pet connection

331 Comments »

1. China will not modify its behavior without the outside pressure of the US consumer.

   Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 8:37 am

2. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story.....-cfia.html

   It says that last July, the same Chinese company that supplied melamine-contaminated wheat gluten for pet food also shipped wheat gluten to a British Columbia feed mill, which turned it into food for fish farms that has since been consumed by people.

   But the CFIA said it believes the risk to people is low, even if the fish had been contaminated.

   Comment by Sue — April 28, 2007 @ 8:47 am

3. Steve, you sure china could “modify” its communism behavior with presure from u.s.consumer?
   naaaa..

   Comment by johnypaycut — April 28, 2007 @ 8:50 am

4. I just came back from the annual No Fleas Flea Market to benefit Good Mews, a no-kill cat shelter here in Atlanta.
   One of the items that I came home with is a platter that I bought to feed my cats their dry food on.
   I was taking the price tag off when I noticed the stamp on the bottom, it is made of melamine and is from China!!!
   That’s right, melamine is for feeding cats ‘on’ not for ‘in’ the cat food!!!
   Ironic!

   Comment by Alexis Mills — April 28, 2007 @ 8:53 am

5. Saturday news — Has THE cause been found?

   “Cyanuric acid, which was found in urine samples from animals that died, and melamine, a compound identified in the gluten found in the recalled pet food, react with one another to form crystals that may block kidney function, researchers at the University of Guelph said yesterday.”

   http://www.edmontonsun.com/New.....2-sun.html

   Comment by Christi — April 28, 2007 @ 8:58 am

6. Comment by Alexis Mills — April 28, 2007 @ 8:53 am

   Guess you might want to think twice about heating their food on it in the microwave. Think if you didn’t know what you know now. And how many others that don’t. What a world we live in.

   Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 9:03 am

7. The outside pressure of the US needs to be DON’T BUY CHINA’S FOOD EXPORTS. gAStly! the worst. See: http://www.fda.gov/ora/oasis/ora_oasis_ref.html

   Comment by Kat — April 28, 2007 @ 9:08 am

8. __________________________

   XIAOMING YANG, MD, PhD
   __________________________

   Yang received an appointment at the State of Washington University in the School of Medicine at the Dept. of Radiology in July 06. [See Page 13}

   http://www.washington.edu/rege.....ad/a-1.pdf.

   Had been at Johns Hopkins.

   http://cigi.rad.jhmi.edu/Xiaoming%20Yang.htm

   Curriculum Vita (9-24-04):

   http://cigi.rad.jhmi.edu/Yang%.....tion-2.htm

   Comment by Nadine Long — April 28, 2007 @ 9:11 am

9. The Chicago Tribune article that Gina quotes from in the intro to this thread is a good one. But again, why should anyone (who isn’t as educated as those reading this blog)pay attention when it repeats the FDA’s #s as “17 or 18” pets died.

   See the article: http://tinyurl.com/yt7auv

   Suggest that others write to the reporters (whose e-mail addresses are at the end of the article)and REQUEST A CORRECTION. It’s otherwise an important article and they should be commended for that, IMO. Here’s my e-mail to them. I include it here because it quotes the FDA at Friday’s press conference from their own website.

   to the Chicago Tribune reporters:

   I appreciate your article on what began as a pet food problem. It’s important that articles such as yours continue as we need to know that the FDA isn’t capable of even basic safeguards of the food supply, whether for humans or pets.

   I write this as I understand that the #s of pets reported as dead or ill is misleading and trivializes the problem. The safety of our food will not be taken seriously unless the magnitude of the damage we have recently discovered is correctly reported. That is not to say you should hypothesize, but the FDA is only considering those animals that died at Menu Foods when originally testing the foods — so “17 or 18” is not correct and trivializes the story. If I didn’t have dogs and a cat and didn’t read all the news coverage and blogs, I would be a food consumer who thinks this isn’t a big deal. Why should anyone care when the losses are so low.

   You attempt to qualify the “17 or 18” by saying “more have likely died without being reported.” If you don’t want to quote the self reported #s of deaths at just one blog, petconnection.com (4,526 as of today), or the extrapolated # reported by the chain of pet hospitals (39,000 dead or very ill), then look at the source for the “17 or 18”, the FDA itself, and see how they qualify that number. The FDA says, “We’ve had multiple, thousands of calls from consumers…maybe 17 or 18 that we’ve confirmed…But again that’s not our focus.” They are not keeping track! That’s the point. It’s not that they aren’t “being reported”; the FDA isn’t keeping track.

   The following is from the FDA’s Friday transcript. Please print a correction to the effect that “Our article “Food Safety Worries Mount” quotes the FDA’s self-reported number of dead animals as “17 or 18.” However, the FDA is not tabulating the deaths reported to them by the many thousands of consumers who are calling them. They say “that’s not our focus.”

   From the transcript of the April 27th FDA press conference http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal.....4/0119.xml

   REPORTER: Thank you. Jim Kirshner with WDIV-TV in Detroit. I think this was asked earlier, and I may have missed the answer or it didn’t get answered. Do you have a total number of pets either killed or sustaining some sort of injury from the pet food contamination? What figures do you have confirmed at this point?

   DR. MCCHESNEY: This is Dan McChesney from FDA. What I previously said I believe in response to the Washington Post question was that it’s in the high teens, maybe 17 or 18 that we have confirmed. But again that’s not our focus. Our focus is to remove product that was contaminated, contained either wheat gluten or rice concentrate from commerce so we don’t involve other animals or get it into other parts of the supply system.

   REPORTER: At some point will you make a count, take a count, of the number of dogs, cats involved?

   DR. MCCHESNEY: I don’t know. We’ve had multiple, many thousand calls from consumers, and we are looking at that, but I’m not sure we will ever come up with a final number here. It’s just, I just don’t think we can ever get there.

   Comment by Maureen — April 28, 2007 @ 9:13 am

10. Shelly- actually, the platter should be safe.. melamine dishes aren’t dangerous. Most grocery stores and Target/Wal-Mart type stores sell them.. they’re generally marketed for children, as they’re rather difficult to break. They’ve been around for ages.. I know I had a few sets while growing up.

    Of course, just because it’s safe to eat *off* of doesn’t mean you actually want to eat the raw materials it was made from.. but I’d say that that probably goes for most anything we eat off of, whether it’s made of plastics, ceramics, glass, styrofoam.. you name it.

    Comment by Gwen — April 28, 2007 @ 9:16 am

11. People Ate Tainted Pork, We May Be On the Verge of Crisis
    April 28th, 2007

    The Chicago Tribune has detailed information on how a pet food recall has brought a federal agency to its knees. The agency admits being behind the curve, while the bulk of the investigation has yet to begin.

    Also, FDA is investigating an Illinois shipment of rice protein used in human food.

    Here are the highlights:

    The end of this pet food crisis appears more elusive than ever…

    About 45 [California] state residents ate pork from hogs that consumed animal feed laced with melamine from China.

    What last month was a limited recall of canned pet food is on the verge of becoming a full-fledged public health scare.

    The FDA’s real detective work may be just beginning. Having found many sources of contamination, investigators must now determine exactly how widespread the problem is and how it began.

    http://www.itchmo.com/

    Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 9:17 am

12. Response to my inquiry from Pedigree on April 26th:

    In response to your email regarding PEDIGREE Brand Food for Dogs
    website.

    Thank you for your email.

    The recent pet food recalls do not include any Mars Petcare US brands.

    All of our brands, including PEDIGREE, CESAR, and THE GOODLIFE RECIPE®
    food for dogs, and WHISKAS, SHEBA, TEMPTATIONS®, and THE GOODLIFE
    RECIPE® food for cats, as well as our snacks and treats, are safe for pets
    to enjoy.

    Mars Petcare US sources its corn gluten from domestic sources and not
    China, and its brands, do not include any rice protein or wheat gluten
    from the foreign suppliers linked to the recall.

    None of our brands are involved in the recalls and all of our brands
    continue to be safe for pets to enjoy.

    We want to make it very clear to pet owners that Mars Petcare US pet
    food brands are not involved in the recalls.

    The safety and nutritional quality of our pet food is our top priority
    because for many people, their pets are their top priorities.

    For details on wheat gluten, rice protein or corn gluten, please
    contact the US Food and Drug Administration at 1-888-463-6332 or visit its
    web site at http://www.fda.gov.

    Tim Mengel
    Masterfoods USA, a Division of Mars, Incorporated
    Consumer Care Department
    1-800-525-5273
    DIRECT ALL E-MAIL REPLIES TO:
    pet.care@masterfoodsusa.com

    Comment by Deanna — April 28, 2007 @ 9:17 am

13. “Consumer Care”. . . Right.

    “Mars Petcare US sources its corn gluten from domestic sources and not China, and its brands, do not include any rice protein or wheat gluten from the foreign suppliers linked to the recall.”

    Oh but Tim, did it ever occur to you that these US Sources import the ingredients you buy from them from China?

    Think about it Doc.

    Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 9:30 am

14. Chicago Tribune this morning!

    Food safety worries mount
    Does melamine hurt humans? Why isn’t food supply protected?

    By Stephen J. Hedges and Mary Ann Fergus
    Tribune staff reporters
    Published April 29, 2007

    WASHINGTON — The tainted pet food scare, which has swelled into a serious crisis for animal lovers, now has spread to humans.

    California officials have revealed that the contamination got into the food chain: About 45 state residents ate pork from hogs that consumed animal feed laced with melamine from China. Melamine is used to make plastics, but it also artificially boosts the protein level—and thus the price—of the glutens that go into food.

    It was already fatal for some pets: 17 cats and dogs are confirmed dead, more have likely died without being reported, thousands have suffered kidney problems, and 57 brands of cat food and 83 of dog food have been recalled. On top of that, roughly 6,000 hogs will be destroyed because they ate tainted feed.

    The effects of melamine on people are thought to be minimal, but no one really knows. Its consumption by humans is considered so improbable that no one has even studied it.

