ASA ruling upheldNutripaw: A paid-for Facebook ad for a dog dental care product misleadingly and irresponsibly implied that dogs undergoing veterinary treatment had a high chance of dying, made medicinal claims for an unauthorised product, and made misleading efficacy claims. ASA ruling, August 2026
Nutripaw All-Itch & Immunity Treats
Treat · complementary
Our verdict
Is Nutripaw All-Itch & Immunity Treats a good dog food?
This is a treat, not a complete diet, so it is not scored on our 1-100 scale. The ingredient breakdown below shows what is in it; a treat should be fed alongside, not instead of, a complete diet.
Complementary semi-moist dry treats for dogs of all life stages, with potato starch, glycerine and gram flour as the main ingredients.
100% of this recipe has no printed percentage. Estimated shares are model estimates, not label facts.
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. Find foods that fit your dog.
What the label tells us
- The label lists 11 ingredients.
- Lists no artificial colours or preservatives.
- Prints no ingredient quantities.
Why is this treat not scored?
Our 1 to 100 rating applies to complete diets, so treats and complementary foods are presented as what the label tells us rather than a number that would invite comparison with complete meals.
What should I look for on a treat label?
A short ingredient list, named animal sources instead of generic terms, and no artificial colours or preservatives. Printed quantities are a good transparency signal, though few treat labels provide them.
These points are derived from the published ingredient list, not a rating.
Nutrition and feeding
Typical analysis (as fed)
No analysis recorded yet.
Additives & feeding info
Feeding and storage
Feeding guide
Under 11Kg - 1 chew/day; 11-23Kg - 2 chews/day; 23-35Kg - 3 chews/day; 35-45Kg - 4 chews/day; Over 45Kg - 5 chews/day. 120 chews per tub. Safe to double recommended serving. Suitable for puppies 12 weeks or older.
No additives recorded yet.
Ingredients (11)100% of the recipe is estimated
Estimated composition
- carb 47.1%
- supplement 16.6%
- other 11.2%
- oil 9.1%
- veg 8.6%
- additive 7.5%
| # | As declared | Matched | Label reading | Declared % | Est. % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Potato Starch | Potato starch | carb · poor | - | 11.8 |
| 2 | Glycerine | Glycerine | other · medium | - | 11.2 |
| 3 | Garbanzo Flour | Gram flour | carb · good | - | 10.7 |
| 4 | Pea Flour | Pea flour | carb · medium | - | 10.2 |
| 5 | Saccharomyces cerevisiae | Brewer's Yeast | supplement · good | - | 9.6 |
| 6 | Flax Seed Oil | Linseed oil | oil · good | - | 9.1 |
| 7 | Flax Seed | Linseed | veg · good | - | 8.6 |
| 8 | Tapioca Starch | Tapioca Starch | carb · medium | - | 8.0 |
| 9 | Magnesium Stearate | Magnesium stearate | additive · poor | - | 7.5 |
| 10 | Sunflower Lecithin | Lecithin | supplement · good | - | 7.0 |
| 11 | Coconut Flour | Coconut Flour | carb · medium | - | 6.4 |
- 1. Potato Starch11.8% estimated
- 2. Glycerine11.2% estimated
- 3. Garbanzo Flour10.7% estimated
- 4. Pea Flour10.2% estimated
- 5. Saccharomyces cerevisiae9.6% estimated
- 6. Flax Seed Oil9.1% estimated
- 7. Flax Seed8.6% estimated
- 8. Tapioca Starch8.0% estimated
- 9. Magnesium Stearate7.5% estimated
- 10. Sunflower Lecithin7.0% estimated
- 11. Coconut Flour6.4% estimated
Trust and sourceNo recalls recorded in our database · checked 2026-10-06
Brand and contact: Nutripaw
- Website
- https://nutri-paw.com/
Trust and provenance
- Recall history
- No recalls recorded in our database
- Label data last checked
- 2026-10-06
- Product page
- nutri-paw.com
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.
Brand and retailer reviews
External platform ratings are not scores for this individual recipe.
15,000 reviews on this product · 4.9/5
Spotted a mistake in this listing? Report it here and we'll take a look.
Score details and methodologyCalculations, history and evidence
Recipe: how the 1-100 score is calculated
Scored with model v3 on 2026-10-25. Each component is the feature value for this product multiplied by the model's published coefficient.
