substitutions are being created and promoted by companies who have no qualified nutritionist on staff.
This includes Blue Buffalo, who came up with the entire concept of judging a food by the ingredients in the first place but only recently (2022) hired a veterinary nutritionist to correctly formulate their diets.
Because as we are learning, this is all about marketing.
Here are some common ways that dog food companies organize their ingredients lists to sell to you.
#1 – “Meat is the first 5 ingredients!”
This implies that the food has more meat in it than other foods.
However, it’s smoke and mirrors. Instead of using 10oz of chicken, they used 2oz of chicken, 2oz of dried chicken, 2oz of chicken liver, 2oz of whitefish, and 2oz of dried lamb.
The meat content is the same, it’s just been split up. Then all they have to do is split up their grains (by using multiple sources or through ingredient splitting) and other ingredients so that none of those weigh more than any of the meats.
#2 – “Fresh meat is the first ingredient”
Fresh meat is heavy, so it’s nearly always at the top of the ingredients list (which is based on weight prior to extrusion).
Fresh meat is 70% water.
Companies want you to believe that your dry kibble is loaded with meat because they show you a photo of a beautiful chicken breast and an ingredients list with “real chicken” as the first ingredient.
But after the fresh chicken is extruded into kibble, the moisture (and thus a solid majority of that heavy fresh meat) is gone. In many cases, the finished kibble will have less fresh meat in it than other ingredients.
This is why some companies use a meat meal, which is dehydrated before it’s used in the extrusion process and contains a lot more nutrition as a result. A kibble that contains some kind of meat meal or meat by-product meal will always have more meat based protein, amino acids and nutrients in it.
#3 – “Includes spinach, blueberries, and carrots”
In an attempt to appeal to consumers who want a ‘fresh’ or ‘holistic’ option, some kibble foods will include a range of fruits and vegetables from spinach to pomegranate and lay claim to the antioxidant benefits.
The bag will often contain beautiful and colorful photos of these ingredients, too.
But like fresh meat, fruits and vegetables are mostly water. To meet nutritional requirements, these cannot be too high on the ingredients list, either, otherwise it throws off the density and nutritional balance of the finished dry kibble food. They are nearly always listed near or after salt, indicating that they are less than 1% of the overall formulation.
As one board certified veterinary nutritionist put it, “it is fairy dust”.
Skip this and top your dogs food with real fresh fruit and veg. (Up to 5-10% of the overall diet is acceptable for treats and toppers like this).
#4– Ingredient Splitting
This common trick allows dog food manufacturers to take a whole ingredient and split it up into multiple parts on the ingredient list.
This changes our perception of how much of that ingredient is in the food, as it can either be perceived as being “more” (for example, multiple meat sources as in the #1 example above), or “less” (by pushing the now lower-weight ingredients down on the ingredients list).
You’ve found ingredient splitting when you see a brand utilizing multiple forms of the same ingredient. For example:
“Peas, pea protein, whole peas, pea fiber, pea flour, green peas”
#5 – “Holistic, Super-Premium, Functional, Human Grade”
There are many common words used by dog food companies to sell their products, and the vast majority of them are completely unregulated terms with absolutely not legal definition.
Holistic, for example, is often used to indicate a food that is somehow more ‘natural’. It’s a word that has been misused for so long that people associate it with a perception, not an actual meaning. Any food company can grab this word and throw it into their marketing.
Given how similar 99% of dog foods actually are to each other, even the ‘holistic’ ones, this particular term lacks any real authority to designate one food as ‘healthier’ or ‘higher quality’ than the next.
Super Premium is another word with no meaning at all. To the point of being laughable. As if being ‘premium’ weren’t enough, THIS food option is SUPER premium, ooooh!
See my point here? Words like “Super Premium” are there to make you feel some sort of way about the dog food. There is no legal definition for this term either.
Functional is the new “it” buzzword, courtesy of “Integrative, Functional, Holistic” Veterinarians and practitioners. Honestly though? All food should be functional. It is supposed to support health, right down to the cells.
I’m honestly concerned that some dog food companies have to tell us their food is ‘functional’ to get our attention.
Human Grade is complicated. There are some very loose regulations surrounding the use of this word. In theory, the ingredients should be sourced from suppliers where the intention of the food is for human consumption, and made in kitchens that prepare human foods, for example.
But once ‘human’ food is put into a dog food recipe, it’s no longer human grade as the final product is intended for use by animals. Not humans.
Food from suppliers intended for use in dog food doesn’t have to be trash; and truthfully, it’s well regulated. Keep in mind that the ‘human’ supply chain is just as susceptible to problems related to salmonella or otherwise.
Choose companies that have good ethics and practices and don’t waste your money, hopes, and dreams on the overpriced and wasteful ‘human grade’ marketing gimmick.
Your beloved pet is a dog, not a human. Given the opportunity, they will tear into your trash and happily eat all the guts out of a chicken carcass.
Anytime we post an article like this, we get a million questions about “‘well, “ok fine, what SHOULD I feed instead?”
Do you want the honest answer? Stop looking at the marketing and the ingredients lists. Look around at the literal billions of dogs that are quietly eating and thriving on veterinary recommended food brands. Those brands have qualified nutritionists on staff and dump millions of dollars every year into nutritional research and feeding trials.
For a comprehensive (and growing) list that addresses common brands/formulas as it relates to large + giant breed puppies (in particular), check out this spreadsheet:
You can also check your brand against the data in the Pet Nutrition Alliance Database. Notice how many brands only use nutritional consultants, and that’s if they even bothered to include their information in this database.
