Pet-food recall: I just don’t know what to say edition and Thursday morning open thread
By Gina Spadafori
May 10, 2007
- If you have a sick pet or a question on your pet’s health, call your veterinarian.
- If you’re new to the site, please check out our general information page (includes information on recalled foods).
- If you want to report a sick or deceased pet, click here.
I love media releases. The truly clueless, poorly written and horribly timed ones are fun to trash, and the ones written by the truly gifted practitioners of the craft of spin are even more challenging for reading between the lines. And then there are the sincere ones that reveal that the people behing them truly do live in some parallel universe, and believe the nonsense they say.
The caffeine hasn’t quite kicked in, so I’m going to let you all figure out which category this one falls into, if any:
MT MORRIS, Ill., May 10 /PRNewswire/ — On the heels of its annual Petfood Forum and Petfood Forum Europe conferences and trade events, which together gathered more than 1,300 executives from all segments of the petfood marketplace worldwide, Petfood Industry magazine today outlined some of the initial ideas and the protocol discussed at the events to address the recent string of petfood recalls and the evolving crisis facing this industry.
The events took place in Chicago the week of April 16-19 and in Utrecht, Netherlands on May 8. Among the key topics discussed during Petfood Forum and Petfood Forum Europe were how the recent petfood recalls have affected quality assurance procedures and future methods, traceability aspects of the business, and potential procedures to help ensure the safety and health of family pets. The attendees also discussed establishing a crisis program designed to assist and/or honor those families and pets affected by the contaminated petfood.
“As businesspeople and animal lovers ourselves, the recent string of petfood contaminations have been a difficult situation for all of us in the petfood industry,” said Debbie Phillips-Donaldson, editor-in-chief of Petfood Industry. “We recognize the need for new measures to be put in place for ongoing communication to the media and consumers and started actions toward this end.”
One of those actions is the development of a Petfood Industry Advisory Board which will consist of an objective group of industry members with the best interest of family pets and all entities in the Petfood industry at its core. Discussions are currently taking place to finalize the goal and objectives of the group, as well as the individuals to be members of the board.
[More after jump]
“This year’s Petfood Forum events were of great value as they provided an industry think tank for ideas and insight, and were truly the first opportunity for the industry to come together as a whole on the petfood recalls,” said Phillips-Donaldson. “The specialized sessions, such as traceability, during this critical timeframe added more relevance to the events.”
Within the next 30 – 45 days, Petfood Industry magazine will provide additional insight and details into the Advisory Board, protocol and procedure methodologies, and proactive communication practices to keep the media and consumers better informed on ongoing issues that might affect the health and welfare of their pets.
This information will be found in the magazine, on Petfood Industry’s web site, http://www.petfoodindustry.com, and in the electronic newsletters like Petfood E-News and Petfood Nutrition News, which reach the market consistently throughout each month.
Petfood Forum, Petfood Forum Europe and Petfood Forum Asia are the premier events for petfood industry executives worldwide. Presented by Petfood Industry magazine and Watt Publishing Co., over the past 15 years, these forum events have provided the industry with educational sessions on relevant industry topics; opportunities to showcase and preview the latest products, processes, and advancements; and a forum for interacting with peers, sharing the latest industry practices, and networking with leaders across the industry and throughout the world.
Petfood Industry (http://www.petfoodindustry.com/, http://www.petfoodindustry-digital.com/) is the leading global information source for professionals responsible for developing, processing, marketing and packaging petfood products. It is published by Watt Publishing Co., which has been delivering business information to decision makers in the U.S. and global petfood, woodworking and food-producing animal industries since 1917.
Reminder: Here is the link
to the transcript from the chat with itchmo, petfoodtracker, thepetfoodlist, and the PetConnection.com bloggers.
Go to the latest blog post | Go to the PetConnection home page
|Technorati Tags: pet food recall, dogs, cats,veterinarian, veterinary
“One of those actions is the development of a Petfood Industry Advisory Board which will consist of an objective group of industry members with the best interest of family pets and all entities in the Petfood industry at its core.”