    But they are studying now. What last month was a limited recall of canned pet food is on the verge of becoming a full-fledged public health scare, potentially overwhelming government agencies and raising troubling questions about U.S. food safety in the global economy and in the post-Sept. 11 era.

    The Food and Drug Administration, criticized by some in Congress for responding too slowly, is struggling to catch up with the implications of the spread of melamine-contaminated glutens from China to hogs, and the human food chain. The FDA is still trying to get its investigators into China, where a skeptical government only last week assented to investigators’ visa requests.

    At a time when food imports are growing, and only 1 percent to 2 percent of food imports receive any government scrutiny, critics say the scare reveals the shortcomings of a weakened food safety bureaucracy, the inadequacy of existing regulations and the inability of the FDA, which has suffered significant cutbacks, to protect the food supply.

    “They’re reactive, not proactive,” said Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), whose House subcommittee on investigations last week held a hearing on food safety. If the problem was imported pet food additives, he asked, “How does it then get to hogs? They’ve known about this for some time. What did they do with it?”

    In a statement, the FDA said that “food safety funding” for the year ending last Sept. 30 “was $376 million.” But funding for the agency’s Center for Food Safety has dropped from $48 million in 2003 to about to $30 million in 2006, according to the center’s 2006 budget priority statement. Full-time jobs in the Center for Food Safety have also been cut from 950 in 2003 to about 820 in 2006, according to the budget statement.

    FDA looking for origins
    The FDA’s real detective work may be just beginning. Having found many sources of contamination, investigators must now determine exactly how widespread the problem is and how it began.

    The importer of the bad wheat gluten, ChemNutra Inc. of Las Vegas, contends that its Chinese manufacturer, Xuzhou Anying Biologic Technology Development Co., illicitly added melamine to the gluten in order to boost the measurable protein level and thus the price of the shipment. If so, the FDA may find itself pursuing criminal charges against the Chinese company.

    FDA officials Friday searched ChemNutra’s offices, as well as a pet food plant operated by Menu Foods in Emporia, Kan., according to The Associated Press. Menu Foods has recalled millions of cans of pet food in recent weeks.

    In China, the central government has been defensive about charges that an export shipment had been deliberately contaminated, at first denying that any tainted wheat gluten was even shipped to the U.S. But that tone has softened as the extent of the pet food recall expanded. On Friday, a government spokesman told USA Today that some shipments were contaminated.

    Scores of pet food brands have now been recalled in the U.S. for fear that melamine-contaminated glutens were used in their manufacture. They include canned and dry dog food and dog biscuits that are made in places as widely scattered as Utah, Missouri and South Carolina.

    The FDA is also examining imported vegetable proteins earmarked for human products like pizza, protein bars and baby formula. That investigation, still in its early stages, hasn’t uncovered any contaminated ingredients, but the agency, an FDA doctor said, wanted to “get ahead of the curve.”

    The melamine-laced food reached hogs because surplus pet food—crumbled and broken food bits rejected as unsuitable for dogs or cats—was sent to hog farms and turned into feed. The FDA says bulk shipments of feed were delivered to hog farmers in California, Utah, Ohio, Kansas, Oklahoma, New York, North Carolina and South Carolina. FDA officials said they were also concerned that contaminated livestock feed may have been shipped to Missouri.

    “It’s absolutely a terrible nightmare story,” said Eric Nelson, a Wisconsin feed specialist and president of the Association of American Feed Control Officials. “It just doesn’t seem to get any better, and I’m sure it’s not over.”

    Rice protein also a problem
    Even as the tainted wheat gluten cases have multiplied, the FDA has learned of another problem: Chinese rice protein. U.S. importer Wilbur-Ellis told the agency that a single bag of rice protein that it had imported tested positive for the presence of melamine. Wilbur-Ellis imported the rice from Binzhou Futian Biology Technology Co. in China’s Shandong province. In the U.S., the protein went to five U.S. pet food makers in Utah, New York, Kansas and Missouri.

    While the FDA has targeted select states for hog inspections, the pet food recall and the large number of sick cats and dogs have overwhelmed state agencies that often only investigate a dozen pet food complaints a year. The FDA says about 400 employees across the country are collecting pet food samples, monitoring the recalls’ effectiveness and preparing complaints.

    The investigation’s progress in Illinois alone illustrates the problem.

    About half of the 32 FDA investigators in the state have worked on responding to more than 500 complaints of sick or deceased dogs and cats since the recalls began March 16. They must collect medical records from veterinarians and gather samples of contaminated pet food.

    The office is also involved in recall effectiveness. “It’s very taxing on our resources,” said Scott MacIntire, director of the FDA’s Chicago office, which oversees state operations.

    MacIntire said his office is investigating a shipment of rice protein concentrate imported to Illinois and potentially used in a human product.

    Nationwide, the FDA has only enough inspectors to check 1 percent to 2 percent of the 8.9 million imported food shipments in 2006.

    “We don’t have the resources or the capabilities to test every single shipment of every single food item that crosses into our country or into our state borders,” said Frank Busta, director of the National Center for Food Protection and Defense.

    Stupak is among a small number in Congress who for several years have pressed for stiffer food safety regulations. He said legislation likely to pass this year could include a provision giving the FDA authority to order food processors to recall questionable items.

    Currently, the FDA can issue mandatory recall orders only for baby formula, while other government safety agencies can demand the recall of goods such as unsafe toys and tires.

    “It took Menu Foods almost a whole month to do a full recall of the dog food,” Stupak said. “If they’re dragging their feet on the recall of dog food, in the meantime this tainted wheat gluten is going to hogs.”

    Other fixes could include expanded funding for food safety inspections and labs, the right to conduct spot inspections, subpoena power for the FDA and country-of-origin labeling on food products. Congress has already passed the labeling law, but the Bush administration has declined to implement it, citing cost concerns.

    FDA officials acknowledged that they are closing seven labs but said they are older facilities that needed renovation and that other labs are being expanded to compensate.

    What price safety?
    The end of this pet food crisis appears more elusive than ever, shedding light on issues beyond the largely self-regulated pet food industry to America’s growing dependence on cheap imported ingredients from China and other countries, where safety precautions may be more lenient.

    But just as troubling, federal officials and congressional critics of the FDA say, is the ease with which the bad gluten was passed along once in the U.S. After the Sept. 11 attacks, food and water safety were an issue of great concern, they say, but those concerns seem to have eroded.

    America’s increasing reliance on low-cost food creates a complicated food distribution system, Busta said — and that leaves “many potential vulnerabilities.”

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 9:38 am

15. If the FDA is primarily concentrating on clearing a backlog of potentially tainted ingredients, it makes perfect sense to test for melamine or any of its derivatives/metabolites.

    For the longer term, we can be confident that any questionable, international suppliers will look for an alternate form of nitrogen which might slip through the tests currently devised.

    Pet food companies and their suppliers can no longer use the “fast and dirty” test for “nitrogen” as an indication of protein content. They are surely aware of this.

    The best test combination might be to test for protein directly and then for nitrogen separately. If they find a notable discrepancy, the product is most likely tainted.

    Comment by Eva — April 28, 2007 @ 9:40 am

16. The bottom line.

    It takes a hell of a lot longer to get out of a mess then it does to get into one.

    Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 9:47 am

17. Do we know who the second importer is and I missed it?

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 9:50 am

18. Why does the FDA announce no more recalls when obviously they are wrong? The answer: to appear to be out of the loop.

    Exactly. It is S.O.P. If they announce more recalls at a press conference, then they open the door to questions and I’m sure the official position is we don’t know so we can’t tell or be responsible for what we don’t know.

    And why does it take two weeks to test for the toxic elements? This two weeks gives time for the businesses, the corporation, to get their ducks in order.

    So the F.D.A. needs to look good - hard to do -but their answer No More Recalls is the better P.R. position. It’s equivalent to - “I take the Fifth”

    Comment by Issy — April 28, 2007 @ 9:50 am

19. ChemNutra, Steve Miller
    Mr. Pet Food Supplier goes to Washington

    http://www.canadafreepress.com.....042507.htm

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 9:57 am

20. Juicy: Got Steve’s home address-

    Stephen Miller’s Summerlin home, at 10396 Noontide Ave., near Charleston and Hualapai Way.

    http://www.reviewjournal.com/l.....71149.html

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:03 am

21. REPORTER: At some point will you make a count, take a count, of the number of dogs, cats involved?

    DR. MCCHESNEY: I don’t know. We’ve had multiple, many thousand calls from consumers, and we are looking at that, but I’m not sure we will ever come up with a final number here. It’s just, I just don’t think we can ever get there.

    =======

    “I just don’t think we can ever get there.”

    You have got to be frelling KIDDING me, right?!!!

    Comment by Ally — April 28, 2007 @ 10:05 am

22. This will make you sick.

    http://www.naturalproductsinsi.....p/li/49724

    Chem Nutra imports raw materials from China for distribution to the energy drink and nutritional supplements industries. They supply:

    Ingredient Supplier
    Vitamins
    Cobalamin (B12)
    Inositol
    Niacin (B3)
    Pantothenic Acid (B5)
    Pyridoxine (B6)
    Riboflavin (B2)
    Vitamin C

    Specialty
    Amino Acids
    Creatine
    Inositol
    L-Alanine
    L-Arginine
    L-Carnitine
    L-Isoleucine
    L-Leucine
    L-Taurine
    Protein, Rice

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:06 am

23. Does this bother anyone else?

    “Many of the companies recalling food said in statements on their Web sites that American Nutrition added the rice protein concentrate to their products without their knowledge or approval, reports the AP.

    “It appears that ANI (American Nutrition Inc) had been adding the unauthorized rice protein concentrate to Harmony Farms products for some time and only told the company when the FDA was about to conclude that some of ANI’s rice protein concentrate (supplied by Wilber-Ellis) was contaminated with melamine,” said a statement on the Harmony Farms site.

