Feelwells Intestinal Tincture

Supplement complementary

This is a supplement, not a complete diet. The 1–100 rating applies to complete foods, so it isn't scored. Ingredient breakdown below.

Is Feelwells Intestinal Tincture a good dog food?

This is a supplement, not a complete diet, so it is not scored on our 1-100 scale. The ingredient breakdown below shows what is in it; a supplement should be fed alongside, not instead of, a complete diet.

How we score

100% of this recipe has no printed percentage. Estimated shares are model estimates, not label facts.

Recipe
Not applicable
Nutritional
Not applicable
Transparency
35
Safety
100
Evidencelimited
33

Complementary supplement for dogs of all life stages, with vinegar, hibiscus and thyme as the main ingredients.

Why you might choose it

Doesn't list grain ingredients.

Why you might not

A supplement, not a complete diet: feed as an extra, not the whole diet.
Around 28% of the recipe is generic or unspecified ingredients.
Meat makes up an estimated 0% of the dry matter; carbohydrates dominate.

View the source page

Estimated composition

veg43.8%

unknown31.9%

additive18.1%

supplement6.2%

Typical analysis (as fed)

No analysis recorded yet.

Additives & feeding info

No additives recorded yet.

Who is this food for?

Suits

Labelled by the manufacturer for all lifestages
Grain-free: no grain ingredients listed
Doesn't list chicken, beef, turkey, lamb, fish, venison, pork, duck as ingredients

These points are derived from declared ingredients and analysis, not a substitute for veterinary advice. If your dog has a diagnosed condition, food choice is a medical nutrition decision: speak to your vet. Use the homepage filter to find foods that fit your dog.

Ingredients (13)

#	As declared	Matched	Category	Tier	Declared %	Est. %
1	Organic Cider Vinegar	Vinegar	additive	poor	-	10.0
2	Hibiscus	Hibiscus	veg	good	-	9.6
3	Thyme	Thyme	veg	good	-	9.2
4	Ginger Root	Ginger	veg	good	-	8.8
5	Cloves	Cloves	veg	good	-	8.5
6	natural salts	Salt	additive	poor	-	8.1
7	organic Bitter Apple	Apples	veg	good	-	7.7
8	Filix-mas 12x	unmatched	-	-	-	7.3
9	Cina 12x	unmatched	-	-	-	6.9
10	Ferrum-met 12x	unmatched	-	-	-	6.5
11	Sulphur 30	Sulfur	supplement	medium	-	6.2
12	Abrotanium 12x	unmatched	-	-	-	5.8
13	Teucrium-mar 12x	unmatched	-	-	-	5.4

Brand

Website: https://feelwells.co.uk/
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 01609
Address: P O Box 174 Northallerton North Yorkshire DL7 7AB
Contact page: feelwells.co.uk

Trust and provenance

Recall history: No recalls recorded in our database
Label data last checked: 2026-09-15
Product page: feelwells.co.uk

Recall history is presentation-only and never affects the score. Dates are when we recorded the data, not when the manufacturer last changed the recipe.

Spotted a mistake in this listing? Report it here and we'll take a look.

Recipe: how the 1-100 score is calculated

Scored with model v2 on 2026-09-22. Each component is the feature value for this product multiplied by the model's published coefficient.

Component	Input	Coefficient	Contribution
Base score	-	32.336	+32.34
Average ingredient quality	0.3	9.915	+2.85
Vegetable share of dry matter	34.0%	-0.002	-0.06
Additive share of dry matter	28.3%	0.177	+5.02
Supplement share of dry matter	9.9%	-0.009	-0.09
Unrecognised share of dry matter	27.8%	-0.022	-0.62
Recipe graded poor	18.1%	-0.045	-0.81
Number of poor ingredients	2	-0.868	-1.74
Largest single poor ingredient	10.0%	0.056	+0.56
Undeclared quantities	100.0%	-0.131	-13.09
Low meat (under 10% of dry matter)	yes	-1.988	-1.99
Additive penalty	-21.85	0.236	-5.15
Processing multiplier	1.00	32.336	+32.34

