The Petsumer Report Blog is an interesting blog. Prior to reading I felt it would be a site to complain about the pet food recalls, but after reading the blog the author actually presents â€œdecentâ€ information about the pet food that has and has not been recalled. The author Susan Thixton appears to know what she is talking about, but I am hesitant to take her words as the bible for I could not find any academic or educational training or background that would make me believe her words. For instance, anyone who reads the law and stays current with the law can tell and state their opinion about it, but if the same individual did not go to law school and pass a bar exam then that person is not considered a lawyer. If the person who just reads the law practices, they are considered practicing without a license.
This blog claims to put forward the truth about pet food and how the companies create such food, but I as an individual pet owner feel that some of the things she says hold no merit, especially without credentials to back up her statements. She states much coincidental evidence towards why certain foods are good or bad for your pets. For instance, she discusses a specific chemical that is harmful to animals and â€œhas invoked cancerâ€ in some animals, and claims in a negative tone that it is acceptable for pet food manufacturers to use this product. She proceeds on stating how this chemical should not be used in the foods, but, correct me if I am wrong, there are numerous products that are approved for use in human food that cause the same effects by themselves or in high doses. I think that her blog could be better if she stepped back from the problem, and working through both the good and bad effects of the food she is reviewing. If you start with a bad opinion of a product, a bad opinion is what you have in the end.
The design of the site is very simple; it did take a little longer to load. The site is still too new to say too much about. It began in May of 2007 and has a total of 7 articles on the whole site. It has a simple orange and white background with red and black text. Each article is backed by a light shade of blue for easy distinguishing of what is the blog and what is extra. I feel the blog does have potential.
I would make the following recommendations. If Susan does have credentials to support analyzing chemistry or psychology, she should post her credentials to the site. She does state that she has created a video for how home owners can train their dogs. This does not make you a subject matter expert in how a dog thinks or how food is produced. The next thing is cite your sources better so that readers can hold the claims at a higher standard than just, â€œI said so!â€ If this is going to hit 20/20 or Good Morning America I feel these credentials need to be met. Plus it will make your argument stronger. Keep up the good work and continue on your quest to find out the truth. Just do me a favor and prove it rather than state a hypothesis with the appearance of truth.