    Other companies making similar allegations are The Blue Buffalo Co., Natural Balance, Canine Caviar, Diamond Pet Foods and Mulligan Stew Pet Food.

    http://www.postchronicle.com/n.....7507.shtml

    Comment by Christi — April 28, 2007 @ 10:06 am

24. Steve Miller’s contact info:

    10396 Noontide Ave.
    Las Vegas, NV 89135
    Phone: (702)883-8928
    Fax: (702)920-8958
    Email: steve@chemnutra.com
    Web: http://www.chemnutra.com

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:08 am

25. “How pet food makers get their supplies a tawdry tale”

    Interesting Read

    http://www.canadafreepress.com.....040607.htm

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:13 am

26. http://www.naturalproductsinsi.....p/li/49724

    We import raw materials from China for distribution to the energy drink and nutritional supplements industries

    Chem Nutra

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:17 am

27. Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:08 am

    I doubt the Millers are answering the phone or sipping umbrella drinks in the back yard working on their tans at this point.

    Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 10:18 am

28. Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:17 am

    Oh great. Thats all we need.

    Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 10:20 am

29. Comment by Issy

    “Why does the FDA announce no more recalls when obviously they are wrong? The answer: to appear to be out of the loop.”

    They’re all the same mentality. The first words:

    FBI - “It wasn’t terrorism”
    USDA - “No madcow entered the food chain”

    Comment by Gary — April 28, 2007 @ 10:23 am

30. Quote:
    China will not modify its behavior without the outside pressure of the US consumer.

    Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 8:37 am

    ——————— End Quote ——————-

    Neither the government of the USA nor any industry will modify their behaviour without pressure of the US consumer.

    We can’t regulate the rest of the world - but we can (and *have to*) modify what happens in our own country.

    IMHO

    Comment by MaKo — April 28, 2007 @ 10:25 am

31. Interesting survey on Itchmo about pet deaths and whether they were on antibiotics or fungicides at the time of eating tainted foods.

    ATTENTION: ANYONE WHOSE PET DIED DUE TO CONTAMINATED FOOD

    Was your pet taking an antibiotic or fungicide shortly before death? On 04-27-2007 the University of Guelph determined that cyanuric acid and melamine, when combined, cause a toxic reaction.

    In my research I discovered that some pharmaceuticals use cyanuric acid in some antibiotics and fungicides. Could either of these types of drugs have hastened your pet’s death? I don’t know. But I’d like to survey those whose pets died to find out.

    http://64.79.216.38/~itchmo/fo.....54#msg1254

    Comment by mal — April 28, 2007 @ 10:26 am

32. This is interesting from the Chicago Tribune article:

    What price safety?
    The end of this pet food crisis appears more elusive than ever, shedding light on issues beyond the largely self-regulated pet food industry to America’s growing dependence on cheap imported ingredients from China and other countries, where safety precautions may be more lenient.

    MacIntire said his office is investigating a shipment of rice protein concentrate imported to Illinois and potentially used in a human product.

    What price safety?
    The end of this pet food crisis appears more elusive than ever, shedding light on issues beyond the largely self-regulated pet food industry to America’s growing dependence on cheap imported ingredients from China and other countries, where safety precautions may be more lenient.

    http://tinyurl.com/26aae2

    Comment by Issy — April 28, 2007 @ 10:27 am

33. Rice Protein Buyers were warned about Chinese Fakes before the recall and were told how to identify them. WHAT THE F%&*??????????????
    @#$%^&*()_+$%^&*#$%^!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

    http://tinyurl.com/2cevuj

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:28 am

34. Just in…

    FDA-RECALLS-L@LIST.NIH.GOV

    Recall — Firm Press Release

    FDA posts press releases and other notices of recalls and market withdrawals from the firms involved as a service to consumers, the media, and other interested parties. FDA does not endorse either the product or the company. This listserv covers mainly Class I (life-threatening) recalls. A complete listing of recalls can be found in the FDA Enforcement Report at: http://www.fda.gov/opacom/Enforce.html

    Natural Balance Pet Foods, Inc. Recalls Products in Response to American Nutrition Inc. Pet Food Recall

    Contact:
    Natural Balance Consumer Contact:
    1-800-829-4493

    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — Pacoima, CA — April 27, 2007 — Because of the pet food recall initiated today by American Nutrition Inc., Natural Balance Pet Foods has announced it is issuing a nationwide recall of a number of canned products manufactured by American Nutrition. This action is limited to four specific Natural Balance canned formulas: Chicken Canned Dog Formula 13 oz , Beef Canned Dog Formula 13 oz, Lamb Canned Dog Formula 13 oz, and the 3oz and 6 oz Ocean Fish Canned Cat Formulas.

    Natural Balance Pet Foods is taking this voluntary action after learning the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) confirmed rice protein concentrate used by American Nutrition contained melamine, a substance not approved for use in food. These products are being recalled in addition to our previously recalled Venison and Brown Rice canned and bagged dog foods, Venison and Brown Rice dog treats, and Venison and Green Pea dry cat food.

    Natural Balance Pet Foods has not received any indication of quality or safety issues, including pet illness, with the four withdrawn formulas. However, because American Nutrition informed the company that these four specific products may include rice protein concentrate, Natural Balance Pet Foods felt this action was necessary for the protection of its customers and their pets.

    It should be noted that the products being recalled were not formulated or labeled to contain rice protein concentrate. While the FDA is investigating this, current information indicates this error is a result of a manufacturing deviation by American Nutrition. Natural Balance is working with the FDA in this matter.

    ####

    FDA’s Recalls, Market Withdrawals and Safety Alerts Page: http://www.fda.gov/opacom/7alerts.html

    Comment by Nadine Long — April 28, 2007 @ 10:31 am

35. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biuret

    Biuret. Biuret is a chemical in the pet food. They knew it before the recall. THEY KNEW!

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:31 am

36. Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:17 am

    Now we need to find out which “natural foods” and supplement and vitamin companies have been purchasing raw materials from the Millers.

    The gift that keeps on giving.

    Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 10:32 am

37. I’m leaving a big THANK YOU to all those who posted reports of sick pets who ate Purina dry food. It was NOT on the recall list. I’ve been homecooking for my dog but still giving him some Purina dry. I’ve stopped and am giving him a handfull of whole grain cereal instead. If not for the great people at this site, I would believe dry foods like Beneful are still safe. Thanks again

    Comment by Falcon K — April 28, 2007 @ 10:36 am

38. I’m so pissed right now I can’t sit still

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:37 am

39. Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:28 am

    I’ve seen that warning before but don’t know exactly who received the warning. Also I don’t know if buyers would be capable of immediately testing their imports for the things specified in the warning (assuming they took it seriously) or if it would take some time to investigate how to get those tests done.

    Comment by slt — April 28, 2007 @ 10:38 am

40. Important info for non-symptomatic pets who ate recalled food -

    Here is a link to Antech’s website, they are doing alot of the lab testing for vets. Although some of the affected pets they have tested are in renal failure, most have normal BUN/Creatinine (blood test) but have crystals in the urine.

    http://www.antechdiagnostics.com/

    Comment by catlover — April 28, 2007 @ 10:44 am

41. Thank you Catlover for that link. That’s what we had- awful urine.

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:49 am

42. This has probably been going on for awhile and someone just got the levels too high this time. I bet I’ve got melamine in MY urine! God knows what we’re all consuming.

    Comment by Christi — April 28, 2007 @ 10:56 am

43. http://www.zoasis.com/zoasis_news_alerts.html

    I arrived at this link via Antech’s site.

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 10:59 am

44. Comment by Eva — April 28, 2007 @ 9:40 am

    , et al….

    Go check out the world trade boards: Alibaba, Made-in-China, Fuzing, just to name a few. They have NUMEROUS LISTINGS for vegetable proteins with to BOOST THE poor PROTEIN sources! Mrs ChemNutra IS A CHINESE FOOD SPECIALIST.

    Xuzhou Anying on Alibaba: http://www.alibaba.com/company/10926883.html

    Binzhou Futian Biology on Alibaba:
    http://chinafeed.en.alibaba.com/group/0.html

    They’ll even tell you how to do it:
    Use Methods:
    1. For poultry feed: adding 2. 0% is capable of increasing protein by 3. 2% -6. 0% .
    2. For cattle / sheep / pig / fish / shrimp feed: adding 3. 0% is capable of increasing protein by 4. 8% -9. 0% .
    3. For raw materials such as Fish Meal, Meat and Bone Meal, Bean Meal, Rice Protein Meal and other protein feed ingredients: adding 1kg of ESB Protein Powder per hundred kilos can improve protein by 1. 6% -3. 0% .
    Quality Standard: The product is yellow, dust-colour or white powder form and free flowing. This product also resists iodin, and is able to bear high temperature, the reaction of ammania nitrogen Contain 160% protein, 70% water-soluble and 8% moisture. Contain 300% protein, 80% water-soluble and 8% moisture. Keeping in dry and ventilate condition, agglomeration will not influence quality.
    Guaranteed shelf life: 1 year.

    They’ve known — don’t think they didn’t. Esp. ChemNutra — the “EXPERTS”. (my opinion)
    :[

    Comment by Kat — April 28, 2007 @ 10:59 am

45. Comment by Maureen — April 28, 2007 @ 9:13 am

    That is a really good letter. The tiny number of pets listed continues to be a problem and based on the FDAs response will NOT be answered for months. But the press feel the need to use only official numbers.

    Nice connection to the FDA transcript too hopefully they will get the idea that they must qualify the small numbers too when they are understated not just the big numbers.

    Comment by spocko — April 28, 2007 @ 11:01 am

46. Whatever happened the the Professor & his PhD student & the rig they made for instant field tests?? Who’s using that?? It kind of fell through the cracks. I sent him an email thanking them.

