Preventable by Design: The Pet Food Industry’s Shift Away from Health

Industry Accountability & What Responsible Nutrition Should Look Like

Since approximately 2022, the pet food industry across large corporations, boutique brands, and retail exclusive labels, influencer Media, online markets has increasingly prioritized marketing trends, ingredient novelty, and cost efficiency over long-term metabolic compatibility for pets. Where it's purchased says nothing about the quality.

Industry-wide formulation concerns

While major manufacturers such as Mars Petcare, Nestlé Purina, and Hill’s Pet Nutrition have shifted their formulas to meet consumer demand and trends to remain in veterinary and retail spaces, simultaneously, many popular retail brands commonly found at Pet Valu, Global Pet Foods, and PetSmart reflect similar formulation issues despite being marketed as premium, natural, or health-forward.

These include brands such as:

Blue Buffalo
Instinct
Merrick
Simply Nourish
Authority
Acana
Orijen
Open Farm
Farmina
Royal Canin- Although their customer service is great and they do take feedback seriously. They are shifting their formulas to better accommodate pets based on feedback.
Hills
Stella & Chewy’s
Primal Pet Foods
Open Farm RawMix
Instinct Raw
Vital Essentials
Ziwi Peak
Smack
Big Country Raw

Carnivora
Weruva, BFF (Best Feline Friend)
Tiki
Koha
Kirkland

While not every formulation from these brands is inherently harmful, the prevailing formulation direction is increasingly problematic especially for pets with early digestive, skin, or immune stress.

Common formulation problems across brands

Across corporate, boutique, and retail-exclusive products, the following trends are increasingly normalized:

Ingredient stacking (multiple proteins, fats, legumes, botanicals)
High omega-6 fat loads without adequate omega-3 balance
Coconut oil and rich poultry fats used indiscriminately
Heavy reliance on synthetic vitamin/mineral correction
“Functional” or fad ingredients added without long-term tolerance data
Grain-free or legume-heavy formulas used outside of medical necessity

These approaches increase digestive workload, destabilize bile and pancreatic output, and promote subclinical inflammation that often appears first as stool changes, yeast, seborrhea, pigmentation, and abnormal secretions.

What a responsible pet food formulation should look like

A genuinely responsible formulation prioritizes biological tolerance over novelty and supports organs before symptoms appear.

Key characteristics of responsible formulations

Limited ingredient complexity (not just limited ingredient marketing)
One primary protein source per formula
Moderate, consistent fat levels (not excessive or fluctuating)
Minimal fermentable carbohydrates
Clearly defined fat sources (no vague “animal fat”)
Functional ingredients added only when biologically justified
Whole-food support before synthetic correction
Designed to reduce liver, bile, and pancreatic strain over time

What responsible nutrition focuses on

Digestive consistency, not just stool appearance
Skin oil balance, not itch suppression alone
Early metabolic signals, not crisis intervention
Prevention, not lifelong symptom management

Why early signs should never be dismissed

Subtle changes such as softening stool, mucus, pigmentation changes, yeast buildup, seborrhea, or altered eye and muzzle secretions are early warning signs, not cosmetic issues.

When these pre-symptoms are dismissed or normalized, preventable conditions progress until medication becomes necessary. This benefits sales and symptom management models but does not serve long-term animal health. Responsible pet nutrition is not about chasing trends, exotic ingredients, or marketing claims. It is about feeding the organs first, respecting individual tolerance, and responding early before disease becomes the norm.

Raw, Freeze-Dried & Social-Media–Driven Diets: Additional Industry Concerns

In recent years, raw, freeze-dried, and social media promoted diets have increasingly entered the mainstream pet food market. While often marketed as “biologically appropriate,” “ancestral,” or “species-appropriate,” many of these diets present similar or greater risks when not formulated with restraint and long-term metabolic impact in mind.

Common issues seen in raw & freeze-dried formulations

Excessive protein and fat loading

Poor calcium–phosphorus balance over time

Inconsistent micronutrient delivery

Heavy reliance on organ meats without buffering

Increased liver and pancreatic workload

Yeast and seborrhea exacerbation in sensitive dogs

Many modern pet diets appear successful in the short term—improving appetite, coat shine, and overall appearance. However, over months to years, these same diets can quietly contribute to digestive instability, bile and pancreatic stress, and imbalanced skin oil production.
These effects often become apparent only when health issues reappear or suddenly develop, at which point medication is required to manage symptoms. In many cases, the underlying dietary contribution is dismissed or redirected to other causes, rather than addressed directly.
This is partly driven by the understandable desire of pet owners to feel confident in their feeding choices. Unfortunately, this can delay recognition of early warning signs and allow preventable conditions to progress.
Short-term cosmetic improvements do not always reflect long-term metabolic health. Ongoing digestive consistency, skin balance, and tolerance over time are far more reliable indicators of whether a diet is truly appropriate for a pet.