Show all 40 components

Component	Input	Coefficient	Contribution
Base score	-	32.336	+32.34
Average ingredient quality	0.3	9.915	+2.85
Meat share of dry matter	0.0%	0.116	+0.00
Carb share of dry matter	0.0%	-0.113	+0.00
Oil share of dry matter	0.0%	-0.088	+0.00
Vegetable share of dry matter	34.0%	-0.002	-0.06
Additive share of dry matter	28.3%	0.177	+5.02
Supplement share of dry matter	9.9%	-0.009	-0.09
Other share of dry matter	0.0%	-0.371	+0.00
Unrecognised share of dry matter	27.8%	-0.022	-0.62
Recipe graded poor	18.1%	-0.045	-0.81
Poor-quality meat in recipe	0.0%	-0.182	+0.00
Number of poor ingredients	2	-0.868	-1.74
Largest single poor ingredient	10.0%	0.056	+0.56
Undeclared quantities	100.0%	-0.131	-13.09
Prints ingredient percentages	no	3.194	+0.00
Complete diet	no	1.703	+0.00
Frozen or chilled fresh	no	11.440	+0.00
High meat (30%+ of dry matter)	no	-0.506	+0.00
Low meat (under 10% of dry matter)	yes	-1.988	-1.99
High carb and low meat	no	-1.250	+0.00
Meat share × printed percentages	0.0	-0.073	+0.00
Meat share × fresh	0.0	-0.339	+0.00
Fresh × high meat	0.0	16.475	+0.00
Additive penalty	-21.85	0.236	-5.15
Processing multiplier	1.00	32.336	+32.34
Processing: Raw	no	13.322	+0.00
Processing: Fresh Chilled	no	7.712	+0.00
Processing: Fresh Frozen	no	6.583	+0.00
Processing: Fresh Refrigerated	no	4.857	+0.00
Processing: Fresh Shelf	no	0.072	+0.00
Processing: Dry Freeze Dried	no	11.127	+0.00
Processing: Dry Air Dried	no	9.320	+0.00
Processing: Dry Cold Pressed	no	4.569	+0.00
Processing: Dry Baked	no	-2.321	+0.00
Processing: Dry Extruded	no	-6.996	+0.00
Processing: Dry Semi Moist	no	-6.833	+0.00
Processing: Dry Muesli	no	-10.711	+0.00
Processing: Wet Pate	no	2.935	+0.00
Processing: Wet Chunks	no	2.292	+0.00

Processing-type offset: +0.00
Subtotal: 49.6
Final score: 50/100

Contributions are rounded to two decimals, so they may not sum exactly to the subtotal. The full coefficient table is published on the methodology page.

This is not a complete diet, so the 1-100 rating does not apply to it. Read the recipe breakdown above as ingredient-quality context only.

Score history across model versions

The score shown above is always computed with the latest published model. Earlier scores are kept for the record and are never edited or deleted; a scoring change ships as a new model version with a public write-up on the methodology page.

Model	Score
v2	50/100	current
v1	49/100
v1.9	50/100

Nutritional: declared analysis vs reference ranges

Not applicable to complementary food. FEDIAF reference ranges apply to complete diets.

Transparency: what the label discloses

How much the manufacturer discloses, measured against the FEDIAF Code of Good Labelling Practice and Regulation 767/2009. Mandatory items dominate the weighting.

Item	Points
✓ Ingredient list on the label (mandatory)	10/10
✗ Printed percentages on the label (voluntary) - not on file	0/20
✗ Analytical constituents declared (mandatory) - not on file	0/15
✗ Additives declared (mandatory) - not on file	0/10
✗ Energy value declared (voluntary) - not on file	0/5
✓ Complete/complementary designation (mandatory)	5/5
✗ Feeding guidance given (mandatory) - not on file	0/10
✓ Manufacturer identity and address (mandatory)	10/10
✓ Country of manufacture stated (voluntary)	10/10
✗ Batch and date labelling (mandatory) - not on file	0/5

Capped at 60: mandatory items missing (Analytical constituents declared, Additives declared, Feeding guidance given, Batch and date labelling).

Safety: recall history

Recall and safety-notice history, time-decayed. This dimension is shown alongside the score and never feeds the headline number.

No recalls recorded in our database.

See all current recalls we track.

Evidence: what the brand claims, and what supports it

The marketing claims made on the pack and product page, and how much evidence sits behind them. We record the claims as stated; we do not assess whether they are true.

Claim	Type	Substantiation
tolerated by even the most sensitive animals (on page)	Functional	Manufacturer assertion
It will not adversely affect the protective natural gut flora. (on page)	Functional	Manufacturer assertion
made from 100% natural ingredients (on page)	Content	Manufacturer assertion