    Comment by Kat — April 28, 2007 @ 11:05 am

47. I apologize in advance if this has already been posted, as it is quite long. However, it’s also an informative read.

    The Great Pet Food Scandal
    How one supplier caused a huge crisis, and why it’s just the tip of the iceberg
    CHARLIE GILLIS AND ANNE KINGSTON | April 30, 2007 |

    Sometime in the next couple of years, when the public gaze has drifted from the tainted pet food epidemic and we’ve all forgotten what melamine is, a judge in Ohio or California or Ontario will take up the daunting question of what a dog or cat is worth. There was considerable legal debate on this topic even before the current uproar. But if an animal’s curative effect on the human heart plays any part in the calculation, the courts might start at a small house in Floral Park, N.Y., where the wounds wrought by the poisoning epidemic will stay raw for a long time to come.
    Continued Below

    It was here in the Long Island suburbs that Donna Opallo and a couple of relatives brought home Checkers, a chocolate-eyed beagle puppy, three years ago, figuring she might lend solace to Opallo’s grief-stricken sister, Debbie DiGregorio. The previous week, DiGregorio’s 16-year-old son, Louis, had died suddenly of a brain aneurysm. Frantic for ways to help, the family took a flyer on the dog, and their instincts proved correct. “That dog filled a very big void in her life,” says Opallo, 47, who lives with her 45-year-old sister. As the months passed, it became clear that Checkers possessed healing powers no psychiatrist, friend or relative could equal.
    Then, in mid-February, the family was thrown back into crisis. Checkers began vomiting incessantly and defecating blood, sending the sisters on a series of futile visits to a local veterinarian. Test after test proved inconclusive, and only after Mississauga, Ont.-based Menu Foods issued its first recall of contaminated food on March 16 did the penny finally drop. Both Checkers and Opallo’s own dog, an 11-month-old Bichon-Shih Tzu cross named Taco, had been eating food from foil pouches sold under the Nutro brand name, one of the products on Menu’s list. Checkers survived the initial illness, but her gruesome symptoms persisted. Today her vets can’t say whether she’ll survive. Taco, who hadn’t showed any outward signs of trouble, turned out to be in near-total renal failure. He spent more than a week in an animal hospital in nearby Westbury, with an intravenous line attached to his leg and his owner by his side. “Three-quarters of his kidneys are destroyed, and I don’t know what his life expectancy will be,” says Opallo. “It’s like there’s a little ticking time bomb inside of him.”
    The plight of Checkers and Taco is by no means unique: it is believed some 40,000 pets who ate Menu Foods products made with melamine-laced wheat gluten have been sickened in the U.S. and Canada. While mortality estimates vary, a recent survey by the Davis, Calif.-based Veterinary Network estimated the death toll in the U.S. in the thousands. But it does give some sense of the debacle’s reach — as well as its ruinous effect on each family it touched. Quite apart from the collective US$6,200 in vet bills Opallo and DiGregorio have paid out of their line of credit, or the thousands more they’re willing to spend, they quake knowing they might lose one or both of their beloved animals. “I don’t think I could ever buy another dog,” says Opallo. “I’m basically in denial.”
    The scope of the tragedy — emotional and financial — continues to widen. The recall has been expanded four times in the last four weeks, with 889 separate items under 100 different brand names yanked off the market. The company’s explanations raise more questions than answers, and there’s been predictable talk of reform at the government level. In Canada, talks between pet food makers, vets and a variety of federal agencies have already begun, with a view to imposing rules on an unregulated industry. In the U.S., members of the Senate’s agriculture appropriations subcommittee have held hearings into the Food and Drug Administration’s handling of the crisis, while the FDA itself continues to investigate the cause of the contamination.
    But the economic model that led to the poisoning shows little sign of change. Even in the throes of a PR nightmare, the big grocery chains continue to support Menu, a production behemoth with whom they share a mutual dependency. Loblaw Companies, for one, which sells Menu products under its President’s Choice and No Name brands, has no plans to switch suppliers. “They’ve been a valued partner,” says spokeswoman Elizabeth Margles. “We do have confidence about them at this point.”

    ————————————————————————————————————————
    Loblaw may remain unshaken, but for the average dog or cat owner the entire affair has been a faith-testing experience. Little did pet owners know that, whether they were buying a budget supermarket brand or splurging on top-of-the-line fare at a specialty pet store or from a veterinarian, the food was being produced at the same factory and even shared some of the same ingredients. How could they? Menu Foods’ name appeared nowhere on the label. The company existed as an invisible cog in the food chain, churning out most of North America’s most popular wet food in cans and foil pouches to its customers’ blue-chip specifications — Science Diet for Colgate Palmolive, Iams for Procter & Gamble, Whiskas for Purina. It also manufactured an estimated 75 per cent of private label brands in Canada, including Wal-Mart’s, Sobey’s and Pet Valu’s. In the United States, where its customers include PetSmart, Safeway and Wal-Mart, Menu supplies between 40 per cent and 50 per cent of wet pet food.
    The story of how a tiny, shoestring operation in Toronto’s western suburbs came to dominate its industry reflects the seismic shifts in the manufacturing food chain over the past three decades. Increasing power wielded by the margin-obsessed, cutthroat supermarket industry has forced manufacturers to source cheaper ingredients globally. Those forces have favoured faceless giants — players capable of supplying myriad products demanded by retailers, retooling and remixing recipes as the orders came in. But as the Menu case demonstrates, the system also ensures a continent-wide catastrophe when something goes wrong. Marion Nestle, a professor in the department of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, doesn’t see the Menu tragedy as an aberration. Rather she calls it “the tip of the iceberg.”
    Suffice to say, no such spectre troubled Robert Bras, the sharp young supermarket executive who bought into Menu Foods in the late 1970s and turned the plodding company into a trailblazer. At the time, Bras was working for Loblaw Companies, a firm in the midst of its own astounding turnaround from down-at-the-heels grocery chain. Central to its recovery strategy was a private-label program that would rival the big national brands in quality and sales. Without the advertising and distribution costs that inflated the prices of national labels, executives reasoned, a supermarket could sell its own brand — often made at national brands’ factories — at a lower cost for a higher margin. Pet food was a critical part of the scheme: it is a high-frequency purchase that brings people into the store. Desirable proprietary brands presented a way to cultivate customer loyalty. Sensing untapped opportunity, Bras left Loblaw in 1977 and bought a 50 per cent stake in Menu, a manufacturing generalist that made everything from bargain-basement pet food to bleach.
    Bras quickly stripped away extraneous product lines and purchased a factory in New Jersey with an eye to expanding into the U.S. But his big break came in 1979, with a contract to produce Loblaw’s “no-name” canned pet food. The first offering, a No Name Luxury meat mix, claimed to match brand leader Dr. Ballard’s formula in quality at a lower price. The “luxury” reference was a master stroke: it seduced pet owners into believing they were buying status for the same price as “maintenance” — an industry term for standard product. Within six months, it was the No.1-selling product at Loblaw’s Ontario stores.
    Menu’s sales grew 25 per cent a year on average during the 1980s, fuelled by the growing number of supermarkets cluing in to the fact they could make margins of 35 to 40 per cent profit on their own premium house-label pet food. Business was buoyed by the fact that pets were increasingly viewed as full-fledged family members — “furkids” as they came to be called. Nowhere was this more apparent than at the pet bowl. When canned dog food was introduced in 1922 there was no pretense of nutritional benefits; the only benefactors were meat packers who seized on a profitable way of disposing of surplus offal and horse meat. By the 1980s, however, pets’ diets were mirroring their owners’ own peccadillos, food phobias and culinary dispositions, be they kosher, hypo-allergenic, vegetarian or low-fat.
    “We have anthropomorphized our pets,” says Kelly Caldwell, editor of Dogs in Canada. “You want to feel you’re giving your dog the best possible food. It’s a way to show we care, that we’re not scrimping, that they’re valuable.” Caldwell buys only “organic” feed for her purebreds because that’s what she eats. “I’ve bought into the packaging and promises,” she says. Nutrition tops the concern of Dogs in Canada readers, she says. Bras understood the business was “counter-economic.” Pet food wasn’t sold on price alone; if your dog or cat isn’t going to eat it, you’re not going to buy it. And if people believed they’d improve the health or extend life of their pet, they’d spend more on higher-priced premium labels.
    Menu’s expansion in the United States was ramped up in the 1990s when Cott Corporation, a Toronto-based manufacturer of private-label soft drinks with grand plans for global domination, bought the remaining 50 per cent stake in the company. Wal-Mart and Safeway were added to Menu’s customer roster. The company also benefited from the fact that national brands, under assault from retailer labels, were increasingly outsourcing their manufacturing so they could focus on “managing the brand.” It was an ironic twist: managing the brand became synonymous with distancing itself from the grimy business of production.
    Menu, meanwhile, invested heavily in a U.S. infrastructure. A state-of the-art factory was built in Emporia, Kan. In 2001, Menu bought the wet food operations of Doane Pet Care for US$15 million. The following year, the company went public on the Toronto Stock Exchange as an income trust, a structure that avoids most corporate taxation because most of the company’s income is paid directly to its unit holders. If there’s a discernible turning point in the company’s history, however, it is 2002, when Bras died of cancer. He was replaced by Paul Henderson, a former chief operating officer at Cott. In 2003, Menu assumed US$85 million in new debt to purchase a Procter & Gamble plant in North Sioux City, S.D. With that purchase came a five-year supply agreement to be the exclusive supplier of Iams and Eukanuba wet foods, which now account for about 11 per cent of Menu’s sales.
    But even as Menu’s business grew exponentially, its margins were reportedly under constant pressure. It was rumoured within the industry that Wal-Mart and Loblaw, eager to maintain their own margins in a competitive pricing environment, kept a lid on prices that squeezed Menu’s profits. Specifically, Menu was expected to deliver expensively made foil packs — now at the centre of the contamination controversy — at the same price as cans. “They definitely had to eat margins to a point they weren’t making any money selling to Wal-Mart,” says an industry insider who explains Menu couldn’t afford to lose the contracts because they provided credibility with potential customers. Loblaw says there was no freeze on prices. “We always try to keep prices down but didn’t say you couldn’t raise prices,” Margles says. “We always try to keep costs down for our customers. We have to remain competitive.”
    At the end of 2005, Menu reported a loss of $54.6 million and suspended payments to its unit holders, blaming the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar. The next year Menu returned to profitability, yet its cash distributions remain suspended. By early 2007, with a revived Canadian dollar and new price increases, prospects appeared on the upswing. Improved cash flow was being used to pay down debt and industry analysts were expecting it to resume distributions to unit holders.

