At this point most people already know (and some accept) that food dyes are bad for us. Some countries have even banned them from the foods they eat (although not us) and many choose their food after checking labels to avoid them. Manufacturers use them anyway because it makes the food look more appetizing, cereals and boxed macaroni and cheese are perfect examples. It makes sense that looking appetizing leads to sales and despite health risks, the bottom line is the profit. Healthier natural options for color are more costly and that cuts into that profit. Brands that do make that change use the “no food dyes” as a selling point.
What makes a lot less sense is how the consumer of pet food would ever decide they wanted to eat a food because of the added colors! Wouldn’t “No added food dyes” make the pet owners be more apt to purchase it the way parents choose the macaroni and cheese?
Your cat or dog doesn’t decide they like a food based on whether it contains red food dye number 40 or yellow number 5 but you as a parent knows it could lead to health issues that are costly both emotionally and financially. So maybe not choosing the ones that contain them can send a message. It is after all, the bottom line.
The Social-Commentary.Com 