Updated Government guidance puts pet food claims under the spotlight
Just days after we launched the Pet Food Standards Charter, updated Government guidance has turned the spotlight on claims made about animal feeds and supplements, and the evidence used to support them.
On 25 September, the Veterinary Medicines Directorate (VMD) substantially updated its guidance on advertising non-medicinal veterinary products, following a review specifically of the rules for feed products.
Where the line is drawn
The guidance draws an important distinction between:
- claims that a feed or supplement helps maintain health in a healthy animal
- claims that a product can restore, correct or modify physiological functions through pharmacological, immunological or metabolic action, which may bring it within veterinary medicines legislation
- It also makes clear that feeds must not be presented as having antibiotic, antifungal, antiviral, antibacterial or antiparasitic effects.
- Any evidence published to support a feed-product claim must not itself present the product as having medicinal properties.
- Calling a product herbal, natural or nutraceutical makes no difference. The VMD states that these descriptions provide no exemption from medicines legislation where medicinal claims or functions are involved.
Why this matters for the Charter
The development is particularly relevant to Principle 6 of our Pet Food Standards Charter: Evidence Behind Claims.
The Charter calls for objective nutritional and health-related claims about commercially manufactured pet food to be supported by appropriate evidence, with that evidence made readily accessible to consumers.
We believe pet owners should be able to see whether a claim rests on research into the finished product itself, studies of individual ingredients, wider published literature or evidence generated by the manufacturer.
The new VMD guidance does not introduce that transparency requirement, and the VMD does not regulate non-medicinal feed products themselves. But by clarifying the boundaries around feed claims, it sharpens the question at the heart of our Charter:
If a company makes an objective claim about what a food or supplement does, how easily can the person buying it see the evidence behind that claim?
More than 6,600 signatures in a week
The timing comes as support for the Charter has grown extraordinarily quickly.
More than 6,700 people have signed the petition in its first week.
Thank you to every single person who has signed, shared or talked about the Charter. Your support is helping show that pet owners want greater transparency, stronger safeguards and information they can genuinely use when deciding what to feed their animals.
What happens next
This is only the beginning. We will continue examining each of the Charter's six principles, gathering evidence and taking the campaign to the organisations and decision-makers with the power to improve standards.
In the meantime, please share the petition with one more pet owner. Every new signature strengthens the case that these questions deserve serious attention.
Read more
VMD guidance: Advertising non-medicinal veterinary products