    ————————————————————————————————————————
    If the engines of Menu’s success were humming again, they cut out abruptly on March 16, 2007. The recall notice the company issued that morning downplayed the implications, describing the removal of 60 million units from the market as “precautionary” and omitting all reference to any potential contaminant. Within days, however, the FDA was asking awkward questions about wheat gluten shipped from China, and pet owners were starting to exchange horror stories on the Internet.
    What the company did next will surely go down as a case study in how not to manage a crisis. Far from tackling the matter head-on — by, say, quickly withdrawing all products made with suspect material — it left items on the shelves for what by human food-safety standards seemed an eternity. On March 24, eight days after its original notice, Menu expanded its recall to include all varieties of its wet pet food, a rearguard action that encompassed those household names it had so assiduously cultivated, from Iams to Wal-Mart’s house brand Ol’ Roy. Two more recalls would follow, the first on April 5 for all Menu products made with the suspect wheat gluten, including dry food; the next on April 10, when Menu pulled products made at its plant in Mississauga (previous recalls affected product made at the Kansas plant).
    At the centre of all of this was an ingredient few North Americans had heard of before the crisis. Wheat gluten — essentially, destarched flour dough — is used in pet food to bind and add texture. Menu had previously been buying it from U.S. sources, but had switched last November to an obscure Chinese manufacturer called XuZhou Anying Biologic Technology Development Co. Menu cited a gluten shortage in North America for the change, but a cynic would point to other potential motivations: in 2006, wheat gluten from China sold for about 20 cents per pound less than that made by U.S. competitors.
    Whatever the savings Menu realized, however, could not possibly have been worth what followed. By Feb. 22, according to timelines provided by the company, Menu was receiving warnings from consumers that its food was sickening pets. On Feb. 27, routine taste tests of its own products resulted in the deaths of at least two and, by some accounts, as many as 10 animals. Still, it took Menu until March 8 to notify ChemNutra, the Las Vegas-based distributer of the Chinese product, that it was investigating the possibility the gluten was causing illness. The recall, however, wouldn’t come for another eight days.
    The contempt implicit in this tardiness infuriates pet owners. Jody Tomlinson of Coquitlam, B.C., lost his job as a warehouse supervisor after spending hours on the phone last winter researching the mysterious kidney ailment that eventually claimed the life of his two-year-old mastiff, Binky. The idea that Menu may have sat on vital information leaves the 38-year-old fuming, and calling for government regulation. “Greed started this,” he says, “not common sense.” Lance Ganske, a Calgary sheet-metal worker who lost Blackie, one of several pet cats, now distrusts the entire industry. “When I buy something, I don’t know whether it’s going to be good or not,” he says, “and I still have to feed my animals.”
    Menu officials haven’t helped matters, allowing their phones to ring unanswered for hours at a time, according to angry consumers, and providing confusing explanations for what went wrong. (In one interview, vice-president Randall Copeland blamed part of the contamination on a “clerical error” that saw the wheat gluten bags receive false U.S. labelling; photos supplied by the product’s U.S. distributor clearly show the words “Made in China” printed directly on the bags.) In an email to Maclean’s last week, Menu CEO Paul Henderson disputed suggestions that the company dragged its feet. While Menu did receive reports of cat illnesses on Feb. 22 and 28, he said, “the vets who attended these cats informed Menu that they each had access to various contaminants and could have gotten into something they should not have, such as antifreeze.” A third call reporting a cat death came in on March 5, Henderson said, and while Menu did not receive veterinary information about the third case, the consumer did send in the unused food. “We tested the food, but the testing did not reveal anything wrong with it,” he wrote.
    The irony in all of this is that Menu was blindsided as well — the company just can’t seem to communicate it. In the end, lab tests performed in late March on the Chinese gluten identified the likely cause of the poisoning as melamine, a plastic by-product that is entirely foreign to the production of wheat gluten — or, for that matter, pet food. “It’s unheard of,” says Steve Pickman, a vice-president at Atchison, Kan.-based MPG Ingredients Inc., which makes wheat gluten for human and pet consumption. “You’d never think to test for it.”
    Indeed, reports out of Washington last week said the FDA was investigating the possibility that workers at the XuZhou Anying factory tainted their product deliberately — that they were using the substance to amp up the apparent nutrient value of their product. Melamine, it turns out, mimics protein when mixed into wheat gluten, creating the illusion that the substance is packed with value. Whether the supposed saboteurs knew it was fatal to animals is one question. How you guard against miscreants half a world away is quite another.

    ————————————————————————————————————————
    Despite what seems to be an unsurmountable crisis, analysts remain optimistic about Menu’s future. Aleem Israel, an analyst at Cormack Securities in Toronto, currently rates Menu Foods Income Fund a “buy,” noting that its status as the primary supplier of wet pet food, as well as the only source of foil pack pet food, ensures its survival. And while most of its customers aren’t locked into long-term supply contracts, no other manufacturer has the economies of scale that can provide the same profits.
    That retailers have an economic stake in maintaining the status quo also works to Menu’s advantage. No grocery giant is standing by the company more staunchly than the one that helped create it. “To say [the contamination] is extremely unfortunate is an understatement,” says Margles, the Loblaw Companies’ spokeswoman. “People feel very strongly about their pets and we feel very strongly about product integrity. Still, they’ve been a valued partner and we have a very detailed recall process here and we are keeping on top of it, as we’re sure they are with any products they’re manufacturing.”
    Margles, like others, blames the tainted raw material, not the manufacturer, for the catastrophe. “It does seem to be linked to the wheat gluten in China,” she says. Such a rationale doesn’t reassure nutritionist Marion Nestle, who compares the Menu case to last summer’s E. coli outbreak in the continental spinach supply. “What this has exposed about globalization issues is just breathtaking,” she says. “No one knew this kind of thing. People knew that spinach was centralized because of what happened over the summer. But the idea that one ingredient from China could go into 100 brands of pet food is something no one had any idea about.”
    Nestle, currently writing a book about pet food, believes the recall should make customers question the price differentials in the pet food market. “The disclosure is particularly striking for people who were paying a lot of money for Iams or one of those expensive brands,” she says. “The idea that the same ingredients are going into cheap brands as expensive brands disturbs pet owners to no end. It’s not that the formulas are the same but that they’re using the same ingredients.”
    It certainly upsets Benjamin DeLong, 33, and his wife Jennifer, 32, a Wadsworth, Ill., couple who believed they were doing their cats Freddie and Rita a favour when they upgraded from no-name brands to Iams’ “Tuna and Sauce” and “Salmon and Sauce” in foil packs. They now blame the products for Freddie’s death and Rita’s illness, and have joined a class-action lawsuit launched in Chicago. “We thought, let’s spend a little more on our pets, get them a little better food and maybe they’ll last a little longer,” Benjamin DeLong says ruefully.
    DeLong was particularly incensed by a full-page newspaper ad taken out shortly after the first recall announcement by Iams-Eukenuba, asking pet owners to keep buying product that was made in its “own” factories in the U.S., and not by Menu Foods. “Hey, you know what, I thought I was buying Iams,” he says. “Obviously there was not enough oversight and management responsibility for somebody over at Menu Foods to stop this from happening. So not only do I hold Menu Foods responsible, but Iams as well.”
    The tragedy has also laid bare the lack of pet food regulation in Canada. The U.S., United Kingdom and European Union all have government agencies that monitor pet food for safety. Though the Department of Consumer and Corporate affairs oversees labelling claims, the Canadian industry is left to police itself. The Pet Food Association of Canada, comprised of manufacturers, has imposed a voluntary nutritional assurance program, while the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association runs a voluntary standards program that certifies only about two per cent of Canadian-produced pet food. Without systematic oversight, however, it’s impossible to know whether the tainted pet food still sits on store shelves in Canada. Last week, the Food and Drug Administration said a random check of 400 retail outlets across the U.S. found some still stocking previously recalled dog and cat food; consumers north of the border have access to no such information.

    ————————————————————————————————————————
    How, then, to respond? Who is to blame when poison makes it into an ingredient made by a foreign supplier for a U.S. distributor, who in turn sells to a Canadian processor who supplies retail outlets for pets across North America? How do you stop it from happening again?
    At least part of the fallout will take the form of legal retribution. Within days of the first recall, class-action lawyers assumed their customary circling pattern, in some cases posting sign-up sheets on their firm websites for potential clients. Frank Jablonski, an attorney from Madison, Wis., says he’s received 3,000 inquiries, nearly half from people whose pets have died. “The stories are devastating,” he says. “You end up spending a lot of time on each one of them because essentially you’re consoling the person.” Jay Strosberg, a class-action lawyer based in Windsor, Ont., who has filed suit against Menu, says he’s received more than 100 calls from people whose pets were sick or had died. The company says it faces more than 50 suits in the U.S.
    These actions are primarily aimed at recouping vet bills. But it’s a measure of how widely the case has resonated that some owners hope to break new legal ground by winning awards for emotional distress. “There’s no way you can tell me that emotion doesn’t factor into this,” says DeLong from Illinois. While courts on both sides of the border have resisted such findings, preferring to treat pets as property rather than family, both Illinois and Tennessee have legislation allowing damages for emotional loss. And in a precedent-setting decision last year, a Superior Court judge in Ontario awarded $1,417.12 to an owner whose dog was let out of a boarding facility and died. The ruling was significant because the judge specifically stated that pets should not be considered “owner’s chattel so as to preclude damages for pain and suffering.”
    The Canadian government, meanwhile, is reconsidering its hands-off approach to pet food safety. Bill Hewett, the executive director of policy and planning for the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, says the Menu case highlights the importance of pets in modern households, and has prompted his branch to reassess its options, including all-out regulation of the industry. The review comes after meetings with the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association, which warned that the absence of rules and standards could expose humans to risk, as well as pets. “What if this had been something other than melamine, like a virus?” asks Dr. Paul Boutet, the association’s president. “Government needs to know these things, because a lot of things that affect pets affect people as well. Look how close these pets are to us now. They’re sleeping in our beds. You could probably find [homes] where pets are eating at the table.”
    Still, neither Boutet nor Hewett foresees a new era of risk-free pet food. The vastness and complexity of the industry, they acknowledge, make it difficult to police effectively. “We have everything from large, internationally competitive manufacturers to mom-and-pop, niche-type producers,” says Hewett. The Menu contamination, he adds pointedly, occurred despite FDA rules requiring pet food makers to ensure the safety of their products, demonstrating the “opportunity for failure” even in the context of government regulation.
    Under the circumstances, pet owners — even those who escaped this particular crisis — have little reason to feel confident. Barring a complete restructuring of the economics of food manufacturing — or a regulatory regime that would see Canadian inspectors combing through factories in China — the question is not how this contamination happened, or how it might have been handled better, but when the next crisis will strike. Henderson, Menu’s CEO, reassures customers that melamine testing will become standard operating procedure for his beleaguered firm. But the broader sentiment in the industry is best summed up in his prediction of Menu’s immediate future: “It will be a return to business as usual.”

