Sounds crazy, but on human food, they have to list all the ing. as well as RDAs of half a million things--sat. fat, unsat fat, cholesterol, fiber--soluble/insoluble, protein (sometimes quality of protein,) percent of vitamins, carbs--fast and slow, etc, even organic/non-organic. Even dog and cat foods are starting to follow the trends.
You'd just think with so many people spending so much on their fish the food industry would wake up to conscientious consumers and instead of just saying, "Here's bottom-feeder food" or "tropical flakes," things like that, different species at different life stages could be addressed more personally. For instance, different fish are prone to recurrent health problems like weight gain, constipation, fin diseases (you'd think healing oils like A and E, plus L-lysine and better proteins could help re-build skin.) Even aging fish have a little different needs than conditioning diets for young ones (probably to account for slowing metabolisms and thinning bones.) But most everything out there's just so generic--min. crude protein, moisture analysis, etc... If we could feed them consistently better diets, knowing their predispositions and managing them lifelong, might fish live longer, healthier lives?
Are there some companies already doing this better than others
We have fish who can outlive dogs, it'd be nice if they had the same nutritional opportunities.
Or am I off my rocker?