Help get this topic noticed by sharing it on Twitter, Facebook, or email.

Ratings for Pet products?

I'd like to see ratings for pet products. pet food, pet toys, cat litter etc.
3 people have
this question
+1
Reply
  • Pet food is among our top ten new product categories that we would like to develop ratings for, but it is a complex category to score with some significant data availability challenges. We are currently reviewing the methodologies available for rating the nutritional value and environmental attributes of pet food products. We are not currently planning on covering pet paraphernalia like chew toys or litter.

    We plan to post the rollout schedule for new product category ratings for the remainder of the year as soon as we have completed our assessment.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • 1
    Look elsewhere. This site is horribly biased towards Science Diet, one of the worst pet food makers out there.
    • We do not believe our ratings are biased towards any specific pet food manufacturer - GoodGuide does not have a commercial relationship with any of the pet food companies we rate, nor have those companies participated in the development of our rating system.

      Science Diet has top-rated products in our pet food categories because our scoring system rewards products with a high Health score that are made by a company with high Environmental and Social scores. Other dog food products such as Purina Pro Plan Natural Chicken & Brown Rice Formula and Purina Pro Plan Natural Beef & Barley Formula and Eukanuba Large Breed Puppy also get top scores in health, but their manufacturers have lower environmental and/or social scores, which brings down their overall rating. Some manufacturers score higher than Science Diet on environmental or social impacts, but lower product-level health ratings bring down their overall score. For example, products from brands such as Acana and Newman's Own Organics receive top scores on Social criteria. Products from brands such as Evo, and Newman's Own Organics receive top scores on Environmental criteria.

      Note that if a user wants to select pet food products based on their Health ratings only, or pet food manufacturers based on Environment or Social ratings only, that can be done at http://www.goodguide.com/products/?fi.... If users sort products by Health, they will find out that there are numerous products scoring better than Science Diet: http://www.goodguide.com/products?cat.... If users sort by Environment or Social, they will see that there are over 200 products that score higher than Science Diet products: http://www.goodguide.com/products?cat...
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I wouldn't expect Goodguides to ever admit on their forum if they did have a relationship with Science Diet. The fact that every single one of their brands is in the top spot speaks for itself, the fact remains that veterinarians are divided on the issue and I know of not one that has recommended this brand of food since more has been revealed on the type of ingredients used in food, that anyone could suggest that the ingredient list on a food is irrelevant to the food's overall quality is the most ludicrous thing I have heard. The ingredients determine what is in a food, a human is an animal just like a dog, granted nutritional needs are different, that's a given, but food is food, and an inferior product is an inferior product, the people on this site agree as is evidenced by how many recommend that readers avoid Science Diet before I even made my post.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m frustrated
    I'm not quite sure how you rate pet food, but your site rated many Science Diet brands as the best which if you knew what their ingredients meant for a dog's health, all their brands would be ranked the lowest. For example, the highest ranked food lists "chicken by-product" as a desirable ingredient. This ingredient is all the parts of a chicken a human or other animal wouldn't eat such as ground up bills and feet. This food also contains a high level of wheat, corn and soy which are allergens known to make numerous dogs ill and are used as fillers in food in the place of good high quality protein sources. Your site should strongly consider revising this section in keeping with current literature on pet foods and healthy ingredients before someone takes your website's recommendations for pet food and winds up with a sick pet and your site with a lawsuit. Many of your top brands have been in litigation for class action suits regarding their food, consider an overhaul on this section asap.

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
    How are you ranking your pet foods??????.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m sad
    For such a wonderful service to the consumers you have really let the ball drop for our pets. Your ratings on dry food for dogs is so medevil that I needed to give you 5 wet noodles. You say there is no guidelines but if you listen to your pets thats all you need. Read the ingredients on that bag of science diet......barleyed rice..this is all the stuff leftover from human processed foods that then formed to look like rice. Grains dogs are carnivores not cows. Poultry-by-products...this is becks feathers and such. The best dog foods out there are not even on your list. Blue Bufflo, halo, avoderm. Your researches are terrible ignorant about this field. I haven't even gotten to what a disservice you done to our felines. PLEASE learn more about this field before reporting on this again. PLEASE

    This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled
    Please stop poisioning our animals.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • 2
    No question that GoodGuide has serious credibility issues here. Their own webpage on pet food ratings state that their most important criteria is that it meets AAFCO standards. What does that mean?

    "The protocol requires that 6 out of 8 animals complete a 26 week feeding trial without showing clinical or pathological signs of nutritional deficiency or excess."

    This means that 2 out of 8 animals eating the food (25%) can become ill while eating the food over 26 weeks and the food still gets the "Complete and Balanced" label approved by the AAFCO.

    Is that really the standard GoodGuide is lowering itself to?

    In spite of what the GoodGuide page says, AAFCO is not a regulatory body, the USDA, FDA and FTC regulate pet food in the United States.

    Even though cats are obligate carnivores, GoodGuide lists things like Whole Grain Corn and Wheat Gluten as desirable ingredients for cat food.

    No wonder why foods like Science Diet end up at the top.. even though people who have done the research know that foods like Wellness, Royal Canin or Avoderm are actually healthier for their pets.

    Isn't the idea that GoodGuide does the research so that the consumer doesn't have to? Doesn't look like that's happening here. I wouldn't trust these ratings at all.. and in my mind it brings into question ratings for other products I haven't done the research on.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly indifferent, undecided, unconcerned happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated