Should there be increased regulations on dog food?

Despite the large contrast between the aroma of pumpkin pie in the oven and the salad I’m preparing, my dog sits at the bottom of my feet, with an appetite for both. Chopped onion and avocado fall to the floor. Quickly, I grab the fallen fruit and vegetable before my dog attempts to eat the two because although these foods are healthy for us humans, I am aware they are toxic to our furry friends. I see how hungry she is, and given it’s dinner time for the both of us, I place a scoop of dog food into her bowl. But little did I know, the dog food that I voluntarily feed her could be just as bad. You see, the little regulation in place by the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) regarding dog food allows the globally expanding dog food industry to manipulate compassionate consumers like me into purchasing what I believe to be quality food. Sixty-eight percent of U.S. households own a pet, according to the 2017-2018 National Pet Owners Survey conducted by the American Pet Products Association (APPA). From that sixty-eight percent, 60.2 million families own a dog. This means that as a country, we are heavily affected by the little regulation within the dog food industry. In order to support a healthy canine diet and limit health complications, we should increase regulations in the United States to reduce manufacturing deficiencies, deceptive marketing, and recalls for dog food.

Before we examine the current state of dog food regulations, let’s review why the quality of the food, how nutritional and digestible, matters and why you should care about the health of dogs. Though their services to society are sometimes overlooked, dogs have a notable purpose. Gregory Okin, a professor in the Geography Department at University of California, Los Angeles conducted a study to understand “the scale of pets’ dietary needs in relation to those of Americans”(Okin 1). In Okin’s “Environmental Impacts of Food Consumption by Dogs and Cats”, he claims the increase in the production of dog food will escalate the environmental ramifications that human food already has. “They provide a host of real and perceived benefits to people including companionship, increased physical activity, improved mental health and social capital” (Okin 9). In analyzing pets’ consumption of food and energy relative to humans, Okin acknowledges the values that dogs have. Although the diets of dogs may impact the environment and alter the amount of energy consumed by them, they are prized by society. So why should we value their health any less? Currently, the law does not reflect society’s value of dogs. Dogs play important roles and the little regulation within the dog food industry does not comply with the importance of their health.

One of the current issues with the insufficient regulation in place within the dog food industry is manufacturing deficiencies. Michal Rolinec, along with other teachers and researchers from Slovak University of Agriculture in Nitra, wrote a research article “The Nutritive Value of Selected Commercial Dry Dog Foods.” In the article, they discuss their study in which they analyzed and compared the nutrient content of dry dog foods. The manufacturer of dry dog foods states the nutrient content through labeling. “Analysed dry dog foods have very different nutritive value in comparison to declared nutritive value” (Rolinec 26). There was found to be an inconsistent amount of nutrients between the bags of dry dog food that was inspected. This inconsistency is unhealthy for dogs because they may intake an abundant amount of nutrients or become nutrient deficient, leading to various diseases. Therefore, manufacturers need to be held to some responsibility for their failure to state and provide the correct amount of nutrients in dog food. Another study shedding light on manufacturing deficiencies was conducted by Karma Koerich and peers from the Mycotoxins and Other Pollutants Laboratory in the department of Science who wrote an article “Labels Layout of Cats and Dogs Food Sold in Brazil and Their National Regulation Adequacy.” Koerich assessed the information on the package labels of 64 dog and cat dry foods marketed in Brazil and compared them to current regulations. “From the total labels analyzed, all of them (100%) presented unconformity for at least one of the items evaluated. The highest rate of non-conformity was observed in the presentation of illustrations and phrases…” (Koerich 367-368). The outcome of this study shows the lack of labeling on dog food in Brazil. If this is a problem in a country like Brazil, it certainly has the potential to also be an issue in the United States. The results showcase the manufacturer's failure to satisfy the expected level of quality. Increasing regulation would be beneficial because it will improve enforcement by the FDA. Following these standards are important because it will prevent consumers from being misinformed about the matter they are feeding their dogs, therefore supporting a healthier diet for dogs and reducing the chance of complications.

