This bag of Pedigree dog food has an image of a grilled steak on the label, but it contains no steak ingredient. Instead the Pedigree dog food contains the ingredient “meat and bone meal”.
If the Pedigree dog food contained the meat portrayed on the label, a one pound steak would cost $3.31 per pound ($331.00 per 100 pounds Choice Chuck).
But…instead of steak, this Pedigree dog food contains “meat and bone meal.” Per USDA pricing of meat and bone meal, 1 pound of this ingredient costs Pedigree $0.12 ($250.00 per ton).
The actual ingredient in the pet food (meat and bone meal) costs 2500% LESS than the ingredient portrayed on the label (steak).
We contacted Pedigree via their website contact form on 2/4/26, asking if their pet foods contained roasted chicken or grilled steak as label images portray. Pedigree did not respond to our questions.
Below are some other common pet food ingredient prices based on USDA data. These are bulk prices, and many are human edible grade (not feed grade).
| Ingredient | Price (Bulk) | Estimated Price per Pound |
| Corn | $4.20/bushel (approx. 56 lbs) | $0.07 |
| Soybeans | $10.30/bushel (approx. 60 lbs) | $0.17 |
| Soybean Meal | $300.00/ton | $0.15 |
| Wheat | $5.00/bushel (approx. 60 lbs) | $0.08 |
| Meat and Bone Meal | $250.00/ton | $0.12 |
| Rice (seconds or Brewers) | $16.00/100 pounds | $0.16 |
| Fat (White Grease, Yellow Grease, Tallow) | $0.40 | |
| Chicken (Backs and Necks Stripped – USDA inspected) | $0.07 | |
| Mechanically Separated Chicken (USDA inspected) | $0.24 |
With meat ingredients in pet food, existing regulations allow ingredients to be labeled as the whole meat when actually the product contains a lesser cut. As example “chicken”…
Pet food regulations allow for the ingredient name ‘chicken’ to be listed in the ingredient panel when the actual ingredient in the pet food is “chicken backs and necks stripped” costing only $0.07 per pound. Chicken backs and necks stripped means that the majority of the meat has been removed.
Pet food regulations also allow for the ingredient name ‘chicken’ to be listed in the ingredient panel when the actual ingredient in the pet food is mechanically separated chicken.
And, in either instance – regulatory authorities take no action against manufacturers that portray grilled chicken breasts on a pet food label when the pet food actually contains chicken backs and necks. Pet food manufacturers are allowed to mislead consumers with images that allude they are using a higher quality ingredient – such as chicken breast meat costing $1.19 per pound bulk USDA pricing, when the pet food actually contains chicken backs and necks stripped costing $0.07 per pound.
Don’t hesitate to ask your pet food manufacturer what cuts of meats are used in your pet’s food, and ask why they select that particular cut. As well, ask if ingredients are human grade/human edible or are feed grade.
Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
The 2026 List
Our trusted ‘list’ of pet foods. Click Here to learn more.
The 2025/26 Treat List
Susan’s List of trusted pet treat manufacturers. Click Here to learn more.
Association for Truth in Pet Food is a stakeholder organization representing pet food consumers at AAFCO and with FDA. Your membership helps representatives attend meetings and voice consumer concerns with regulatory authorities. Click Here to learn more.
Lynn Felici-Gallant
March 3, 2026 at 12:50 pm
Thank you for this! It helps explain to folks the reason using real, whole ingredients results in higher-priced food.
Sandy M.
March 3, 2026 at 2:17 pm
The government says Human food manufacturer’s have a regulation to list “mechanically separated chicken” so consumers can distinguish the paste-like product from traditionally deboned chicken.
But, when it comes to pet food, the government regulation is tossed to the wind and now suddenly the game is changed. Consumers have no right to an informed decision and are even miss-led by pictures. What an insulting double standard there is for pet owners!
The government uses our tax dollars not work for us but to work for corporations. We must inform ourselves. Thank you Susan for shedding light on this, reminding us of this double standard and for your “Trusted Lists” to help us make informed decisions.
Carol Chakeropulos
March 4, 2026 at 7:14 am
Thank you, Susan. I will gladly pay extra money for real food ingredients for my furbaby. I will continue feeding “Evermore” forever. But I had no idea that small a cost being paid by these companies… unacceptable pet food being produced… and it continues. Infuriating!
Again, thank you for all you do for us, Susan. Best wishes.
Suzanne Burleson
March 4, 2026 at 8:49 am
Many Thanks for all you do!! I feed a prepared raw I buy from small companies that I think and sure hope are honest. My dogs are thriving. I am a believer in raw! I also add various protein and mix it up all the time. As well as Goats Milk. No kibble for my 3. They are involved in Dog Sport activities. Hard to believe all the outright lying from the Dog Food industry. Legal does not mean MORAL!
Will Falconer, DVM
March 4, 2026 at 9:37 pm
Wow, they’re still allowing phony photo labels on pet food bags? Dr. Wysong sued several makers many years back over this very issue. Guessing that didn’t make an impact if your image is a current one.
This week’s Vital Animal News is slated to open with a vet “nutritionist” and her hesitancy re: fresh foods for pets. One of her points? Cost! I’ll be linking to this, Susan, excellent timing.
R.T
March 9, 2026 at 3:40 am
Can you provide a source for the pricing of which companies pay for their ingredients?
Just because something is allowed in law, does not mean it is practised – in fact I would be very surprised if it could be proven that any reputable pet food company was doing this practise. This alone cannot be proven via an ingredients list.
Susan Thixton
March 9, 2026 at 8:15 am
The source is linked in the post. We provided USDA pricing sheets for a recent week.