Compliance becomes a selling point for pet supplements, treats: full analysis

Regulatory compliance is emerging as a competitive differentiator for pet supplement and treat companies, according to a recent PetfoodIndustry report built around comments from Asa Waldstein, principal of Apex Compliance. His argument is straightforward: brands that address ingredient suitability, supplier controls, manufacturing quality, and marketing claims before launch are in a stronger position to grow than companies that treat compliance as a cleanup job after products hit the market. (petfoodindustry.com)

The timing reflects a more complicated regulatory environment for companion animal products. FDA regulates pet food as animal food under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, requiring products to be safe, produced under sanitary conditions, and truthfully labeled. At the same time, AAFCO’s model framework shapes how many states approach labeling and ingredient issues, and both FDA and AAFCO draw a hard line around disease claims: once a product is marketed to diagnose, cure, mitigate, treat, or prevent disease, it may be treated as a drug rather than a food or supplement. (fda.gov)

That distinction is especially important in pet supplements and treats, where companies often market products for calming, mobility, digestion, skin health, or immune support. Waldstein told PetfoodIndustry that many brands run into trouble through marketing rather than formulation alone, which is why he advocates formal review and approval processes for websites, social media, and other promotional content. He also highlighted a GMP mindset modeled on human dietary supplements, along with supplier qualification, batch oversight, and label-claim discipline, as a practical foundation for companies that want to scale responsibly. (petfoodindustry.com)

Recent enforcement activity helps explain why that message may resonate. FDA warning letters in 2025 cited animal-product companies over both manufacturing lapses and unlawful claims. In one case involving raw pet food, FDA cited a manufacturer for failures tied to contamination controls under animal food safety rules. In another, FDA warned HolistaPet that claims for CBD oils, treats, chews, and capsules for animals caused those products to be treated as unapproved new animal drugs. Those examples reinforce Waldstein’s point that even digital marketing language can create significant regulatory exposure. (fda.gov)

Industry groups are also trying to create clearer trust signals in a crowded market. NASC expanded its Quality Seal program to include pet treats in early 2026, aiming to address long-standing confusion around how treat products fit into existing compliance expectations. PetfoodIndustry also reported this week that manufacturers are navigating one of the category’s most complex regulatory periods, with added pressure from labeling, ingredient, and state-level enforcement differences. That broader backdrop suggests compliance is becoming not just a defensive measure, but a commercial one. (nasc.cc)

Why it matters: Veterinary professionals are often asked to weigh in on supplements and functional treats despite uneven evidence, inconsistent labeling, and aggressive marketing. If more companies build compliance systems upstream, clinics could see incremental improvement in product consistency, transparency, and claim discipline. That won’t solve the evidence gap on its own, but it may make it easier for veterinarians to identify products that have stronger manufacturing controls and fewer red flags for pet parents. (petfoodindustry.com)

It also matters because compliance failures can quickly become clinical trust problems. Contamination events, misleading disease claims, or ingredients that are acceptable in human products but unsafe for animals can all put patients at risk and complicate veterinarian-client conversations. Waldstein specifically flagged ingredients such as xylitol, high doses of vitamin D3, and alpha lipoic acid as examples that require animal-specific caution, underscoring the gap between human supplement practices and companion animal safety. (petfoodindustry.com)

What to watch: The next phase will likely center on whether companies adopt more formal claim-review systems, how widely NASC’s treat program is used, and whether FDA and state regulators continue to focus on online marketing and label claims as primary enforcement targets over the rest of 2026. (nasc.cc)