Petfood Industry - April 2018 - 57
www.PetfoodIndustry.com | 57
for which it is formulated. A unique graphic also has been
existing Food and Drug Administration regulations. For
developed for treats, nutritional supplements and other foods
example, one idea is to separate out the vitamins and
that are not intended to serve as the sole source of nutrition
minerals to better identify them as nutrients as opposed to
(e.g., toppers), although the proposed language for the graphic
scary "chemicals." However, that would seriously disrupt the
("supplemental feeding") was met with concern by some in the
order of predominance of ingredients as mandated by FDA.
audience. There would be a third graphic for products intended
Using more simplified but less accurate names of ingredifor use under veterinary supervision.
Exact appearance and placement of the
appropriate graphic on the principal display
he proposal is To reTain The currenT labeling
panel, as well as minimum size requirements
(depending on the area of the panel), would
requiremenTs in Terms of a nuTriTional
be specified in the regulations. In this way,
a consumer can easily identify the product's
adequacy sTaTemenT but to include mandatory
purpose upon casual review of the front panel
front-of-pack graphics as well.
as it appears on the shelf, instead of straining to
locate the nutritional adequacy statement on the
Ideas with respect to any prospective changes to feeding
directions are less developed at this juncture. In addition to
other thoughts as to how to improve the directions and for
which products feeding directions are needed, there is a concept
proposed to require a link to a non-commercial website to
provide more information on appropriate feeding practices (e.g.,
feeding based on body condition scoring).
This may be the most difficult aspect in which to initiate
changes, as any alteration may be in direct conflict with
ents for the sake of consumer understanding would also be
problematic. However, even labeling schemes as currently
allowed on human food labels (e.g., "contains one or more
of the following" declarations in the case of fat blends or
fish-based ingredients) has met with resistance from some
regulators. So, the extent to which changes will be made to
this aspect of the label remains to be seen.
Other items discussed include renaming some of the more
vilified ingredients, such as by-products. However, advances
in this area would appear to be more within the purview of
the Ingredient Definitions Committee than this group.
Visit us at
Industry April 2018