Stan C,
Thanks for your suggestion. Like every nomination we get here and by way of our special “Suggest a Dog Food” form found in the footer of every page on this website, we consider every suggestion that QUALIFIES for our ultra-select Editor’s Choice recommendation.
In addition, the company must also (at the very least) meet our minimal requirements to be reviewed on our website.
Please check the 2 links I have included in this particular comment. And you should be able to see why the brand you suggested doesn’t meet minimal criteria to even be reviewed on our website.
For example, we’re unable to find a single food product anywhere on the Soul’y website that shares critical and standardized FDA-compliant label information. Most notably, there appear to be no Statements of Nutritional Adequacy Statements. And no other assurances from the company that any of these foods are “complete and balanced” for a specific AAFCO nutrient profile.
By the way, in general, raw dog foods are notorious for not providing full and complete FDA compliant label information — or making any effort to meet AAFCO nutrient profiles. In fact, many of these foods are simply not complete and balanced.
In addition, like many other raw dog foods, the Soul’y products have only limited regional distribution. So, they would only be available to very few of our readers and members.
Lastly, because we receive more than 100 review suggestions in an average week, our small team does not allow us enough resources to reply to every recommendation.
With our Editor’s Choice nominations, each suggestion could have its own reasons that it fails to meet our guidelines (as detailed in the links above). With over 1,000 suggestions in this thread alone, it would be impossible for us to provide a detailed reply to each comment we get.
In any case, even though we do not have the resources to provide a detailed response, please be assured we frequently scan these suggestions for new ideas.
Thanks for taking the time to make this suggestion.