Reality time: if you’re an industry member, you’re not objective.
Let me guess, Duane Ekedahl is either on the nominating committe or is nominating himself to be on the Advisory Board.
Comment by slt — May 10, 2007 @ 8:48 am
I sent Hills Science diet Co an email about the wheat flour, that is listed as an ingredient. I have not received a reply yet. Maybe they have too many incoming questions from customers. Customer service seems almost non existent these days.
Comment by Peter — May 10, 2007 @ 8:50 am
“The specialized sessions, such as traceability, during this critical timeframe added more relevance to the events.”
Do you think this topic was on the agenda in January?
I’m glad they are are feeling so upbeat about the future. And we only have to wait another month for them to speak up….
Comment by Cathy — May 10, 2007 @ 8:54 am
Unless they have something to say on the order of
” We killed your pets and have been real jerks and we are sorry and all those vet bills, here we will pay that and please , please let us have a second chance and Duane is out on his butt because you don’t like him, OK?” and unless they say that from on their knees, or on national TV with a listing of the symptoms of renal failure and an admission of the total FAILURE of the pet food industry to get that news out two months ago while many pets were suffering and dying, not much they have to say that I care to hear.
Comment by E. Hamilton — May 10, 2007 @ 9:04 am
PFI Editor Debbie Phillips-Donaldson apparently hasn’t woken up to the realization that the industry she represents is getting more corrupted, more criminal in nature, infested with worse and worse human beings by the day.
I wonder if her eyes would glaze over if she was asked in person how she feels about being an official sycophant, a servile self-seeker who attempts to win favor by flattering influential people in the Pet Food Racket.
Comment by Steve — May 10, 2007 @ 9:11 am
“…these forum events have provided the industry with… a forum for interacting with peers, sharing the latest industry practices, and networking with leaders across the industry and throughout the world.”
So are these “forum events” to blame for how everybody in the pet food industry came to realize you could cut costs and cheat consumers by tossing in toxic protein powders from China?
And now these are the same folks who are going to police themselves with their own Advisory Board?
Comment by slt — May 10, 2007 @ 9:14 am
the pet food industry advisory board idea is quite a hoot, eh? i don;t think we need to wonder what they’re going to say to affected pet owners… they’re going to say, gee that’s too bad about ol’ fluffy there, but it wasn’t really our fault so suck it up.
i believe the appropriate category for this is Bull**it
Comment by pat — May 10, 2007 @ 9:16 am
“Petfood Industry Advisory Board “
Maybe the next issue of PetFood Industry magazine should
- publish a photo of each dog or cat that has died or suffered critical illness
- give a brief account of the animal’s suffering
- list the specific food they consumed
- give an account of the pet parent’s grief
- disclose the amount of money spent to save their family member
All the Advisory Committee members could look at that each morning when they go to work.
Comment by Donna — May 10, 2007 @ 9:19 am
Were the Millers in the audience?
Comment by Steve — May 10, 2007 @ 9:29 am
I looked at the site http://www.petfoodindustry.com/
Dummy me, I thought it was for us consumers!
This seems to be for the pet food industry to get together and figure out how to communicate to the media and consumer…
I know I’m real jaded and have no trust left for these folks, but I’m just saying that it sounds like they’re gonna put their heads together to figure out just what we want to hear and then feed it to the media…
OK, how about we start with:
1.) All finished foods tested for melamine and cyanuric acid.
2.) The results of those tests published and readily available.
I don’t want to hear about suppliers, this one step thing sucks.
What I really what to know is this:
How come the pet food companies have to wait for the FDA to tell them the food is toxic.
Do they really not know where the ingredients come from? But I know they don’t, I read it, they don’t have to know that.
But, why o’ why, haven’t they looked into their suppliers and investigated the whole chain. Back in March, when this all started!
Why didn’t they they just run out and do the ethical thing and just test their foods themselves? Please, Go test the food, Now!
The test cost about $100 - $150 for us. They would get a break or buy the testing machine.
A production run is, well, I have no idea, but lets say you get a 1000 cans…
So, that’s about 10 cents a can. I’ll pay it, that is nothing.
