F.F.I.T. Testing Your Dog's Food: Beyond the Marketing Hype & Feeding For Health

Every single day we see dogs eating foods we’d never offer our own family - and worse, trusting marketing slogans over real nutritional sense.

That’s exactly why I developed the F.F.I.T. (First Five Ingredients Test) all the way back in 2010 when Augustine was a little puppy and I realised just how misled we can be when it comes to choosing what we feed our companions.

In those early days I didn’t have any experience behind me to evaluate the integrity and health of the foods that were recommended to me -  all I had was a desperate desire to help my dog thrive. What I learned then still holds true today: a dog’s food is either life-enhancing, or it is quietly setting the stage for chronic inflammation, immune imbalance, and disease.

This guide takes the original F.F.I.T. idea from 2010 and brings it into the modern era - with more context, more nuance, and better ways to interpret what should actually go into your dog’s bowl.

The concept is simple but powerful: look at the first five ingredients on a dog food label because they tell you what the food is mostly made of.

However, today’s understanding of canine nutrition also reminds us that ingredients alone are not enough. Quality, source, processing, and nutrient density matter just as much.

Establishing a Baseline: A Simple Reality Check

The purpose of this step is not to debate whether one ingredient is marginally better than another, nor to get caught up in technical arguments about processed versus fresh, or this carbohydrate versus that one. This step exists to establish a baseline understanding of whether a food is even remotely appropriate for a dog in the first place based on its first five ingredients.

At this stage, complexity is unnecessary. What matters is clarity.

A straightforward and surprisingly effective way to create that clarity is to look at the first five ingredients and assess them one by one using plain, everyday logic rather than marketing language.

How to Do the Baseline Check

Take the first ingredient listed and search for it twice.
First, search for “[ingredient] good for dogs.”
Then search for “[ingredient] bad for dogs.”

Example Result (ingredient 4): Cellulose

As an example of how this baseline process can quickly reveal important information, cellulose often stands out when it appears within the first five ingredients. A simple review shows that powdered cellulose is a purified plant fibre derived from processed plant material and used primarily as a bulk filler, contributing little in the way of meaningful nutrition for dogs. Its inclusion highlights a broader issue with many processed foods: within a fixed volume of food, space occupied by low-value fillers is space no longer available for quality proteins, beneficial fats, or nutrient-dense whole ingredients.

This concept is explored further in the article The Balanced Meal Myth, where we examine why foods labelled as “complete” or “balanced” can still fall short when ingredient quality and biological relevance are taken into account.

Repeat this process for each of the first five ingredients.

This exercise is not about finding a single definitive answer. It is about identifying patterns, recurring concerns, and consistent themes across multiple independent sources. Very quickly, you will start to see whether an ingredient is widely regarded as nutritionally useful, commonly described as a cheap filler, or frequently associated with digestive stress, inflammation, or poor tolerance in dogs.

When this process is repeated across all five ingredients, a broader picture begins to form. In many cases, it becomes obvious that a food is built primarily around low-cost carbohydrates, high-volume fillers, or ingredients included for manufacturing efficiency rather than biological value.

Equally, in fewer cases, you may find that the ingredients reflect a more thoughtful attempt to prioritise nutrient density and biological relevance.

This is not about perfection. It is about awareness.

Why This Step Matters in Processed Foods

This baseline assessment becomes especially important when evaluating processed foods, such as kibble or canned foods. With these products, there is an unavoidable limitation: only so many ingredients and nutrients can physically fit into one kilogram of food.

Every ingredient added comes at the expense of something else.

If a significant portion of that kilogram is made up of low-value starches or fillers, then there is inherently less space available for quality proteins, beneficial fats, and meaningful micronutrients. Over time, this trade-off has real consequences for health.

This is often the point where dog owners begin to question long-held assumptions about “balanced” or “complete” foods. Articles such as The Balanced Meal Myth and explore why these labels do not always reflect real-world outcomes, particularly in heavily processed foods.

Using This Step as a Filter, Not a Verdict

It is important to understand that this exercise is not intended to deliver a final judgement. It is a filter, not a conclusion. Its role is to help determine whether a food deserves closer examination or whether it is already falling short at a fundamental level.

If, after this process, concerns arise and the food in question is a processed diet, this is where deeper context becomes valuable. Understanding how processing affects nutrient integrity, why synthetic supplementation is often required, and how inflammation can quietly accumulate over time provides a much clearer picture. This is discussed at length in the article Inside the Mind of a Formulator: What Makes a Great Dog Supplement.

Passing a label check does not automatically equate to supporting long-term health.

The Core Principle to Keep in Mind

At the heart of this approach is a simple principle - If there are only so many ingredients that can fit into a kilogram of food, then those ingredients should be chosen with intent, biological relevance, and nutritional value in mind.

The goal is not to follow trends or marketing claims. The goal is to maximise your dog's diet to deliver the maximum amount of absorbable and assimilatable nutrients possible.

This baseline exercise is designed to help you take the first step toward doing exactly that.

Why the F.F.I.T. Alone Is Not Enough

The original F.F.I.T. was never intended to be the final authority. It was designed to start conversations and expose obvious red flags, not to evaluate the entire nutritional picture.

The test does not account for how the food was processed, including high-heat extrusion. It does not assess nutrient bioavailability, fat quality, protein integrity, or whether synthetic additives are being used to compensate for processing losses. It also does not reveal whether a diet may contribute to long-term inflammatory load.

It is entirely possible for a food to pass the first five ingredients test while still being heavily processed, heat-damaged, or overly reliant on cheap carbohydrates.

For a deeper discussion of this, you may wish to explore our blog section for related articles on processed foods, inflammation, and the limitations of conventional “balanced meal” messaging.

From Ingredients to Real Nutrition

Outdated thinking assumes that if ingredients sound good, the food must be good. Modern nutritional understanding tells us that this is not necessarily the case.

Many marketing terms sound reassuring but offer little real meaning. Words such as “balanced,” “natural,” “premium,” or even “human-grade” are often used without context or proof. These phrases can distract from more important questions about sourcing, processing, and biological appropriateness.

This is particularly relevant when it comes to synthetic supplementation in commercial foods. In many cases, heavily processed foods rely on isolated synthetic vitamins and minerals to replace nutrients lost during manufacturing. Whole-food nutrient complexes behave very differently in the body and are often better recognised and utilised.

Better Alternatives: Feeding With Purpose

When the F.F.I.T. Test raises concerns, there are practical, evidence-informed ways to improve a dog’s diet without chasing extremes.

A whole-food-centric approach prioritises identifiable foods such as quality meats, organs, and appropriate plant matter rather than anonymous meals and fillers.

Fats and proteins should be considered primary energy sources for dogs, not excessive starch. Canine metabolism is far better suited to deriving energy from fats and proteins than from large carbohydrate loads.

Thoughtful supplementation can play a supportive role when used to complement real food, not to mask deficiencies created by poor diet quality. Supplements should support normal biological processes rather than attempt to override them.

Final Thought: Becoming a Thinking Dog Carer

The F.F.I.T. Test was never meant to be a rigid rulebook. It is a starting point - a way to look past branding, packaging, and advertising claims and begin evaluating what is truly in your dog’s bowl.

Dogs do not benefit from marketing. They benefit from nutrition that respects their biology, supports immune resilience, and reduces unnecessary physiological stress over time.

When we feed with intention and understanding, we are not just choosing food. We are shaping health, comfort, and quality of life for the years ahead.