DO REVIEWS, RANKINGS, AND PLEDGES IDENTIFY THE BEST PET FOODS?

The Internet has exciting potential for erasing barriers of ignorance and prejudice and bringing the world together. A universe of information is available with a click and people around the globe can communicate instantaneously. This technology is truly staggering in its potential for good.

Although the Internet opens a world of knowledge and facts to the public, it also is a platform for every sort of half truth, lie, mythology, yarn, and quackery. Anyone can come out of the woodwork, claim special knowledge, and put themselves forth as an authority. Surfers must be wary and discerning. The best way to do that is to be skeptical of any claim, check the credentials and bias of the source, and do your research on the facts.

I bring this to your attention because the pet food arena is chocked full of self proclaimed experts. A favorite format is to dream up a list of good and bad pet food features and then rank products accordingly in a chart.

Consumers understandably seek fair and impartial evaluations of products. However, anyone, irrespective of their qualifications, can post an opinion or even create a review website with themselves as the "expert."

Printed words and polished websites create credibility where there may not be any whatsoever. For example, the opinion of someone who owns a website but has never been on a cruise ship or to its destinations should not be relied upon to advise you on your trip.

Likewise, someone with no education or experience in the technologies important to commercial pet food production (which does not equate to simply having fed pets or being able to read a label) should not be relied upon to choose a pet food.

More important than the competency of product critics are the criteria used. Using automobile paint color to rate horsepower is absurd. Likewise, fad criteria that can have nothing to do with pet health—such as grain free, ingredient order, no corn, no wheat, no by-products, human grade, complete and balanced, etc., as noted in these articles— but simply embrace urban legends (having no empirical or scientific backing) are likewise absurd.

Only when the criteria being used to rate pet foods are properly evaluated can the value of the site intended to rank pet foods be determined.

With these thoughts in mind, evaluate pet food reviewers and rankers based upon their competency and experience in nutrition, biochemistry, health sciences, epigenetics, nutrigenomics, toxicology, nutraceuticals, food chemistry, processing technology, and the criteria they use to measure pet foods.

Proper criteria to determine the healthiness of pet foods can be found here. A closer examination of dozens of advisor, review, and ranking sites-and some wars we have had with them-can be found here.

Video: Cat stage show

A French stage show featuring some very talented cats...

Thought for the day: Everything self appointed pet food rankers have to say is fully substantiated by their opinion.

Word for the day: metabolic - adjective: relating to metabolism, the whole range of biochemical processes that occur within us (or any living organism). Metabolism consists of anabolism (the buildup of substances) and catabolism (the breakdown of substances). It is a complicated interrelated process only beginning to be understood. It deserves our respect if we want health, not its mindless manipulation with pharmaceuticals or its assault with improper food and living habits...which can only lead to disease.