Absolutely nothing compared to my Vet bill! Not to mention the health of my pet who didn’t need to be poisoned in the first place. And a little piece of mind when I have to feed them to be sure I’m not poisoning them, (again); or my family, either.
Comment by Peggy (AKA: Big Fat Momma Cat) — May 10, 2007 @ 9:29 am
Fear and Loathing in Utrecht
http://tinyurl.com/37kbns
Comment by Steve — May 10, 2007 @ 9:32 am
Let me tell you browsing through this is enough to make any responsible pet parent permanently switch their pets over to a home cooked diet.
Bio-Fuel Co-Products in Pet Food? Pg 40
http://tinyurl.com/37kbns
Comment by Steve — May 10, 2007 @ 9:41 am
Follow the Money
http://finance.google.com/fina.....lient=news
Comment by Steve — May 10, 2007 @ 9:49 am
Apparently the Pet Food Industry sees our Pets as living garbage and waste product disposals.
Later, I need a break before I projectile vomit from reading that rag.
Comment by Steve — May 10, 2007 @ 9:55 am
Thanks for the links Steve.
Comment by Donna — May 10, 2007 @ 9:56 am
Maybe we’re going about this all wrong. Maybe we should all buy shares in Menu Foods. If we were controlling shareholders, we actually might get heard.
Comment by Joyce — May 10, 2007 @ 9:59 am
Reading between the lines of the press release:
We have a problem. We know we have a problem. We can’t agree on what the problem is. We can’t agree on a solution.
But we know we have to do something.
So we are going to create an advisory board.
We can’t agree on what the advisory board will do. We can’t agree on who should be on the advisory board. We can’t agree on when we will decide.
But at least we’re doing something. Actually, we are doing nothing. But we didn’t agree to do nothing, so we are only going to do nothing until we agree to do something.
Comment by Mike — May 10, 2007 @ 10:00 am
It’s a wonder all our pets don’t have ulcers - bio fuel? Just when I’ve heard it all, something else pops up. Gag a maggot!
Comment by Linda — May 10, 2007 @ 10:02 am
Maybe we should create our own Advisory Board and organize our efforts.
Comment by Donna — May 10, 2007 @ 10:02 am
Maybe we’re going about this all wrong. Maybe we should all buy shares in Menu Foods. If we were controlling shareholders, we actually might get heard.
Comment by Joyce — May 10, 2007 @ 9:59 am
Actually, this would be an excellent idea. One doesn’t have to be a majority owner in order to receive all financial documents, prospecti, and other company information that isn’t readily available. Indeed, I would think it one of the best ways to monitor who is contracting with Menu (even if they wish it semi-veiled) and who drops them over the coming months. Also, shareholders do have some leverage with agencies, albeit no much, but some. I am going to look into buying five-ten shares.
I always want to know who is using Menu, past and future, as I intend never to purchase a single item from that source. Call it a personal vendetta if you like. Indeed, any company that out-sources will never receive another dollar from me. Thus, Priority brand from Safeway is just one of a number of foods and companies that I will maintain a non-buying attitude toward. Indeed, Menu manufactured goods should be boycotted now and forever simply based on their actions and the fact that so many animals died from December until now due to their lack of conscience.
Incidentally, at my local Safeway, the shelf space allotted to Priority pouches has a tag saying, “COMING SOON”. It has been there for several weeks. One other note though I rarely go to that store now is that I never see anyone in the pet food aisle where once it seemed quite common.
Comment by Jay — May 10, 2007 @ 10:21 am
a lengthy press release that says absolutely nothing. so they TALKED about “quality assurance”, “traceability” and “potential procedures to ensure safety”, but what they decided to DO was set up an advisory board of their own NONobjective members. Note to PFI: most advisory boards contain laypeople and interested community members. But hey, they are going to improve communications to the media—-what a relief. what jack*sses.
Comment by nancy — May 10, 2007 @ 10:27 am
What on earth happened the the National Pet Food Commission they so proudly marched in front of us right after this debaucle started?
Anybody heard any gargling out of them?