Deceptive marketing is another consequence of the ineffective regulation within the dog food industry that consumers face. The little regulation allows there to be deceptive marketing, permitting companies to take advantage of their uninformed consumers. David Gomez Baquero works in the Center for Sensory Analysis and Consumer Behavior and wrote an article “Acceptability of Dry Dog Food Visual Characteristics by Consumer Segments Based on Overall Liking: a Case Study in Poland.” He examined the correlation between the appearance of pet foods to the owner’s response. In an effort to grasp the effect of visual characteristics of dry dog food on an owner’s assumptions and acceptance of the food, Baquero found several influential factors. “The acceptability of the appearance of dry dog foods was affected by the number of different kibbles present, color(s), shape(s), and size(s) of the kibbles in the product...Consumers rated highest single-kibble samples of medium sizes, traditional shapes, and brown colors” (Baquero 1). With these factors influencing consumer preferences, dry dog food manufacturers design the food and packaging to appeal to the consumer, not necessarily with intentions to provide a balanced diet for dogs. Consumers may be deceived about how healthy the dog food actually is by judging the way it looks and is marketed. Besides the visual characteristics of dog food, pricing is another tool to market the product. The common saying “you pay for what you get” may lead consumers to judge the quality of dog food they’re purchasing based on the price. However, as Sanil D. Singh, and Anil A. Chuturgoon discovered in their article “A Comparative Analysis of Mycotoxin Contamination of Supermarket and Premium Brand Pelleted Dog Food in Durban, South Africa”, that motto doesn’t necessarily apply to everything, such as dog food. They found that higher priced dog food does not promise superior quality or food that is sterile. “Our study shows that purchasing dog foods based on price and marketing channels do not ensure a mycotoxin-free product.” (Singh 5). Choice of words or prices may deceive the consumer into purchasing a healthier or superior option of dry dog food. Consumers often look to packaging labels for ingredients and other essential information, “but with limited information on actual percentages of ingredients used in the formulation”(Singh 1), they are left to interpret the labeling themselves, thinking ingredients such as meat may be more present than they actually are. Since this deceptive marketing can negatively impact a dog’s health, regulations should be increased.

Lastly, recalls have been a common occurrence in the dog food industry’s history with little regulation. In the article “Commercial Pet Food Recalls: Incentives to Improve Pet Food Safety”, Mark Fox and Robert Kenagy from Indiana University review the history of past recalls on dog food and the logistics of regulation. “In 2007 contaminated pet food led to the deaths of thousands of cats and dogs in the U.S. and triggered the largest pet food recall in history, as well as contributing to public pressure for the government to improve overall food safety” (Fox 17). With manufacturers not meeting regulatory standards, recalls were necessary and inevitable. However, an increase in regulations will help prevent and limit recalls in the future. Until then, pet owners remain fearful. If manufacturers and marketers were to be held accountable, they would have more of an incentive to increase the measures they take to assure a healthy diet for dogs. It’s important that all aspects of dog food are inspected because manufacturers in the United States are not the only ones in the production of dog food. In the article, Fox also says “The recalls all resulted from pet food that contained wheat gluten and rice protein concentrate imported from China” (Fox 20). What people wouldn’t normally think anything of, turned out to be “contaminated with both melamine and cyanuric acid, which can cause renal failure in small animals” (Fox 20). Many consumers are not even aware of the dog food they are purchasing in America has come from China. If there was an increase in regulation within the dog food industry, there would be a decline in the number of recalls. “The Food and Drug Administration’s Animal and Veterinary Recalls archives show 33 recalls for 2013, 45 for 2012, 19 for 2011, and 25 for 2010” (Fox 19) as Fox includes in his article. Consumers would be more confident and assured about the quality of dog food they are buying if there were less recalls.