    With Nicholas Köhler, Nancy Macdonald and Barbara Righton

    Comment by Eva — April 28, 2007 @ 11:06 am

48. ooops - missed a word —

    They have NUMEROUS LISTINGS for vegetable proteins with ~NPN~, ie; non-protein nitrogen, to BOOST THE poor PROTEIN sources.

    Comment by Kat — April 28, 2007 @ 11:08 am

49. Frankenfoods: The Unnaturalizing of our Food Supply

    http://tinyurl.com/2qy7ua

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 11:10 am

50. Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 8:37 am

    “China will not modify its behavior without the outside pressure of the US consumer.”

    Every US administration since Nixon has treated the Chinese government with kid gloves. The Chinese Communist government has one of the worst human rights records in the world and animal rights are non-existent. The vast majority of the Chinese people are suffering under China’s form of economic gangster capitalism and total political repression, while a few puppets of the government are becoming billionaires and a very small middle class serves as a false showpiece of economic improvement in the country for the general population. Communist China has violated every trade pact and treaty and our government always ignores it or caves in to China’s excuses.

    We will not see real change in the shipment of garbage and trash to this country until the American people wake up to how much power and influence the Chinese government has in Washington and in corporate America.

    How quickly we forget the 1989 massacre in Tiananmen Square. Is this national lack of memory because we are so dependent on or addicted to cheap athletic shoes, cheap … and cheap pet food ingredients?

    Comment by MFEMFEM — April 28, 2007 @ 11:16 am

51. Anyone seen the homes in Summerlin? A bit more than any of us could ever afford. Glad he’s got an expensive home & is relaxing in his backyard with his Mai Tai’s & little umbrellas….sure hope he doesn’t get poked in the eye. Wonder if any little four-legged creatures are enjoying the sunny afternoon with him. Maybe we should email & ask what he’s feeding his pets.

    As for the FDA’s “real investigation about to begin”…..oh, puuuulllleeezzzz….if we have to depend on them for the “investigation”, we are all SOL…..if you get my drift…..

    Comment by JanC — April 28, 2007 @ 11:17 am

52. Gonna go to HEB to see what the deal is with Beneful & that rumor from last night. I called 2 24-hr stores. One said they didn’t have any of the medium sized bags, but the small & large were there. HEB didn’t know anything about a recall, nor did Purina’s answering service. Purina’s answer service was quick to grab the paper & start spewing off info about Mighty Dog, etc.

    I can’t find a post on another recall on bread with PIECES OF COTTON in it. Distribution in the NE.

    http://www.kptv.com/money/9736070/detail.html

    Comment by Kat — April 28, 2007 @ 11:18 am

53. Comment by Kat:

    The FDA has posted new protocols for “melamine testing”. I wondered if they were using the latest advances we were reading about. Not a chemist…can’t tell.

    Comment by Eva — April 28, 2007 @ 11:20 am

54. Comment by Steve — April 28, 2007 @ 8:37 am

    “China will not modify its behavior without the outside pressure of the US consumer.”

    Every US administration since Nixon has treated the Chinese government with kid gloves. The Chinese Communist government has one of the worst human rights records in the world and animal rights are non-existent. The vast majority of the Chinese people are suffering under China’s form of economic gangster capitalism and total political repression, while a few puppets of the government are becoming billionaires and a very small middle class serves as a false showpiece of economic improvement in the country for the general population. Communist China has violated every trade pact and treaty and our government always ignores it or caves in to China’s excuses.

    We will not see real change in the shipment of garbage and trash to this country until the American people wake up to how much power and influence the Chinese government has in Washington and in corporate America.

    How quickly we forget the 1989 massacre in Tiananmen Square. Is this national lack of memory because we are so dependent on or addicted to cheap athletic shoes, … and pet food ingredients?

    Comment by MFEMFEM — April 28, 2007 @ 11:20 am

55. Need to pick up pet food ingredients. Think I’ve finally come up with something my cats like. Doggies have been easy to please, except, they miss their kibble.

    Comment by Kat — April 28, 2007 @ 11:22 am

56. Dear FDA, PFI, et al:

    How many more trusting pets must die before ALL affected pet food companies come forward?

    *sound of crickets*

    Comment by Ally — April 28, 2007 @ 11:23 am

57. “I’m so pissed right now I can’t sit still “

    Aw come on,Shelly,you’re just SAYING that.
    LOL
    I can feel your energy jumping through the screen.
    By the way,I’m not laughing AT you!!!!
    I have been thinking as I’m reading your posts and others that Menu et al would never in a million years have guessed what it would really be like to tangle with pet parents whose kids they had killed/sickened.And the rest of us who do/don’t have pets and are disgusted/enraged beyond words by their heinous acts and all the ugly truths being uncovered daily about the pet food industry.
    I’m sure Henderson spoke for the bunch of them when he indicated that by mid ‘08 it would be business as usual/have blownover/whater the heck he said way back in March.
    Ahem,notice anyone giving up yet,Henderson,Miller et al???Maybe you could try holding your collective breaths if you think that would help??

    Lorna

    Comment by Lorna — April 28, 2007 @ 11:26 am

58. Comment by catlover: “most have normal BUN/Creatinine (blood test) but have crystals in the urine.”

    IDEXX is saying the same thing. All pets who have eaten contaminated food should be tested whether they have symptoms or not. Follow-up tests should also be done, looking for an increase in creatinine - even if it is within normal range.

    Comment by Marilyn — April 28, 2007 @ 11:29 am

59. Kat:

    Did I miss something? What about Beneful & the rumors from last night? I don’t feed it to my dog (thankfully) but have been hearing lots of stories about dogs getting sick & dying but nobody has done anything about it….gee, what a surprise. Sadly, I don’t think it’s the only one left out there that’s causing problems.

    I’d like to hear what’s going on….curious.

    Comment by JanC — April 28, 2007 @ 11:37 am

60. I don’t know if this has been posted before - it’s from Kansas City about MenuFoods Emporia, KS plant being

    RECALL OF TAINTED PET PRODUCTS | FDA agents investigate Emporia, Kan., facility
    Menu Foods plant searched

    The company says it is cooperating with the federal agency in the misdemeanor inquiry.

    By DAN MARGOLIES

    The Kansas City Star

    Federal agents searched Menu Foods’ pet food plant in Emporia, Kan., on Thursday as part of a widening investigation into the recall of contaminated pet food products.

    The Canadian company issued a statement disclosing the search by agents of the federal Food and Drug Administration. The statement said Menu Foods had been informed by the U.S. attorney’s office in Topeka that it was the target of a ***misdemeanor*** inquiry into whether it violated the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act.

    click link for more: http://www.kansascity.com/194/story/86904.html

    Aren’t THEY about 5-6 weeks LATE???

    Comment by Kat — April 28, 2007 @ 11:40 am

61. Here is a thread of a lot of pets getting sick on Beneful:
    http://quikonnex.com/channel/item/26035

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 11:54 am

62. http://www.doggybling.com/newsarticle.php?id=1099

    Holy Cow

    Comment by shelly — April 28, 2007 @ 11:56 am

63. The article in the Chicago Tribune was a very important step. Chicago is economically a world class city with major trade alliances via the CBOT and the MERCANTILE exchange. Chicago is huge and has world renoun educational and research facilities. Illinois also has a robust farming economy centered on some of the richest farmland on earth. For those reasons Chicago can be a very key locus to the many pieces of this world impacting story.

    Several folks have posted ideas for responding to the reporters whose bylines are on the Chicago Tribune article. This is a fine idea and I hope many of you will do so. Letting them know you read the article and appreciate their efforts is so important. There is also another important thing you can do which I have learned about (and I hope perfected) over years of trying to get the public better aware of several important issues. If you are an activist at heart, and one with a cool head and good writing skills please read on…..

    I would like to suggest that your thoughts be sent directly to the editor of the paper, the person who actually has considerably more influence on getting stories published than reporters do. In fact, an anonymous reporter recently posted here to say she had been begging for the opportunity to provide more coverage on the pet food crisis but her editor kept turning her down. In past efforts my fellow crusaders and I have truly found writing “Letters to the Editor” to be a worthwhile and rewarding practice. Enough letters landing there can not only result in more in-depth reporting but also occasionally results in a letter, an editorial or opinion piece being published. The guide below has proven effective in other efforts and there is no reason they will not work for our pets.

    -If submitting by US Mail, make a photocopy of your letter for your records.

    -If submitting by the internet, send your “Letter to the Editor” in a standard email message.

    -Do not use web page forms or blog sites for the newspapers, unless you absolutely have to, because rarely do actual newspaper decision makers see these comments.

