This article first appeared on LinkedIn
Whether you outright lie, tell half-truths or lie by omission, the result is the same: you are misleading people!!
A pet food company started posting ads showing their new delivery box that has the following message on it:
"Mealtime excitement, Better poops, More energy, Shinier coat, Allergy relief, Healthier weight, More stamina, Fewer vet visits and Less meds". Their website contains the same messaging but the lead-in adds, "Imagine this:" Perhaps as a defensible position legally to say it does not constitute claims, just the wish list they've heard from customers.
This is the same company that had previously stated a diet of real food (vs imaginary?), "including fresh vegetables can extend a dog's life by up to 32 months and decrease the risk of cancer in dog's by up to 65 percent. Immediate benefits...may include an increase in energy and appetite, improved digestion, shinier coat, allergy relief and healthy weight management." These were prominent ads and placed in most PR releases. Thankfully, they were eventually taken down.
So what's my issue with these ads? They don't provide any citations, research or analytics. The statement of "Less meds" falls under a drug claim...something even therapeutic diets can't say. "Better poops" - Show us your digestibility results (fat, protein and total kcal). "Shinier coat" - not shiny but shinier (a comparison). What are your Omega 6 and fatty acid levels? How about an amino acid profile, specifically for tyrosine, phenylalanine, methionine and cystine as they are important for skin and coat health. "More energy" - Show us the kcal distribution by macronutrient. What about "Healthier weight"? Again, "healthier" is not the same as "healthy," it is a comparison and needs comparative data. It would also be great to provide the levels of Branched Chain Amino Acids as they promote lean muscle mass and help fight muscle atrophy in some cancerous dogs. "Fewer vet visits"; not even sure what to say about this statement. Once again, it is a comparison. Secondly, it implies some power or benefit of the food without providing any supporting data. The average dog is seen by a vet 2.7 x per year in the US - is fewer better? More responsible? Good for the dog?
Back in May, I wrote to this company and asked for any documents and analytics that would support their claims. Here is a verbatim quote from their email response, "We are still a very young company so we haven't done all of the testings that a long time company...has done." They went on to say that they would be running digestibility and amino acid evaluation "in the next couple of months" and make it readily available to customers. So they are too young to provide actual data but OK to engage in marketing puffery? It has been 5 months since that answer and instead of data, we've gotten a "doubling down" on the claims. For the record, I believe in the concept of their food, NOT their marketing. I just want to see good science, good business processes and transparency from them and the industry at large.
If you want to be a better food option for the millions of dogs out there (and eventually cats), start by being a better company than what is out there! The full testing cost to get the data would be about $5k/formula. I'm guessing that has to be a fraction of your social media budget. As a consumer, I deserve more than marketing spins and wild half-truths.
It was funny when I wore a shirt like this in college. When the same design applies to my dog's health, it's not so funny.