By Marie-Sophie Germain

As a journalist, author, and lifelong small pet owner, I’ve spent decades immersed in the world of rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, and other tiny companions. My websites, built from years of research and hands-on experience, reflect my expertise in their care. Yet, I’m constantly troubled by a dilemma: why do reputable pet product companies—ones we trust—continue to market products that are clearly harmful to small pets, despite widespread knowledge about what these animals need? From grain-heavy treats to flimsy tunnels, these products prioritize flash over function, and I suspect the companies know better. Below, I share my perspective as an expert and pet owner, exploring why this happens and why it persists.

The Problem: Harmful Products in Shiny Packages

The small pet industry is flooded with products that sound great on paper but fail our animals in practice. Below is a list of examples of harmful small pet products still sold by reputable brands, focusing on items like treats, bedding, toys, and other supplies that can pose risks to small pets such as rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, and similar animals. These examples reflect products that are marketed despite known issues, as discussed in the context of your dilemma about brands prioritizing profit or appeal over pet safety. I’ve included specific concerns for each product type, based on widely accepted small pet care standards and veterinary insights, without fabricating personal anecdotes or exaggerating impact.

Examples of Harmful Small Pet Products Sold by Reputable Brands

Muesli Mix Food for Herbivores

• Issue: Muesli-style mixes with grains, seeds, dried fruits, or colorful pellets encourage selective feeding, where pets eat high-starch or sugary bits and ignore fiber-rich components. This can lead to nutritional imbalances, obesity, dental issues, or digestive problems. Uniform pellets are recommended for consistent nutrition.
• Why Sold: Muesli mixes are visually appealing, mimicking human cereal, and are cheaper than high-fiber pellets. Despite veterinary warnings about selective feeding, brands continue due to consumer preference for “varied” diets and low production costs.

Grain-Based Treat Sticks for Herbivores

• Issue: Many treat sticks labeled as “healthy” or “natural” for rabbits and guinea pigs contain grains (corn, wheat, oats) or sugary additives like molasses. Strict herbivores have digestive systems designed for high-fiber, low-starch diets, and these ingredients can cause bloating, diarrhea, or gastrointestinal stasis, a potentially fatal condition.
• Why Sold: Grain-based treats are cheap to produce, have a long shelf life, and are visually appealing with colorful packaging that attracts buyers. Despite backlash from veterinarians and informed pet owners, brands continue selling them due to brand recognition and consumer demand for familiar products

Sticky Trap-Like Seed Bars for Hamsters or Gerbils

• Issue: Seed bars held together with sticky binders (e.g., honey or molasses) can adhere to small pets’ teeth or fur, causing dental damage, choking, or skin irritation. High sugar content also risks obesity or diabetes, especially in hamsters. Safer treats use natural, non-sticky binders.
• Why Sold: These bars are marketed as “natural” and “engaging,” with seeds that look wholesome. Cheap to produce and visually appealing, they remain popular despite risks, as companies capitalize on owners’ desire for interactive treats.

Yogurt Drops

• Issue: Yogurt drops are marketed as tasty treats but contain dairy, which small pets cannot digest, leading to digestive upset or diarrhea. Many also include high sugar content or artificial flavors, which can disrupt gut flora or contribute to obesity.
• Why Sold: These drops are inexpensive, have a nostalgic appeal (popular for decades), and are marketed as fun, bite-sized treats. Companies likely know dairy is inappropriate but continue due to consistent sales and lack of strict regulation

Brittle Plastic Tunnels, Toys and Houses

• Issue: Plastic tunnels or toys designed for little rodents often use low-quality, brittle materials that splinter when chewed, posing risks of mouth injuries or intestinal blockages if ingested. Some also have sharp edges or poor ventilation, increasing stress or injury risks.
• Why Sold: Brightly colored, modular tunnel systems are visually striking and marketed as “fun” habitats. They’re cheap to manufacture and appeal to owners looking for engaging setups, even if the materials compromise safety. Companies prioritize aesthetics and cost over durability despite known risks

Ball-Shaped Hay Racks

• Issue: Hay racks designed as wire or plastic balls, meant to hold hay for rabbits, guinea pigs, or hamsters, often have gaps where small pets can get stuck, risking injury or strangulation. Hamsters may try to climb or chew them, leading to broken teeth or trapped limbs. Safer designs use solid frames or wide openings.
• Why Sold: These racks are marketed as “interactive” and space-saving, with a playful, spherical design that appeals to owners. Cheap to produce, they remain on shelves despite reports of pets getting caught, as companies prioritize novelty over safety.

