Author Topic: Rating algorithm overhaul - Have your say!  (Read 2599 times)

Meg

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Rating algorithm overhaul - Have your say!
« Reply #15 on: Dec 23, 2016, 20:59 »
"
I think a lot will have to depend on exactly how much the different preparation methods actually affect the nutrient levels. "
This comment made earler states how I feel too, how many nutrients remain or are destroyed during dog food preparation surely needs addressing as this positively or negatively impacts on the health and wellbeing, and behaviour of a dog.

We decide, do we eat some of our food (like salad) raw as it may not be as good in appearance (?) nor as healthy for us when cooked? Do we reheat our food to extreme temperatures and risk losing good nutrients? Do we prepare our foods to obtain the best possible nutrients our bodies crave for? Occasionally resorting to 'unhealthy' snacks.....

Some of these answers may seem obvious to us, yet maybe not so much when we are addressing these same questions regarding dog food.

Pegasus

  • Retailer
  • *
  • Posts: 102
    • View Profile
Re: Rating algorithm overhaul - Have your say!
« Reply #16 on: Dec 24, 2016, 11:24 »
I have found it invaluable to have the charts that you already have on the site David which show protein levels, fats, carbs for the various foods, and importantly these are also presented for wet foods, as though they are dry so to speak, allowing for a like to like comparison.
 I feel there could be even greater use of these charts by adding charts for different varieties of foods offered by a manufacturer. Not solely for the first food listed.
Also if these charts were promoted and given higher attention  on the website they would hopefully be used more and users wont rely mostly on food scores. Then if a dog is thriving on a certain food the user could look at the current levels of protein/fats/etc in the charts, and search for a similar food using the search nutrient tools  on the website.
Putting this more simply... I'd suggest emphasing the importance of the food charts for a thriving/healthy dog versus solely the scoring of a food.
This takes away a users need to change a food because the rating is not 'the best' it could be. Hope this makes sense

In my opinion, the analytical content (fats, protein,carbs) of the food is of the least importance in terms of determining how good a food is, it is more important where these are sourced ie the ingredients. In the past high protein content was thought of as being an indicator of a good food and manufacturers would use cheap fillers that contained high protein to give the appearance of a quality food. Modern emphasis in dog foods, is on the ingredients, with the level of  meat content and other ingredients being the indicators of what is a good or bad food. This site gives ratings on the ingredients not the analytical content ( although these are part of the ratings). for example - I can find you a food that has five star rating and another on a one star and with similar protein/fat/carbs analysis but that would not give an indication they were similar foods.

Dottie

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,064
    • View Profile
Re: Rating algorithm overhaul - Have your say!
« Reply #17 on: Dec 24, 2016, 14:55 »
I take your point about the analysis and the quality of the ingredients but I am sure that a lot of people find the dials useful, particularly if they have a dog with special needs.  Personally, I have found it invaluable in managing the diet of my dogs.  I think it is a case of looking at the ingredient list (and understanding it) first though. 
Your post and comments may be helpful to others. Please remember to update your thread. Feedback to the forum is appreciated.

Meg

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 55
    • View Profile
Re: Rating algorithm overhaul - Have your say!
« Reply #18 on: Dec 24, 2016, 15:25 »
"Also if these charts were promoted and given higher attention  on the website they would hopefully be used more and users won't rely mostly on food scores."

With hindsight my word "mostly" would be written in italic as that is what I'm trying to put across albeit, clumsily.
The charts on the website follow list of ingredients and an old boot could prop up the protein (and be somewhat disguised in the list), and this shows where scoring should not be dismissed.
Yet it is invaluable to have the charts - having had a dog with specific needs that relied on low protein, low ash, low fat, moderate fibre.
Perhaps David will further promote the charts as they may be a building block to coding for dogs with specific dietary needs for health reasons.