Comment by Ann H. — May 10, 2007 @ 10:32 am
comment by Steve:
“PFI Editor Debbie Phillips-Donaldson apparently hasn’t woken up to the realization that the industry she represents is getting more corrupted, more criminal in nature, infested with worse and worse human beings by the day.”
Steve, How do you know they’ve gotten MORE corrupted? They just got caught. They’ve probably been this corrupt the whole time. It’s news to us who believe we have a higher standard of living, but news to them? I doubt it. I wonder whose more corrupt… American corps & govt or Chinese corps & govt. Maybe the Chinese are just a little less slick about their PR for the time being but our PR firms are going global too.
Comment by Cynthia — May 10, 2007 @ 10:34 am
If we got a significant number of people to buy shares in Menu, then all sold them the same day, wonder if we could crash the company completely? Is that illegal? Kind of the opposite of insider trading.
Comment by Joyce — May 10, 2007 @ 10:37 am
I think their advisory board needs to have an equal number of consumers / pet parents on it. People who do not own shares in pet food companies, or participate in pet food company sponsored events. Then maybe we’d just begin to approach “objective” and start to rebuild credibility.
Comment by Marilyn — May 10, 2007 @ 10:41 am
Mike that about sums it up!
A crisis program designed to assist and honor those families and pets affected by the contaminated food……How about make restitions to those families and pets affected by the contaminated food we sold them, spouting it’s healthy benfits even after we were highly suspect we had an huge problem? Do they really think any one of us who lost or has a sickened pet want to speak with the very business that posioned our pets in a crisis program setting.
How about a one on one with the big guys in charge, so he/she can see the faces telling him/her each and every horror stories of how they killed our beloved pets.
Crisis program= damage control.
Ah, feeling better now that the a.m. rant is out of my system.
Comment by Maudigan — May 10, 2007 @ 10:43 am
I have a couple people I’d love to nominate to be on that board: Smart people with the science chops and the ability to call BS when they see it.
A couple of the regular commenters here would be perfect.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — May 10, 2007 @ 10:46 am
What I want to say wouldn’t be polite….
Comment by Jenny — May 10, 2007 @ 10:48 am
Last year in April, U of Minnesota hosted a day long conference on Terrorist Threats to Our Food Supply
http://tinyurl.com/2ektrw
The video presentations are available online. Good stuff if you’re interested about the vulnerabilities in the system.
Comment by hornblower — May 10, 2007 @ 10:49 am
“We recognize the need for new measures to be put in place for ongoing communication to the media and consumers and started actions toward this end.”
If the pet food industry would use quality ingredients and develop a thorough testing protocol, the need for “ongoing communication” would be greatly reduced, don’t you think?!!!!!
Comment by Sue — May 10, 2007 @ 10:53 am
“Petfood” isn’t even a word, according to my spellchecker. I guess it’s “newspeak” for “pet food”. They don’t even think of it as “food”.
Comment by Palomino — May 10, 2007 @ 10:56 am
In China they do not value pet’s lives as much as we do as a whole. They eat dogs,sell coats with cat fur,etc. Not to say all Chinese feel this way,but many just seem to be out to make a buck by exporting anything and the greed seems to have transferred to American pet companies.Even in pet food manufactured in the US, you cannot be sure of purity-moldy corn,etc.Even human quality food could have salmonella. It is a dilemma!
Comment by Julie — May 10, 2007 @ 10:58 am
We need a grass roots movement to boycott these major pet food companies - that is about the only thing that will get their attention.
Comment by Linda — May 10, 2007 @ 11:05 am
How bout this one.
Within the next 30 - 45 days, Petfood Industry magazine will provide additional insight and details into the Advisory board who will assist the PFI in lobbying for immunity to lawsuits and new regulations which will no doubt cause great harm to our industry.
Comment by Steve — May 10, 2007 @ 11:56 am
If I read *one more time* what family-oriented, pet-loving people those Pet Food Bozos are I’m going to scream!
It is beyond me how anybody who works in that industry, knows about the ingredients, signs off invoices (and earns their paycheck by keeping the costs down) has no idea about the melamime spiking of certain supplements.
