Claim check
Unbacked health claim
On pack: “Plus DHA to support cognitive development”
Unbacked health claim: in our view this is a structure-function claim a treat cannot substantiate, so Claim Honesty is penalized.
Blue Buffalo · Soft & training
BLUE Bits Tasty Chicken Training Treats
A named-meat soft training treat, but it adds cane sugar and makes a 'DHA for cognitive development' claim a 4-kcal bit cannot meaningfully support; transparent on calories, light on portion guidance.
Last reviewed June 2026DogsSoft & trainingPartially verified
Data status
Partially verified
Some primary-source fields are verified; unresolved fields remain visible. Last reviewed June 2026.
The five sub-scores
Treats rubricHow Blue Buffalo BLUE Bits Tasty Chicken Training Treats scores.
7.0
Ingredient ClarityCan a buyer see exactly what the treat is, in a form they can evaluate?
25%of rating
9.0
Caloric LoadIs the treat honest about calories and portionable, so it stays a snack not a meal?
20%of rating
4.0
Claim HonestyDo the on-pack claims hold up? Dental claims need a VOHC seal; health claims need evidence.
25%of rating
8.5
Brand TrustRecall and warning-letter history, manufacturing, and sourcing transparency.
20%of rating
8.0
ValueCost per treat relative to the category-type median.
10%of rating
The composite rating is the weighted average of these five sub-scores - each row’s share of the total is the percentage at right.
Brand trust
Recall and manufacturing record
- Recall (5 yr)
- None matched
- FDA warning letter
- None matched
- Jerky-illness investigation
- Not named
- Named cGMP / processor
- Not shown
- Sourcing transparency
- Not shown
Score math
How PetScored got there.
Expand for the rule-by-rule trail. Useful for checking the rubric; not required to make a buying decision.
Show the trail
Score math
How PetScored got there.
Expand for the rule-by-rule trail. Useful for checking the rubric; not required to make a buying decision.
Ingredient Clarity7.025% of total score
9 scoring rule(s)0 context item(s)
Ingredient Clarity is computed from a named animal base, a clean list, no artificial colors, preservative disclosure, and country of origin.
Ingredient Clarity baselineIngredient Clarity starts at 6.0 and adjusts for what the label shows, penalizing artificial colors and synthetic preservatives.
6.0 before disclosure adjustments+6.0BNamed animal source as the treat baseA named species (e.g. chicken breast, beef liver) as the base is clearer than 'animal' or 'meat'.
named species+2.0BShort, recognizable ingredient listA short list free of unnamed 'animal digest'/'meat by-product'/generic 'meat' and free of added sugar, syrup, or propylene glycol earns clarity credit.
vague, long, or sweetened0.0BCountry of origin / manufacture statedA stated country of origin (especially for jerky and imported chews) earns limited clarity credit.
stated+0.5CArtificial colors presentArtificial colors (Red 40, Yellow 5/6, Blue 2, caramel color, iron oxide, titanium dioxide) are penalized: they are appearance-only additives.
none0.0BSynthetic preservatives presentSynthetic preservatives (BHA, BHT, ethoxyquin) are penalized; a treat with no preservatives, or one naming a natural preservative, is not.
none, or natural named0.0BAdded sugar or propylene glycol presentAdded sugar or syrup, or propylene glycol, is penalized: it makes a snack more palatable without adding anything a treat needs (glycerin, a benign humectant, is not penalized).
added sugar/syrup or propylene glycol present-1.5BUnnamed by-product or corn/grain filler presentAn unnamed animal by-product meal, or a corn-gluten/ground-corn grain filler, is penalized: it is a cheap, low-transparency base (named meals like 'chicken meal', corn starch, and corn cob fiber are not penalized).
none0.0BThree or more junk additives stackedA treat that stacks three or more low-transparency additives (artificial color, synthetic preservative, added sugar or propylene glycol, and an unnamed by-product or corn filler) takes an extra penalty: the combination is junkier than the individual signals suggest, and keeps an additive-heavy treat from scoring well just because it makes no health claim.
fewer than three0.0BCaloric Load9.020% of total score
4 scoring rule(s)1 context item(s)
Caloric Load is computed from a calorie statement, a sane per-piece size, and portion guidance, with a cap when calories are undisclosed.
Caloric Load baselineCaloric Load starts at 5.0 and rewards disclosed, sane, portionable calories.
5.0 before calorie adjustments+5.0BCalorie content statedA calorie statement lets an owner keep treats under the common ~10%-of-daily-calories guideline.
