There is potential to save a ton of money in vet bills via early warning of potential disease in pets[1]. Activity and food intake information is enough for many. Adding some sort of food logging component could make it really powerful. I also wonder if the USP for the product should shift to the savings in vet bills or the extension of life.
[1] Obviously the response cannot be to go to the vet for each alert, but instead to take some action at home.
Adding some sort of food logging component could make it really powerful.
If you are not already aware of your dog's food intake there is already a big problem and a pretty good chance that you are a disinterested owner. Dogs should be fed a certain amount of food each day. The dog's food bowl is not an all fido can eat buffet that is constantly refilled.
I also wonder if the USP for the product should shift to the savings in vet bills or the extension of life.
It seems that before the USP shift you would need some actual research and judging from the answer to "What research supports Whistle's approach?" there is no research to support this proposition.
There are two schools of thought out there. And I think it boils down to your specific dog. My dog used to get enough of a workout that I could leave her with a free feeding bowl. She was at a GREAT weight. Then she had a knee injury and she started gaining weight. Since then I've switched to timed feedings.
"Whistle is supported by veterinary research around activity and behavior as a measure of pet health from leading academic institutions such as the University of California at Davis, North Carolina State University, and the University of Pennsylvania. We work closely with the veterinary community to bring new data to this research across a much broader population of dogs."
I have never heard a vet, breeder or trainer recommend free feeding a dog.
Also from their site? That is not an "also" that is what I was referring to. You read that paragraph and concluded there must be research supporting this? When I read that paragraph the first thing that I was "where are the citations?"
I would probably skim the citations to see if there was anything interesting in them and or any insight into optimal use of the data. But mainly the big thing with the citations is that the citations would back up the claim that the product was supported by research. Right now its just ad copy...
Yeah citations would make this more reputable, and as it stands it's just a claim. But I prefer to trust that they have done some studies on this topic. I'll verify it later, but trust for now. Also, I can't imagine a vet saying that this kind of data on a dog would be "bad" in any way. And it's usefulness will be found through time and trials. Just as most studies are backed after peer review and being open to the test of time.
[1] Obviously the response cannot be to go to the vet for each alert, but instead to take some action at home.