    -If you submit via email, you have the opportunity to cc: or bcc: a copy to yourself—submitting via other methods on the internet means you probably won’t have a dated copy of your response, if you get a copy at all. It is very important that you keep a copy for your records.

    -Letters must be civil, use proper grammar, and be informative. Sarcasm, swearing, yelling or calling the editor either a shill of the left or right or corporate America does NOT help our cause. Duplicate letters that sound as if they are part of a PR campaign do not get published and do not help the cause. Letters that sound as if they are written while “under the influence” do not get published and actually hurt the cause.

    -Your Letters to the editor of the Chicago Tribune should be sent to the following email address:
    ctc-TribLetter@tribune.com

    -Hard copy letters to the Chicago Tribune’s Editor should be mailed to: Voice of the People, Chicago Tribune, 435 N. Michigan Ave. Chicago, Il 60611

    -Additional hints for successful letters to the editor are below.

    -The Chicago Tribune is today’s project.

    -But every paper in every other city in America and Canada needs to get a “letter to the editor” from their “pet loving” readers and “safe food” readers each time a story is run about this. If it is incorrect, then correct the facts. If the article was too short, thank them but give them additional story ideas. If your paper has been ignoring the issue completely, as so many have, chastise them for that and ask (politely) when they plan to cover this important and evolving event.

    -Please use your real name and include the city where you live. Remember to include a daytime phone number for verification purposes. The editor may wish to contact you to know you are a real person.

    -Be certain to indicate in your letter that it is “for publication.”

    -Do remember, items submitted to the “letters to the editor” section should generally NOT be cross-posted to other forums such as this blog. Most publications request exclusivity.

    -Be succinct as possible. Longer items generally don’t have as much of a chance of being published. While there are many many interesting facets to the story: China imports/pet death numbers/sad pet stories/high vet bills to save sick animals/possible food chain contamination/corporate malfeasance/fda inadequacy/American farmers, etc. etc., consider focusing on just one or two facets to help move the the larger cause along.

    -Even if your letter does not get published in print or web media, remember that the media decision makers do take note. Every letter reminds editors and news producers that this is, and will continue to be a very important issue.

    Please write.

    Comment by elizabeth R. — April 28, 2007 @ 12:03 pm

64. Comment by JanC — April 28, 2007 @ 11:37 am

    Hi JanC! There apparently isn’t a recall on Beneful, at least one that has been announced.
    I called 2 HEB 24-hr stores & tho the said they were out of the mid-size & didn’t know why they didn’t have it, they had not gotten an official recall.

    I also called Purina. The answering service just gave me the info about Mighty Dog, etc.

    So, officially there is no recall on Beneful… yet. I reported my dogs sick on it to the FDA. They were sick in Feb.

    Comment by Kat — April 28, 2007 @ 12:19 pm

65. BLUE SKY PET FOODS (doing business as: (Subsidiary of TEJAS INDUSTRIES, HEREFORD, TX)
    FM 2943 EAST HIGHWAY 60
    HEREFORD, TX 79045
    (Headquarters location)
    (Trade style, aka, ‘doing business as’)
    MERRICK PETFOODS, INC.

    Solid Gold Health Food for Pets
    Canned foods are made by Blue Sky Pet Foods
    http://www.thepetfoodlist.com/petfoods_pg3.htm

    Comment by S — April 28, 2007 @ 12:21 pm

66. The Great Pet Food Scandal

    How one supplier caused a huge crisis, and why it’s just the tip of the iceberg
    CHARLIE GILLIS AND ANNE KINGSTON | April 30, 2007 |

    Sometime in the next couple of years, when the public gaze has drifted from the tainted pet food epidemic and we’ve all forgotten what melamine is, a judge in Ohio or California or Ontario will take up the daunting question of what a dog or cat is worth. There was considerable legal debate on this topic even before the current uproar. But if an animal’s curative effect on the human heart plays any part in the calculation, the courts might start at a small house in Floral Park, N.Y., where the wounds wrought by the poisoning epidemic will stay raw for a long time to come.

    It was here in the Long Island suburbs that Donna Opallo and a couple of relatives brought home Checkers, a chocolate-eyed beagle puppy, three years ago, figuring she might lend solace to Opallo’s grief-stricken sister, Debbie DiGregorio. The previous week, DiGregorio’s 16-year-old son, Louis, had died suddenly of a brain aneurysm. Frantic for ways to help, the family took a flyer on the dog, and their instincts proved correct. “That dog filled a very big void in her life,” says Opallo, 47, who lives with her 45-year-old sister. As the months passed, it became clear that Checkers possessed healing powers no psychiatrist, friend or relative could equal.

    Then, in mid-February, the family was thrown back into crisis. Checkers began vomiting incessantly and defecating blood, sending the sisters on a series of futile visits to a local veterinarian. Test after test proved inconclusive, and only after Mississauga, Ont.-based Menu Foods issued its first recall of contaminated food on March 16 did the penny finally drop. Both Checkers and Opallo’s own dog, an 11-month-old Bichon-Shih Tzu cross named Taco, had been eating food from foil pouches sold under the Nutro brand name, one of the products on Menu’s list. Checkers survived the initial illness, but her gruesome symptoms persisted. Today her vets can’t say whether she’ll survive. Taco, who hadn’t showed any outward signs of trouble, turned out to be in near-total renal failure. He spent more than a week in an animal hospital in nearby Westbury, with an intravenous line attached to his leg and his owner by his side. “Three-quarters of his kidneys are destroyed, and I don’t know what his life expectancy will be,” says Opallo. “It’s like there’s a little ticking time bomb inside of him.”

    The plight of Checkers and Taco is by no means unique: it is believed some 40,000 pets who ate Menu Foods products made with melamine-laced wheat gluten have been sickened in the U.S. and Canada. While mortality estimates vary, a recent survey by the Davis, Calif.-based Veterinary Network estimated the death toll in the U.S. in the thousands. But it does give some sense of the debacle’s reach — as well as its ruinous effect on each family it touched. Quite apart from the collective US$6,200 in vet bills Opallo and DiGregorio have paid out of their line of credit, or the thousands more they’re willing to spend, they quake knowing they might lose one or both of their beloved animals. “I don’t think I could ever buy another dog,” says Opallo. “I’m basically in denial.”

    The scope of the tragedy — emotional and financial — continues to widen. The recall has been expanded four times in the last four weeks, with 889 separate items under 100 different brand names yanked off the market. The company’s explanations raise more questions than answers, and there’s been predictable talk of reform at the government level. In Canada, talks between pet food makers, vets and a variety of federal agencies have already begun, with a view to imposing rules on an unregulated industry. In the U.S., members of the Senate’s agriculture appropriations subcommittee have held hearings into the Food and Drug Administration’s handling of the crisis, while the FDA itself continues to investigate the cause of the contamination.

    But the economic model that led to the poisoning shows little sign of change. Even in the throes of a PR nightmare, the big grocery chains continue to support Menu, a production behemoth with whom they share a mutual dependency. Loblaw Companies, for one, which sells Menu products under its President’s Choice and No Name brands, has no plans to switch suppliers. “They’ve been a valued partner,” says spokeswoman Elizabeth Margles. “We do have confidence about them at this point.”

    Loblaw may remain unshaken, but for the average dog or cat owner the entire affair has been a faith-testing experience. Little did pet owners know that, whether they were buying a budget supermarket brand or splurging on top-of-the-line fare at a specialty pet store or from a veterinarian, the food was being produced at the same factory and even shared some of the same ingredients. How could they? Menu Foods’ name appeared nowhere on the label. The company existed as an invisible cog in the food chain, churning out most of North America’s most popular wet food in cans and foil pouches to its customers’ blue-chip specifications — Science Diet for Colgate Palmolive, Iams for Procter & Gamble, Whiskas for Purina. It also manufactured an estimated 75 per cent of private label brands in Canada, including Wal-Mart’s, Sobey’s and Pet Valu’s. In the United States, where its customers include PetSmart, Safeway and Wal-Mart, Menu supplies between 40 per cent and 50 per cent of wet pet food.

    The story of how a tiny, shoestring operation in Toronto’s western suburbs came to dominate its industry reflects the seismic shifts in the manufacturing food chain over the past three decades. Increasing power wielded by the margin-obsessed, cutthroat supermarket industry has forced manufacturers to source cheaper ingredients globally. Those forces have favoured faceless giants — players capable of supplying myriad products demanded by retailers, retooling and remixing recipes as the orders came in. But as the Menu case demonstrates, the system also ensures a continent-wide catastrophe when something goes wrong. Marion Nestle, a professor in the department of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, doesn’t see the Menu tragedy as an aberration. Rather she calls it “the tip of the iceberg.”

    Suffice to say, no such spectre troubled Robert Bras, the sharp young supermarket executive who bought into Menu Foods in the late 1970s and turned the plodding company into a trailblazer. At the time, Bras was working for Loblaw Companies, a firm in the midst of its own astounding turnaround from down-at-the-heels grocery chain. Central to its recovery strategy was a private-label program that would rival the big national brands in quality and sales. Without the advertising and distribution costs that inflated the prices of national labels, executives reasoned, a supermarket could sell its own brand — often made at national brands’ factories — at a lower cost for a higher margin. Pet food was a critical part of the scheme: it is a high-frequency purchase that brings people into the store. Desirable proprietary brands presented a way to cultivate customer loyalty. Sensing untapped opportunity, Bras left Loblaw in 1977 and bought a 50 per cent stake in Menu, a manufacturing generalist that made everything from bargain-basement pet food to bleach.

    Bras quickly stripped away extraneous product lines and purchased a factory in New Jersey with an eye to expanding into the U.S. But his big break came in 1979, with a contract to produce Loblaw’s “no-name” canned pet food. The first offering, a No Name Luxury meat mix, claimed to match brand leader Dr. Ballard’s formula in quality at a lower price. The “luxury” reference was a master stroke: it seduced pet owners into believing they were buying status for the same price as “maintenance” — an industry term for standard product. Within six months, it was the No.1-selling product at Loblaw’s Ontario stores.