Instagram & Trend-Driven Diets Leaking Into Retail

Social media platforms particularly Instagram and TikTok have played a major role in pushing unbalanced homemade raw, PMR (prey model raw), BARF-style, and DIY “holistic” diets into consumer spaces.
These trends often emphasize:

“No carbs ever”

“Dogs are wolves”

“If it’s natural, it’s safe”

“Detoxing through food”

Diets influenced by social media trends often:

Ignore individual tolerance

Dismiss early warning signs

Promote excess organ meats and fats

Frame digestive or skin reactions as “detox”

This has led to preventable digestive, skin, liver, and pancreatic stress being normalized as part of the process.

Without careful formulation, portion control, and ongoing assessment, pushing diets on pets can place equal or greater metabolic strain on the body compared to processed foods especially in dogs already showing early signs such as stool inconsistency, yeast, seborrhea, or pigmentation changes.

Responsible nutrition is not defined by format (kibble, raw, freeze-dried) it is defined by:

Ingredient restraint

Digestive consistency

Long-term organ support

Attention to early pre-symptoms

In Canada Research Restrictions Fuel Trend-Driven Nutrition

Over the past several years, restrictions and defunding affecting independent research, applied nutrition programs, and educational pathways have significantly altered the pet food landscape. When credible, long-term nutritional research becomes harder to conduct or access, even well-established brands are pushed away from evidence-based formulation and toward market-driven trends.

In this environment, nutrition decisions increasingly rely on:

Consumer demand and social media influence

Ingredient popularity rather than tolerance data

Marketing narratives over longitudinal outcomes

As rigorous research becomes less accessible, trend adoption replaces scientific caution.

The Market Gap This Creates

When evidence-based oversight weakens, it creates space for:

Fad-driven formulations

Poorly educated start-up brands

Companies entering the market without adequate nutritional expertise

Social-media–influenced diets being commercialized without long-term safety data

This allows unbalanced raw, freeze-dried, boutique, and “functional” diets to spread rapidly often framed as innovation, despite lacking foundational research support.

The result is a market where novelty is rewarded faster than responsibility, and early warning signs in pets are normalized instead of investigated.

Why This Matters for Pets

When research is restricted or centralized:

Brands follow trends instead of tolerance science

Early metabolic and digestive warning signs are dismissed

Preventable chronic disease becomes normalized

Medication becomes the default solution instead of prevention

This does not mean that all corporate research is invalid, nor that all small or boutique brands are irresponsible. However, the system increasingly rewards speed, marketing, and trend alignment over long-term biological appropriateness. As a result, more responsibility falls on pet owners to monitor their animals closely and provide feedback to companies but only if the owner is aware of subtle early warning signs in digestion, skin, or coat. Without this awareness, preventable issues can quietly progress despite the availability of products designed to support long-term health, while companies continue to thrive largely unaware of the real-world outcomes.

A healthy pet food market requires:

Independent research access

Education-based formulation standards

Long-term tolerance data

Accountability across all brand sizes

When these safeguards weaken, fad diets flourish, responsible brands are pressured to compromise, and pets pay the price through chronic, preventable conditions.

Ethical Implications: Why Passive Acceptance is Irresponsible

When early warning signs in pets: such as stool changes, skin hyperpigmentation, yeast overgrowth, seborrhea, or altered secretions are routinely dismissed or normalized by manufacturers, retailers, breeders, breed standards, well-meaning owners, or even well- meaning medical care, it shifts the burden of preventable disease onto the animal.
This approach is irresponsible and ethically concerning for several reasons:

It perpetuates preventable suffering . Animals experience chronic discomfort, inflammation, and metabolic stress that could have been mitigated through diet or early intervention.

It normalizes subclinical disease. Low-level digestive, skin, and metabolic abnormalities are treated as “acceptable,” allowing chronic conditions to progress silently.

It incentivizes reactive care over prevention. Companies profit from medications, supplements, or symptom-management products, rather than encouraging responsible nutrition or early detection.

It sets a precedent for large-scale neglect . When systemic dismissal becomes standard, it reinforces a culture where animal welfare is secondary to trends, marketing, and profit.

By continuing to accept or support this normalization, humans are effectively allowing preventable suffering to continue unchecked, which can be considered inhumane at a systemic level.

