The human body can't synthesize itself, but must get it from the diet. Breast milk, fish, dried fruits and seaweed are its main sources. Thanks to years of publicity and education in the dairy industry, many domestic consumers, especially women who have given birth, are no strangers to the concept of DHA. The most commendable thing about deep-sea fish oil is its DHA content, so in essence, although the two products have different opinions, they are essentially the same. Conceptually, the author thinks that Arowana is better than Deep Sea Fish Blend Oil vs“DHA Grain Blend Oil. First, the concept of "deep sea fish oil" is easier to understand than "DHA". The author made a small-scale survey of heavy consumers of edible oil. Among the housewives interviewed, older women's awareness of DHA is significantly lower than that of younger women, and even some middle-aged and elderly women confuse DHA with DNA. In the cognition of DHA concept, many audiences will associate it with additives of infant milk powder, and then understand it as nutrition and high-tech content; The concept of "deep-sea fish oil" can easily remind you of supplements and nutrients sold in the domestic market for many years, giving people noble, rare and nutritious associations. One is the abbreviation of chemical terms, the concept is empty and abstract, and the other is the vivid image of rare creatures, which is obviously better than the former. Secondly, the concept of "deep sea fish oil" is broader than "DHA". It is also a product rich in DHA. It should be said that the cleverness of arowana lies in taking the plump body of DHA as the product name. Through the advertisement of Arowana, we know that Arowana deep-sea fish oil blending oil is rich in DHA+EPA+ALA and 3A+. Perhaps consumers can't tell what this string of "A" is, but the common sense of "more is better than less" tells us that Arowana contains more DHA, and "3A+" is better than a single "A", so Arowana is much broader in concept than Fulinmen. In addition, the word "fish" in "deep sea fish oil" is the same as the word "fish" in "arowana". Although this "fish" is not another "fish", they complement each other and inject new connotation into the brand. Third, the concept of "deep sea fish oil" is more differentiated than "DHA". Arowana is a concept marketing expert from EMKT.com.cn. In 2002, the second generation blended oil ushered in a brand-new era of edible oil. The essence of "1: 1: 1" may only be known by nutrition experts and insiders, but the propaganda slogan of arowana is deeply rooted in people's hearts. The deep-sea fish oil blended oil launched this time seems to have opened up a new market segment. While Fulinmen juxtaposes two unrelated concepts of "DHA" and "multi-grain", which is easily understood as adding DHA on the basis of grain blending oil, more like an upgraded version of its main product "grain blending oil". Content PK, data reveals reality. The fast-moving consumer goods market has never lacked conceptual hype. But if there is no good product support, even the best concept is just a castle in the air, and it will eventually disappear. Through the phenomenon to see the essence, with the help of two new bottle labels and promotional materials, Arowana and Fulinmen, the products are further studied and compared. From the point of nutritional composition, there is little difference between them, and the ratio of saturated fat and unsaturated fat is slightly different. The above oil types, the oil types used and the proportion of blending are different, and it is difficult to distinguish them. It's just that there is some difference between the amount of oil and the DHA content of the main selling point. First, from the perspective of oil quantity, Arowana is richer than Fulinmen. Eight kinds of vegetable oils are blended, and the amount of multi-component blended oil of Fulinmen DHA grains is the same as that of Arowana's main product "One bottle to enjoy, eight kinds of nutrition", but the number of deep-sea fish oil blended oil of Arowana listed later is as high as ten kinds! I don't know if Arowana "accidentally inserted the willow" or "deliberately". I wonder if those smart housewives who are "greedy for perfection" will find this subtle difference. Secondly, from the DHA content, Arowana far exceeds Fulinmen. Fulinmen marked the DHA content on the bottle back label as 160ppm (mg/kg), while Arowana advertised that its average DHA and EPA content was 4000ppm (fish oil products are limited by their own raw materials and inevitably contain associated EPA). Cunning arowana did not label the ratio of DHA to EPA truthfully, but according to the ratio of DHA to EPA of other fish oil products, its DHA content is about 1600ppm, almost ten times that of the former! Such a big disparity can not help but make people interested in this data. What does this content difference mean? According to IOM data cited in two promotional materials, the recommended daily intake of DHA is 65,438+0.60 mg. This data seems to be consistent with the DHA content of Fulinmen 160ppm, with different units of measurement, but the essence is quite different. The author calculated an account and supplemented daily DHA from DHA blended oil. Everyone needs to eat about 1000g of Fulinmen or 1000g of arowana every day, which greatly exceeds the 25g recommended by nutrition experts! Everything suddenly became clear, and I smiled with relief. After all, people