Instead of Human Grade the Standard should be Dog Quality by Ann-Marie Fleming

24 January, 2009


Any dog owner has heard the phrase human grade to represent a higher standard for dog food. In other words, if it good enough for a human to eat then it must be safe for our dogs. I am not arguing this point...there should be a standard by which we equate our dogs health and safety to our own, but it has me thinking lately. Maybe instead of saying human grade we should be changing the perspective and describing top-tier dog products as being of dog quality. Yes I realize that dog quality is also the name of my business, but I picked it for the same reason I am writing about it.

A higher standard for dogs is not restricted to dog food and should be across all dog products. The coats they wear, the toys they chew, the dog strollers they ride in etc should all be held to a high standard to make sure it is... well ...of dog quality.

I guess part of my reasoning for not wanting to describe higher standards for dog products using 'human' is that I think dogs can stand on their own. What I mean is that dogs have unconditional love, they are loyal, they see the glass half full and live life to the fullest. Are we selling them short by not using the term dog as the standard by which all is compared?

I just thought I'd share my abstract thoughts...dogs are great, people at times disappoint so why do we use humans as a standard for higher quality? I for one may start using dog quality for anything I think raises the bar. :) 

« previous post   |   next post »

We accept these payment methods:

Mastercard Paypal Visa