The employees of the food manufacturer must have known what went into those nice little pouches and cans, and what got burnt to a crisp as kibble.
If these people tell me they fed their own animals with that food I become more than a bit weary.
Quote:
“As businesspeople and animal lovers ourselves, (snip because of yaddayadda),” said Debbie Phillips-Donaldson, editor-in-chief of Petfood Industry. End Quote
Right. ‘Businesspeople’ comes before ‘Animal lovers’.
I need someone who prints pillow cases. With ‘Bang Head Here’ on one side. My head is starting to become almost rectangular because of all that head banging.
Comment by MaKo — May 10, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Comment by MaKo — May 10, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Yes and the blind faith “I dunno” crowd.
Dr. _______ with the Animal Care Clinic in ______ says the food will probably never be 100 percent safe. He says we have to depend on the Food and Drug Administration’s monitoring.
Veterinary Pet Insurance
Dr. __________ says one way pet owners could prepare for large vet bills is to get Veterinary Pet Insurance. The veterinarian says a well-known pet insurance company- VPI Pet Insurance- costs an average of $50 a month.
Wow!!!! Don’t fix the food, the system. Spend money on pet health insurance for the inevitable pet food induced crisis! Who’d a thunk it!!!!!!!
Comment by Steve — May 10, 2007 @ 12:32 pm
establishing a crisis program designed to assist and/or honor those families and pets affected by the contaminated petfood.
Oh please! Forget honoring dead pet families, pay their friggin’ bills! And take quality control seriously, which includes traceability, no substitutions and accurate labels.
So quit dabbin’ yer eyes like a funeral director and get your collective hind ends in gear.
Comment by CathyA — May 10, 2007 @ 12:58 pm
” […] Petfood Industry magazine today outlined […]”
Definition of insanity = Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.
Ergo, definition of “PFI” = Petfood Insanity.
Comment by K9Rescue — May 10, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
“will consist of an objective group of industry members…”
This one part says it all, when you see this type of phrase being used, you know you can save yourself some time and not even have to finish eading the piece….better yet, they could have saved themselves some time and not hae even written it!
Comment by Sandi K — May 10, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
“Definition of insanity = Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results.
Ergo, definition of “PFI” = Petfood Insanity.”
OH MY GOD………I HAVE PFI.
Can I sue Menu Foods for that?
Comment by Joyce — May 10, 2007 @ 3:21 pm
This is the first article I’ve come across that mentions the long term effects to pets exposed to the toxic food who may have some kidney damage that’s not measurable now, but could affect the animals life adversely nonetheless.
http://www.visaliatimesdelta.c...../705050361
Comment by Marcia — May 10, 2007 @ 11:08 pm
“…establishing a crisis program designed to assist and/or honor those families and pets affected by the contaminated petfood.”
Exactly what is there to honor in having been a family affected by the recall?? I don’t get it. We’re just an ordinary family who fed our dogs a food we thought was safe. One of them suffered and died. Do they want to honor us for not paying as much attention to what we were feeding our dogs as it now is obvious we needed to?
Assist us by reimbursing us for our approximately $2,000 of vet expenses. (Nutro has said they will do that, though I am still skeptical.) Assist us by learning from your mistakes and being a *real* part of the solution. Assist us by listening to our story and helping us heal.
There is nothing honorable about what happened to us.
Comment by Pamela J. Betz-Baron — May 23, 2007 @ 9:53 am
Oh, and they might consider start a fund for possible future vet costs associated with tainted food. We had tests done on our remaining dog, who is now 1y2mo, and who ate only a partial can of tainted food. Some of her values were a little off, but not enough to cause concern, just caution. At our vet’s suggestion, we retested her a month later. There are still a couple of values that are a bit off, so our vet suggests retesting her at her next regular checkup.
Thousands of other pets in similar situations warrant extra testing for the rest of their lives. What might we expect in the future?? Is she more at risk for kidney problems? Nobody knows.
Comment by Pamela J. Betz-Baron — May 23, 2007 @ 10:04 am