Purina v Blue Buffalo update

A few years ago, I fell for the Blue Buffalo commercials the way we fall for those Disney movies that star a dog. BB knows how to manipulate pet owners' emotions, and who doesn't want the best for their kids? All three vets we've seen in the intervening years have had the same low opinion of BB that Dr Doug has. Our current vet is not even guarded with her contempt for the company's product and their marketing. Even the suggested servings of BB put weight on our small dogs and little guys really can't afford any extra pounds. The only dog we have now, Darcy, is on Royal Canin weight control and holding. so far, so good.

I have to admit that I was a supporter of BB, used it for quite some time, then we noticed that our Lab Lucy was losing her hair on each side of her rib cage and her beautiful coat was dull.
We took her for a check up and all was well there so we switched her to Purina Beyond, her coat is back and shinny as ever.
I don't know what is best for what dog but we have three pups that are doing very well right now on the Purina Beyond.
I'm sorry I had her on it so long....

Sher

rockhillmanor wrote:

I saw the inconsistencies first hand over the past year.
I grind down my BB dog food to a powder for the old timer. Which is one of the first steps when testing in labs.

I found a HUGE dependencies in the content of the food from bag to bag. Sometimes there were a high amount of fibrous material and bone chips other times not. And just the size and look of the kibble changed often as it was supplied by the various different manufacturer they were using.

They just purchased/built a $35 million dollar manufacturing plant. Let's hope that they will now have better control of the suppliers of their ingredients.

IMHO, if their claims can't be guaranteed for all but a small margin of error, then they are a company without scruples. It's great to say "our demand is so high that we've had to use additional suppliers", but they don't get off the hook for not meeting their OWN advertised standards because of it.

dturm wrote:
Quality byproducts ...... can provided needed nutrients and can be excellent sources of valuable nutrients.

and "byproducts" (offal) are what wild canines consume first and when consuming birds they consume feathers, skin, feet, bones, beaks, etc.
What many pet food companies advertise as the best meat sources (lean cuts of muscle meat) are the parts of the animals consumed last by wild canines when they hunt.

I am suspicious of all pet food/treat companies that name their stuff using colors. "Blue Buffalo", "Greenies", and "Red Bull" come to mind.

Wait . . . . . . maybe not "Red Bull". That would be the LAST thing Inga needs! :S

dturm wrote:
Sorry, Blue Buffalo has NO credibility in my book. It is a company built on advertising and profit and claims about nutrition are just without merit.

If you check their web site, they list all their top executives, board of directors and nowhere is a veterinary nutritionist.

Do they ever do food trials that are based on anything other than palatability as do many reputable food companies including Purina, Mars/P&G (Iams, Eukanuba), Hill's, Royal Canin?

Their whole schtick is that they provide a natural, holostic diet with things you'd eat with no "objectionable" ingredients. Their premise that byproducts and meat meal is objectionable is just false. Quality byproducts and meal (and even grains) can provided needed nutrients and can be excellent sources of valuable nutrients.

They got caught.

Doug, DVM

BB has never been a favorite among the truly geeky dog food crowd. There were too many things they wouldn't disclose. Of course all companies are going to keep some things private, but BB wouldn't disclose a lot of the fairly basic stuff that other pet food companies will usually readily tell when customer service is contacted. I think their appeal has been to the average pet owner who just wants to feed their dog something better but doesn't want to bother with any real research. Those people are sucked in by slick advrtising, and of course that covers a LOT of people.

Good for Purina. I hope Blue Buffalo gets hit by the media.

Sorry, Blue Buffalo has NO credibility in my book. It is a company built on advertising and profit and claims about nutrition are just without merit.

If you check their web site, they list all their top executives, board of directors and nowhere is a veterinary nutritionist.

Do they ever do food trials that are based on anything other than palatability as do many reputable food companies including Purina, Mars/P&G (Iams, Eukanuba), Hill's, Royal Canin?

Their whole schtick is that they provide a natural, holostic diet with things you'd eat with no "objectionable" ingredients. Their premise that byproducts and meat meal is objectionable is just false. Quality byproducts and meal (and even grains) can provided needed nutrients and can be excellent sources of valuable nutrients.

They got caught.

Doug, DVM

rockhillmanor wrote:
Can you imagine all companies having to test each and every supplier ingredient shipped in before using it?

Yes I can. Our company does that as part of normal quality control; we call it incoming material inspection.

In the first link Purine claims that there was evidence in the suppler documents submitted to the court by BB indicated the ingredients contained by-product meal.

“Blue Buffalo now claims it had no way of knowing the bags contained byproduct meal. A manufacturer is responsible for knowing what’s in its product, and a simple audit of its supply chain would have revealed what we discovered after reviewing the documentation,” Schopp said.

Supplier audit is also something our company does as part of our quality system.

Thanks for posting the updates.

NOT in defense of either company but this could happen to any of them regarding their "suppliers" of ingredients. Can you imagine all companies having to test each and every supplier ingredient shipped in before using it? Buying from only reputable suppliers is the answer to that.

Blue Buffalo has admitted that SEVERAL DIFFERENT companies have been manufacturing their dog food for them due to demand.
http://www.joplinglobe.com/news/article_bfde9e4c-288b-11e4-a86b-001a4bcf887a.html

IMHO, THAT is where they lost control of the quality of ingredients.

I saw the inconsistencies first hand over the past year.
I grind down my BB dog food to a powder for the old timer. Which is one of the first steps when testing in labs.

I found a HUGE dependencies in the content of the food from bag to bag. Sometimes there were a high amount of fibrous material and bone chips other times not. And just the size and look of the kibble changed often as it was supplied by the various different manufacturer they were using.

They just purchased/built a $35 million dollar manufacturing plant. Let's hope that they will now have better control of the suppliers of their ingredients.