    Menu’s sales grew 25 per cent a year on average during the 1980s, fuelled by the growing number of supermarkets cluing in to the fact they could make margins of 35 to 40 per cent profit on their own premium house-label pet food. Business was buoyed by the fact that pets were increasingly viewed as full-fledged family members — “furkids” as they came to be called. Nowhere was this more apparent than at the pet bowl. When canned dog food was introduced in 1922 there was no pretense of nutritional benefits; the only benefactors were meat packers who seized on a profitable way of disposing of surplus offal and horse meat. By the 1980s, however, pets’ diets were mirroring their owners’ own peccadillos, food phobias and culinary dispositions, be they kosher, hypo-allergenic, vegetarian or low-fat.

    “We have anthropomorphized our pets,” says Kelly Caldwell, editor of Dogs in Canada. “You want to feel you’re giving your dog the best possible food. It’s a way to show we care, that we’re not scrimping, that they’re valuable.” Caldwell buys only “organic” feed for her purebreds because that’s what she eats. “I’ve bought into the packaging and promises,” she says. Nutrition tops the concern of Dogs in Canada readers, she says. Bras understood the business was “counter-economic.” Pet food wasn’t sold on price alone; if your dog or cat isn’t going to eat it, you’re not going to buy it. And if people believed they’d improve the health or extend life of their pet, they’d spend more on higher-priced premium labels.
    Menu’s expansion in the United States was ramped up in the 1990s when Cott Corporation, a Toronto-based manufacturer of private-label soft drinks with grand plans for global domination, bought the remaining 50 per cent stake in the company. Wal-Mart and Safeway were added to Menu’s customer roster. The company also benefited from the fact that national brands, under assault from retailer labels, were increasingly outsourcing their manufacturing so they could focus on “managing the brand.” It was an ironic twist: managing the brand became synonymous with distancing itself from the grimy business of production.

    Menu, meanwhile, invested heavily in a U.S. infrastructure. A state-of the-art factory was built in Emporia, Kan. In 2001, Menu bought the wet food operations of Doane Pet Care for US$15 million. The following year, the company went public on the Toronto Stock Exchange as an income trust, a structure that avoids most corporate taxation because most of the company’s income is paid directly to its unit holders. If there’s a discernible turning point in the company’s history, however, it is 2002, when Bras died of cancer. He was replaced by Paul Henderson, a former chief operating officer at Cott. In 2003, Menu assumed US$85 million in new debt to purchase a Procter & Gamble plant in North Sioux City, S.D. With that purchase came a five-year supply agreement to be the exclusive supplier of Iams and Eukanuba wet foods, which now account for about 11 per cent of Menu’s sales.

    But even as Menu’s business grew exponentially, its margins were reportedly under constant pressure. It was rumoured within the industry that Wal-Mart and Loblaw, eager to maintain their own margins in a competitive pricing environment, kept a lid on prices that squeezed Menu’s profits. Specifically, Menu was expected to deliver expensively made foil packs — now at the centre of the contamination controversy — at the same price as cans. “They definitely had to eat margins to a point they weren’t making any money selling to Wal-Mart,” says an industry insider who explains Menu couldn’t afford to lose the contracts because they provided credibility with potential customers. Loblaw says there was no freeze on prices. “We always try to keep prices down but didn’t say you couldn’t raise prices,” Margles says. “We always try to keep costs down for our customers. We have to remain competitive.”

    At the end of 2005, Menu reported a loss of $54.6 million and suspended payments to its unit holders, blaming the decline in the value of the U.S. dollar. The next year Menu returned to profitability, yet its cash distributions remain suspended. By early 2007, with a revived Canadian dollar and new price increases, prospects appeared on the upswing. Improved cash flow was being used to pay down debt and industry analysts were expecting it to resume distributions to unit holders.

    If the engines of Menu’s success were humming again, they cut out abruptly on March 16, 2007. The recall notice the company issued that morning downplayed the implications, describing the removal of 60 million units from the market as “precautionary” and omitting all reference to any potential contaminant. Within days, however, the FDA was asking awkward questions about wheat gluten shipped from China, and pet owners were starting to exchange horror stories on the Internet.
    What the company did next will surely go down as a case study in how not to manage a crisis. Far from tackling the matter head-on — by, say, quickly withdrawing all products made with suspect material — it left items on the shelves for what by human food-safety standards seemed an eternity. On March 24, eight days after its original notice, Menu expanded its recall to include all varieties of its wet pet food, a rearguard action that encompassed those household names it had so assiduously cultivated, from Iams to Wal-Mart’s house brand Ol’ Roy. Two more recalls would follow, the first on April 5 for all Menu products made with the suspect wheat gluten, including dry food; the next on April 10, when Menu pulled products made at its plant in Mississauga (previous recalls affected product made at the Kansas plant).

    At the centre of all of this was an ingredient few North Americans had heard of before the crisis. Wheat gluten — essentially, destarched flour dough — is used in pet food to bind and add texture. Menu had previously been buying it from U.S. sources, but had switched last November to an obscure Chinese manufacturer called XuZhou Anying Biologic Technology Development Co. Menu cited a gluten shortage in North America for the change, but a cynic would point to other potential motivations: in 2006, wheat gluten from China sold for about 20 cents per pound less than that made by U.S. competitors.
    Whatever the savings Menu realized, however, could not possibly have been worth what followed. By Feb. 22, according to timelines provided by the company, Menu was receiving warnings from consumers that its food was sickening pets. On Feb. 27, routine taste tests of its own products resulted in the deaths of at least two and, by some accounts, as many as 10 animals. Still, it took Menu until March 8 to notify ChemNutra, the Las Vegas-based distributer of the Chinese product, that it was investigating the possibility the gluten was causing illness. The recall, however, wouldn’t come for another eight days.

    The contempt implicit in this tardiness infuriates pet owners. Jody Tomlinson of Coquitlam, B.C., lost his job as a warehouse supervisor after spending hours on the phone last winter researching the mysterious kidney ailment that eventually claimed the life of his two-year-old mastiff, Binky. The idea that Menu may have sat on vital information leaves the 38-year-old fuming, and calling for government regulation. “Greed started this,” he says, “not common sense.” Lance Ganske, a Calgary sheet-metal worker who lost Blackie, one of several pet cats, now distrusts the entire industry. “When I buy something, I don’t know whether it’s going to be good or not,” he says, “and I still have to feed my animals.”
    Menu officials haven’t helped matters, allowing their phones to ring unanswered for hours at a time, according to angry consumers, and providing confusing explanations for what went wrong. (In one interview, vice-president Randall Copeland blamed part of the contamination on a “clerical error” that saw the wheat gluten bags receive false U.S. labelling; photos supplied by the product’s U.S. distributor clearly show the words “Made in China” printed directly on the bags.) In an email to Maclean’s last week, Menu CEO Paul Henderson disputed suggestions that the company dragged its feet. While Menu did receive reports of cat illnesses on Feb. 22 and 28, he said, “the vets who attended these cats informed Menu that they each had access to various contaminants and could have gotten into something they should not have, such as antifreeze.” A third call reporting a cat death came in on March 5, Henderson said, and while Menu did not receive veterinary information about the third case, the consumer did send in the unused food. “We tested the food, but the testing did not reveal anything wrong with it,” he wrote.

    The irony in all of this is that Menu was blindsided as well — the company just can’t seem to communicate it. In the end, lab tests performed in late March on the Chinese gluten identified the likely cause of the poisoning as melamine, a plastic by-product that is entirely foreign to the production of wheat gluten — or, for that matter, pet food. “It’s unheard of,” says Steve Pickman, a vice-president at Atchison, Kan.-based MPG Ingredients Inc., which makes wheat gluten for human and pet consumption. “You’d never think to test for it.”

    Indeed, reports out of Washington last week said the FDA was investigating the possibility that workers at the XuZhou Anying factory tainted their product deliberately — that they were using the substance to amp up the apparent nutrient value of their product. Melamine, it turns out, mimics protein when mixed into wheat gluten, creating the illusion that the substance is packed with value. Whether the supposed saboteurs knew it was fatal to animals is one question. How you guard against miscreants half a world away is quite another.

    Despite what seems to be an unsurmountable crisis, analysts remain optimistic about Menu’s future. Aleem Israel, an analyst at Cormack Securities in Toronto, currently rates Menu Foods Income Fund a “buy,” noting that its status as the primary supplier of wet pet food, as well as the only source of foil pack pet food, ensures its survival. And while most of its customers aren’t locked into long-term supply contracts, no other manufacturer has the economies of scale that can provide the same profits.

    That retailers have an economic stake in maintaining the status quo also works to Menu’s advantage. No grocery giant is standing by the company more staunchly than the one that helped create it. “To say [the contamination] is extremely unfortunate is an understatement,” says Margles, the Loblaw Companies’ spokeswoman. “People feel very strongly about their pets and we feel very strongly about product integrity. Still, they’ve been a valued partner and we have a very detailed recall process here and we are keeping on top of it, as we’re sure they are with any products they’re manufacturing.”
    Margles, like others, blames the tainted raw material, not the manufacturer, for the catastrophe. “It does seem to be linked to the wheat gluten in China,” she says. Such a rationale doesn’t reassure nutritionist Marion Nestle, who compares the Menu case to last summer’s E. coli outbreak in the continental spinach supply. “What this has exposed about globalization issues is just breathtaking,” she says. “No one knew this kind of thing. People knew that spinach was centralized because of what happened over the summer. But the idea that one ingredient from China could go into 100 brands of pet food is something no one had any idea about.”

    Nestle, currently writing a book about pet food, believes the recall should make customers question the price differentials in the pet food market. “The disclosure is particularly striking for people who were paying a lot of money for Iams or one of those expensive brands,” she says. “The idea that the same ingredients are going into cheap brands as expensive brands disturbs pet owners to no end. It’s not that the formulas are the same but that theyR