Most people think increasing regulations within the dog food industry would be too costly, but we need to consider the health of dogs and what the future looks like if we don’t. The FDA, which is one of the federal agencies that regulates dog food, is also responsible for regulating food for humans. “The FDA and other federal agencies do not treat pet food with the same level of concern as they treat food for human consumption. Because the FDA is primarily focused on human food and has limited resources...” (Fox 19-20). Some may say that with the restricted amount of resources there are currently, funding would need to be increased. However, the value of health and an improvement in the quality of life from our companion animals are greater than the monetary value needed to increase regulations. Also, if we don’t do anything, why would we want an agency that’s already being spread too thin responsible for the food us humans eat? It comes down to what we value as a society and as Americans.

Dogs deserve a healthy diet, like the rest of us. There’s a common assumption shared among consumers and dog owners that dog food is safer than it actually is. However with the current lack of regulations in the dog food industry, the manufacturing deficiencies, deceptive marketing, and recalls for dog food have hindered a healthy canine diet and resulted in health complications. For the health of our dogs, and the improved quality of life they give us, it’s important that they are healthy. Therefore, we should increase the regulations within the dog food industry. Now I can be an informed consumer and confident about the next scoop of dog food I place in my dog’s bowl. Perhaps she’ll love it so much, she won’t be waiting for a bite of my own dinner.

Works Cited

“Bisphenol A (BPA) in the Serum of Pet Dogs Following Short-Term Consumption of Canned Dog Food and Potential Health Consequences of Exposure to BPA.” The Science of the Total Environment, 2017, p. 1804. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.11.162

David Gomez Baquero, Kadri Koppel, Delores Chambers, Karolina Hołda, Robert Głogowski, Edgar Chambers. (2018) Acceptability of Dry Dog Food Visual Characteristics by Consumer Segments Based on Overall Liking: a Case Study in Poland. Animals 8:6, pages 79

De Nadai Fernandes, Elisabete A., et al. “Trace Element Measurement for Assessment of Dog Food Safety.” Environmental Science and Pollution Research, no. 3, 2018, p. 2045. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1007/s11356-017-8541-4

de Souza, Karma Koerich, et al. “Labels Layout of Cats and Dogs Food Sold in Brazil and Their National Regulation Adequacy.” Ciência Rural, vol. 43, no. 2, Feb. 2013, pp. 366–369. EBSCOhost, stmarys-ca.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=a9h&AN=86047338&site=eds-live.

Fox, Mark A., and Robert Kenagy. “Commercial Pet Food Recalls: Incentives to Improve Pet Food Safety.” Contemporary Readings in Law and Social Justice, no. 2, 2015, p. 17. EBSCOhost, stmarys-ca.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edsgao&AN=edsgcl.436799275&site=eds-live.

Koppel, Kadri, et al. “Determination of Intrinsic Appearance Properties That Drive Dry Dog Food Acceptance by Pet Owners in Thailand.” Journal of Food Products Marketing, vol. 24, no. 7, Oct. 2018, pp. 830–845. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1080/10454446.2017.1415828.

Michal Rolinec, et al. “The Nutritive Value of Selected Commercial Dry Dog Foods.” Acta Fytotechnica et Zootechnica, Vol 19, Iss 1, Pp 25-28 (2016), no. 1, 2016, p. 25. EBSCOhost, doi:10.15414/afz.2016.19.01.25-28.

Okin, Gregory S. “Environmental Impacts of Food Consumption by Dogs and Cats.” PLoS ONE, vol. 12, no. 8, Aug. 2017, pp. 1–14. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0181301.

Pereira, Ana Margarida, et al. “Mineral Composition of Dry Dog Foods: Impact on Nutrition and Potential Toxicity.” JOURNAL OF AGRICULTURAL AND FOOD CHEMISTRY, vol. 66, no. 29, pp. 7822–7830. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1021/acs.jafc.8b02552. Accessed 29 Nov. 2018.

Sanil D. Singh, and Anil A. Chuturgoon. “A Comparative Analysis of Mycotoxin Contamination of Supermarket and Premium Brand Pelleted Dog Food in Durban, South Africa.” Journal of the South African Veterinary Association, Vol 88, Iss 0, Pp E1-E6 (2017), no. 0, 2017, p. e1. EBSCOhost, doi:10.4102/jsava.v88i0.1488