Undersized Rodent Wheels for Hamsters or Mice

• Issue: Wheels smaller than 8 inches (for dwarf hamsters) or 12 inches (for Syrian hamsters) force rodents to arch their backs unnaturally, causing spinal strain, discomfort, or long-term musculoskeletal issues. Mesh or barred wheels can also trap toes, leading to injuries. Solid, appropriately sized wheels are recommended.
• Why Sold: Small wheels are compact, cheap, and fit in budget cages, appealing to cost-conscious buyers. Bright colors and “fun” designs attract attention, and brands continue selling despite veterinary advice due to high demand for affordable accessories.

Artificial Dye-Coated Chew Toys

• Issue: Chew toys for small pets like rabbits or hamsters are sometimes coated with artificial dyes to make them visually appealing. These dyes serve no nutritional purpose and can cause digestive upset or allergic reactions. Some toys also use low-quality wood or adhesives that splinter or release toxins when chewed.
• Why Sold: Colorful toys stand out on shelves and attract buyers seeking “enriching” products. The dyes and cheap materials reduce production costs, and companies continue selling them despite owner complaints because they remain profitable and unregulated

High-Calcium Mineral Blocks for Rabbits and Guinea Pigs

• Issue: Mineral blocks marketed as “essential” for dental health or nutrition often contain high levels of calcium, which can contribute to bladder stones or urinary tract issues in rabbits and guinea pigs, especially when paired with calcium-rich diets. Veterinary consensus suggests these blocks are unnecessary for pets on balanced diets.
• Why Sold: Mineral blocks are inexpensive, have a long shelf life, and are marketed as a “complete” health solution. Their compact, colorful design appeals to owners, and brands continue offering them due to steady sales, despite warnings from exotic animal vets.

Pine and Cedar Shavings Bedding

• Issue: Softwood shavings like pine and cedar release volatile oils (phenols) that can irritate the respiratory systems of small pets, leading to chronic sneezing, wheezing, or even long-term lung damage. Veterinary research has long recommended paper-based or fleece bedding instead.
• Why Sold: Pine and cedar are cost-effective, widely available, and have a pleasant scent that appeals to humans. Despite community backlash and scientific evidence, brands maintain these products due to their low cost and entrenched market presence

Corn-Based Bedding or Litter

• Issue: Corn-based bedding or litter (e.g., corn cob) can mold when wet, posing a risk of mycotoxin exposure, which is linked to respiratory issues or cancer in small pets. It’s also less absorbent than paper or hemp and can be ingested, causing digestive blockages.
• Why Sold: Corn bedding is cheap, lightweight, and marketed as “natural.” Its granular texture appeals to owners seeking alternatives to shavings, and companies keep it on shelves due to low production costs and lack of regulatory pushback, despite known mold risks.

Why They Do It: Profit Over Pets

Why do companies push these products when we all know better? The answer lies in market dynamics. Bright, fun, and familiar products sell. Grain-based treats are cheap to produce and have a long shelf life, making them profitable. Funky tunnels in neon colors catch the eye of impulse buyers, even if they’re impractical. Companies lean into what’s well-known or visually appealing because it moves inventory, not because it’s good for pets. The pet industry isn’t always about animal welfare; it’s about margins.

I suspect these companies are fully aware of the backlash. Veterinary research, online forums, and vocal pet owners have made it clear what small pets need. Yet, reformulating treats to be fiber-rich or redesigning toys to be safe costs money and risks alienating customers who associate certain products with their brand. A company known for its colorful treat sticks might hesitate to pivot to hay-based alternatives, fearing a dip in recognition or sales. It’s easier to slap “natural” on a label and keep the status quo than to innovate responsibly.

The Backlash: Ignored but Persistent

The small pet community isn’t quiet. Owners share horror stories on social media—rabbits with upset stomachs, hamsters with chewed-up tunnels stuck in their cheeks, guinea pigs with bladder stones surgeries, etc. Experts like me write about proper nutrition and safe environments. Veterinarians warn against dusty bedding or sugary treats. This backlash isn’t new; it’s been loud for years. Yet, companies double down, releasing new flavors of the same bad treats or rebranding old products with fancier packaging.

Why ignore the criticism? Because they can. The pet market is vast, and not every owner is an expert. Many buy based on brand loyalty or what’s cheapest, unaware of the risks. Companies bank on this, knowing that backlash from informed owners is drowned out by casual buyers. They also hide behind vague claims like “vet-approved” or “industry standards,” which sound reassuring but often mean little. It’s frustrating to see brands I once respected play these games, knowing they could do better.

Moving Forward: A Call for Awareness

This dilemma isn’t going away. Companies will keep marketing harmful products because they’re profitable, familiar, and fun to look at, even if they know the risks. As an expert, I’m committed to cutting through the noise, offering clear, science-based advice to protect small pets. As a former owner of rabbits, guinea pigs, gerbils and hamsters, I was reminded daily that these animals deserve better. We all know what’s good for our pets now. It’s time for brands to catch up.

Image by Etouale from Pixabay