Responsibility therefore falls on owners, veterinarians, and the broader industry to recognize early signs, demand accountability, and prioritize long-term animal welfare over marketing or convenience.

The 2026 Controversy: Animal Welfare vs. Industry Practices

In 2026, there is increasing public and professional emphasis on promoting animal welfare, with governments, organizations, and companies claiming commitment to humane treatment. Yet, many practices in the pet food industry contradict these stated values.
Despite welfare rhetoric, the system continues to:

Normalize the dismissal of early warning signs in pets, such as digestive stress, skin hyperpigmentation, seborrhea, or yeast overgrowth.

Reward trend-driven, poorly researched diets over scientifically validated, tolerance-based nutrition.

Allow fads, uneducated startups, and social-media–driven products to proliferate, even when long-term safety is uncertain.

Encourage profit over prevention, prioritizing marketing and speed rather than the animal’s long-term health.

This creates a fundamental ethical contradiction: promoting animal welfare publicly while simultaneously supporting practices that increase preventable suffering and compromise health.
In essence, the industry and its consumers can claim a commitment to welfare, yet structurally incentivizes approaches that are irresponsible, inhumane, and harmful at scale.

Historical Perspective: Why This Is Ridiculous in 2026

It is especially concerning in 2026 that preventable digestive, skin, and metabolic issues in pets are still being dismissed or normalized. Humans have coexisted with domesticated animals for thousands of years, learning over generations how diet, environment, and care affect health. Despite this long history, Breeding programs, the modern pet food system, Owners often ignore lessons learned:

Animals still suffer from preventable nutritional imbalances.

Early warning signs in digestion, skin, and coat continue to be minimized or overlooked.

Marketing trends, fads, and social-media influence are prioritized over long-term health and historical wisdom about proper care.

For an era with advanced veterinary science, nutrition research, and widespread information, it is unacceptable and ethically questionable that pets continue to experience issues that could be prevented with responsible formulation, attentive care, and early detection.

The contrast between our historical understanding of co-living with pets and current practices underscores that trend-driven diets and industry shortcuts are not just negligent—they are avoidable and, frankly, ridiculous for this time period.

Taking Control: What Is Within Our Power

The overwhelming reality is that pet owners, veterinarians, and responsible breeders hold the greatest potential to influence positive change. While the industry may promote trends, marketing, and profit-first strategies, the following actions are entirely within our control and can shift outcomes for our pets:

Informed and proactive pet ownership

Monitoring early warning signs: Stool consistency, mucus, pigmentation, seborrhea, yeast buildup, and altered eye/muzzle secretions.

Keeping detailed records: Track diet, supplements, medications, and symptom changes over time, stop the table treats, do not resort to home diets rather read the ingredients and start process of elimination, maintain your pet healthy - dental care, weight management, vaccines, flea and tick prevention.

Making diet decisions based on tolerance and individual needs, not marketing claims or social media trends.

Active feedback loops with companies

Contact manufacturers with real-world observations about how pets respond to their products.

Advocate for ingredient transparency, research-backed formulations, and tolerance testing.

Support companies that respond to feedback with responsible reformulation rather than marketing spin.

Responsible breeding programs (for breeders and consumers)

For breeders, the foundation of long-term pet health begins with selecting breeding stock that demonstrates robust digestive, skin, and metabolic health. This means prioritizing true physiological resilience, rather than masking inherited sensitivities through short-term interventions, trendy supplements, or fad diets.

The financial incentives and pressures of the breeding industry in not an excuse to support or encourage practices that compromise long-term animal welfare:

The obvious breeder desperation fuels trend adoption

When breeders feel economic pressure to maintain appearances or meet market demand, they may rely on fashionable diets, supplements, or products to manage visible symptoms in puppies or adult breeding stock. (That is an unethical practise)
This often masks underlying digestive or metabolic weaknesses instead of addressing root causes, encouraging products and diets that are fad-driven rather than scientifically sound.
Improper breeding to meet demand (Not an excuse)
High-demand breeds or “trendy” traits can lead breeders to prioritize appearance or short-term sales over health.
Animals with subclinical digestive, skin, or metabolic issues may be bred without proper consideration of heritable sensitivities, passing vulnerabilities to the next generation.
Short-term fixes perpetuate systemic problems
Using medications, supplements, or trendy diets as a band-aid for inherited sensitivities delays recognition of real issues.
This increases reliance on symptom management, encourages fad products in the marketplace, and contributes to chronic preventable disease.
Ethical and financial balance
True breeding responsibility requires accepting that long-term health and welfare are the priority, even if it reduces short-term profitability.
Breeding should not be lucrative at the expense of animal welfare. Prioritizing profit over health drives desperation, reliance on fads, and unethical shortcuts- which is noticed in the recent years.