4 kcal/piece+2.5ASane per-piece calorie sizeA single piece at the labeled serving is a reasonable share of the reference dog's daily calories.
reasonable share of daily calories+1.5BFeeding / portion guidance presentPortion guidance (treats per day by body weight, or 'feed as a treat, not a meal') earns credit.
none0.0BUndisclosed-calorie capWhen calories are not disclosed, Caloric Load is capped at 4.0 because portioning cannot be verified.
no capcontextAClaim Honesty4.025% of total score
7 scoring rule(s)0 context item(s)
Claim Honesty is computed from whether on-pack claims clear the bar that exists (VOHC for dental), with penalties for unbacked claims and undisclosed chew risk.
Claim Honesty baselineClaim Honesty starts at 6.0 and rewards claims that clear the bar that exists for them.
6.0 before claim adjustments+6.0BNo functional/health claim madeA plain treat that promises nothing has nothing to disprove and earns the honesty credit.
a claim is made0.0BDental claim backed by a VOHC sealA 'cleans teeth / controls plaque or tartar' claim earns credit only when the product carries the VOHC Seal of Acceptance.
not applicable0.0ADental claim WITHOUT a VOHC sealAn unbacked dental claim is penalized: the only credible consumer dental-efficacy signal is the VOHC seal.
not applicable0.0AUnbacked structure-function / health claimA health or structure-function claim a treat cannot support without evidence is penalized.
health claim a treat cannot support-2.0AMarketing language accurate, not health-implying'Natural', 'human-grade', 'grain-free', 'vet-recommended' and similar terms earn credit only when accurate and not used to imply a health benefit.
puffery or health-implying0.0CHard / rawhide chew risk undisclosedA hard chew (antler, hoof, cooked bone, nylon) or rawhide that does not disclose choking/blockage/digestibility risk is penalized. This is a population-level caution, not a verdict on an individual pet.
not applicable0.0BBrand Trust8.520% of total score
7 scoring rule(s)0 context item(s)
Brand Trust is computed from FDA/CVM recall and warning-letter history, named manufacturing, and sourcing transparency.
Brand Trust baselineBrand Trust starts at 6.0 and adjusts for recall history, manufacturing, and sourcing transparency.
6.0 before regulatory and manufacturing signals+6.0BNo FDA/CVM recall in 5 yearsA verified-clean five-year recall record earns credit (treats have an outsized recall history).
verified clean+1.5ANo Class I recall everA verified absence of any Class I recall earns credit.
verified+1.0ANamed manufacturing facility / single-ingredient processorA named cGMP facility, or a single-ingredient treat from a named processor, earns credit.
not named0.0BSourcing transparencyPublished country-of-origin sourcing for meat/jerky (and not a flagged jerky-origin risk) earns credit.
not published / flagged0.0BRecall in the past 5 yearsA recall in the past five years reduces Brand Trust when matched to the brand/manufacturer.
none matched0.0AClass I recall, warning letter, or jerky-illness investigationA Class I recall, an active FDA/CVM warning letter, or being named in the jerky-treat illness investigation is the heaviest Brand Trust penalty.
none0.0AValue8.010% of total score
1 scoring rule(s)1 context item(s)
Value is computed from cost per treat relative to the category-type median.
Cost per treatValue uses cost per treat, not cost per bag.
USD 0.05/piececontextCCost per treat vs category-type medianThe Value score is banded from cost per treat relative to the median for the treat type.
65% of soft-training median+8.0CSource record
Confidence is visible by design.
Ingredients, calories, VOHC status, and recall facts are researched and cited below; some prices are single-retailer captures and some piece counts are approximate (flagged on the Value panel). Fields we cannot fully verify are marked by source confidence rather than assumed.
- Captured
- June 8, 2026
- Confidence
- Partially verified
- Sources
- Blue Buffalo BLUE Bits Chicken label (4 kcal/bit, made in USA) captured June 8, 2026
no Blue Buffalo recall within 5 years (last 2017) captured June 8, 2026
Cub 11 oz price captured June 8, 2026
Same type
Other soft & training treats we scored
Related reading
How to read this kind of treat
This score is our opinion, formed by applying a published rubric to label data, the VOHC accepted-products list, and public source records - not a statement of objective fact and not veterinary advice. A treat is a snack, not a meal; keep treats to a small share of daily calories and supervise any chew. See the treats methodology and medical disclaimer.