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.7 | 9.191 | +6.50 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 40.0% | -0.115 | -4.60 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 12.2% | -0.092 | -1.12 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 10.4% | -0.005 | -0.05 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 9.1% | 0.163 | +1.49 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 20.7% | -0.012 | -0.25 |
| Other share of dry matter | 7.6% | -0.375 | -2.85 |
| Recipe graded poor | 19.3% | -0.065 | -1.25 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 11.8% | 0.060 | +0.71 |
| Undeclared quantities | 100.0% | -0.106 | -10.56 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| Additive penalty | -8.98 | 0.222 | -1.99 |
| Processing multiplier | 0.97 | 33.786 | +32.77 |
| Processing: Dry Semi Moist | yes | -6.174 | -6.17 |
Show all 40 components
| Component | Input | Coefficient | Contribution |
|---|---|---|---|
| Base score | - | 30.909 | +30.91 |
| Average ingredient quality | 0.7 | 9.191 | +6.50 |
| Meat share of dry matter | 0.0% | 0.096 | +0.00 |
| Carb share of dry matter | 40.0% | -0.115 | -4.60 |
| Oil share of dry matter | 12.2% | -0.092 | -1.12 |
| Vegetable share of dry matter | 10.4% | -0.005 | -0.05 |
| Additive share of dry matter | 9.1% | 0.163 | +1.49 |
| Supplement share of dry matter | 20.7% | -0.012 | -0.25 |
| Other share of dry matter | 7.6% | -0.375 | -2.85 |
| Unrecognised share of dry matter | 0.0% | -0.027 | +0.00 |
| Recipe graded poor | 19.3% | -0.065 | -1.25 |
| Poor-quality meat in recipe | 0.0% | -0.179 | +0.00 |
| Number of poor ingredients | 2 | -0.876 | -1.75 |
| Largest single poor ingredient | 11.8% | 0.060 | +0.71 |
| Undeclared quantities | 100.0% | -0.106 | -10.56 |
| Prints ingredient percentages | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Complete diet | no | 2.294 | +0.00 |
| Frozen or chilled fresh | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| High meat (30%+ of dry matter) | no | 0.707 | +0.00 |
| Low meat (under 10% of dry matter) | yes | -3.158 | -3.16 |
| High carb and low meat | no | -1.180 | +0.00 |
| Meat share × printed percentages | 0.0 | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Meat share × fresh | 0.0 | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Fresh × high meat | 0.0 | 11.084 | +0.00 |
| Additive penalty | -8.98 | 0.222 | -1.99 |
| Processing multiplier | 0.97 | 33.786 | +32.77 |
| Processing: Raw | no | -0.054 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Chilled | no | -2.354 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Frozen | no | -2.354 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Refrigerated | no | 0.000 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Fresh Shelf | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Freeze Dried | no | 6.629 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Air Dried | no | 6.331 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Cold Pressed | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Baked | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Extruded | no | -6.713 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Dry Semi Moist | yes | -6.174 | -6.17 |
| Processing: Dry Muesli | no | -10.146 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Wet Pate | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
| Processing: Wet Chunks | no | -0.672 | +0.00 |
- Processing-type offset
- -0.05
- Subtotal
- 38.6
- Final score
- 39/100
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.
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) | 10/10 |
| Manufacturer identity and address (mandatory) | 5/10 |
| 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, 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 claims made on the pack and product page, checked against the declared label. We record claims as stated; "consistent" means our stored label data supports the claim, "contradicted" means it conflicts with it. Functional claims are recorded but never scored.
50/100 · limited — 2 checkable claims: 2 consistent, 0 contradicted.
Consistent with the label
- "Grain & Chicken Free" — supported by the declared grain-free data.
- "Made in UK / EU" — supported by the declared made in the UK data.
10 further claims on file that we cannot check against the label.
Capped by an upheld ASA ruling from the last 3 years: view ruling
Limited: at least one claim contradicts the declared label, or a recent upheld ASA ruling applies.
| Claim | Type | Check | Substantiation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vet-approved, natural ingredients that support skin comfort and help manage itching, irritation, and behaviours like scratching, licking, and chewing. (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Aid gut health and support the immune system to help with itchiness and sensitive skin. (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Calms Itching In 60 Days (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Grain & Chicken Free (on page) | Free-from | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| Made in UK / EU (on page) | Content | consistent | Manufacturer assertion |
| No corn, no soya, no preservatives, no wheat, No GMO (on page) | Free-from | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| With fresh salmon oil (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 3-Strain Probiotics Blend (on page) | Content | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 95% of customers love results after 90 days (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Rich in Omega-3s to calm itchiness and give a shiny coat (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| Natural & Vet Formulated (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
| 365-Day Money-Back Guarantee (on page) | Functional | not checkable | Manufacturer assertion |
The full scoring method is published. See the methodology for exactly how the headline score and each dimension are calculated.
Community0 comments
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share how this went down with your dog.