A gentle reminder to Breeders- your job is:
Focus on physiology, not cosmetic traits: Choose stock that demonstrates true digestive, skin, and metabolic resilience.
Reject short-term band-aids: Avoid masking inherited sensitivities with trendy diets, supplements, or medications.
Prioritize welfare over profitability: Recognize that ethical breeding sometimes reduces short-term revenue, but protects the breed, the pets, and your reputation in the long term.
Be a force for market change: Breeders who demand scientifically sound nutrition and responsible formulation help curb the influence of fad trends across the industry.

Breeders are expected to adopt these principles because breeders can stop perpetuating preventable suffering, reduce the spread of fad-driven diets, and ensure that future generations of pets are healthier, more resilient, and less reliant on symptom management.- It's the whole reason why pet stores where closed down.

Collaboration with veterinarians (All who are involved in animal care industry)

Work with vets to design elimination diets, monitor organ function, and prevent subclinical stress.

Encourage preventive care over reactive symptom management, particularly for senior pets.

Support research programs by participating in studies or sharing clinical observations that highlight early signs of intolerance.

Community advocacy

Promote collective accountability, making the pet food market more responsive to real animal welfare concerns.
Resources

Nutrition, Digestive Health, and Skin Conditions

1. Fascetti, A. J., & Delaney, S. J. (Eds.). (2012). Applied Veterinary Clinical Nutrition (1st ed.). Wiley‑Blackwell.

A comprehensive veterinary nutrition textbook covering digestive health, dietary formulation, and nutrient tolerance in companion animals.

2. Freeman, L. M., Chandler, M. L., Hamper, B. A., & Weeth, L. P. (2013). Current knowledge about the risks and benefits of raw meat–based diets for dogs and cats. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 243(11), 1549–1558.

https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.243.11.1549

Evaluates raw diet risks and benefits using peer‑reviewed evidence — useful for balanced client discussions.

3. Case, L. P., Daristotle, L., Hayek, M. G., & Raasch, M. F. (2011). Canine and Feline Nutrition: A Resource for Companion Animal Professionals (3rd ed.). Mosby.

Foundational reference on nutrient metabolism, formulation principles, and clinical feeding responses.

Early Warning Signs & Preventive Focus

4. Hall, E. J., & German, A. J. (2020). Chronic gastrointestinal disease in dogs: A practical clinical approach. Veterinary Record, 187(4), e19.

https://doi.org/10.1136/vr.105470

Offers insight into interpreting early stool and gut changes — applicable to subtle signs like mucus or colour changes.

5. Hill, P. B., et al. (2015). Clinical, histological and microbiological changes in canine atopic dermatitis and their association with disease severity. Veterinary Dermatology, 26(3), 168–177.

https://doi.org/10.1111/vde.12145

Connects skin barrier changes with underlying systemic signals, useful for discussions on seborrhea and pigmentation changes.

Veterinary Feeding Trials & Industry Standards

6. Association of American Feed Control Officials. (2020). AAFCO Official Publication. AAFCO.

Industry standard for educational reference on nutrient profiles and feeding trial protocols. Helps establish evidence‑based formulation expectations.

7. National Research Council. (2006). Nutrient Requirements of Dogs and Cats. The National Academies Press.

https://doi.org/10.17226/10668

Authoritative reference on quantitative nutrient requirements — often used by veterinary nutritionists.

Ethical Considerations & Animal Welfare

8. Yeates, J. W., & Main, D. C. J. (2008). Assessment of positive welfare: A review. The Veterinary Journal, 175(3), 293–300.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tvjl.2007.09.016

Discusses welfare beyond disease — useful for ethical arguments about dismissing early signs as “normal.”

9. Rollin, B. E. (2011). Ethics and Animals: An Introduction (2nd ed.). Wiley‑Blackwell.

A broader text on ethical frameworks in animal care and how societal norms influence standards.

Raw & Trend‑Driven Diet Evaluation

10. Freeman, L. M., et al. (2018). Evaluation of pet foods associated with dilated cardiomyopathy: Results from FDA investigations. Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 253(6), 827–841.

https://doi.org/10.2460/javma.253.6.827

A scientific perspective on how fads (e.g., grain‑free) have real clinical consequences — relevant to trend‑influenced diets.

Search This Blog

Debunking Pet Care