Pet-food recall: The rock or the hard place?

Do you like this story?

Pet-food recall: The rock or the hard place?

By Gina Spadafori

May 16, 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 pet-food recall information page (includes information on recalled foods).

Who inspects the food? So …. which route do you find more trustworthy? Having food safety taken care of by a handful of gutted government agencies with strong industry ties? Or having inspections performed by private laboratories paid for by an industry itself?

We know which the industry prefers: The latter over the former, but anything except real reform:

Stung by one of the largest recalls in pet food history, makers of dog and cat foods are developing a plan to prevent future contamination by hiring private laboratories to verify that foreign suppliers are shipping the right products and meeting quality standards.

Companies will soon begin working out the technical details of hiring government-approved testers to certify the identity and safety of pet food ingredients shipped from overseas, said Duane Ekedahl, president of the Pet Food Institute, which represents manufacturers.

“Our government cannot test every shipment into the United States, but what we can rely on is a system of certification,” he said.

Companies hope the move will reassure concerned consumers and stave off tough congressional action.

Experts praised the idea, which they said borrowed from existing practices that have proved successful in guarding the safety of human food and food considered risky enough to warrant government detention at American ports.

Yet experts cautioned that the success of a full-scale system would depend on pet food companies hiring qualified and independent inspectors, and on being backed up by more and better government enforcement.

“The food industry should be doing these things, but it’s up to government to verify,” said Michael P. Doyle, director of the University of Georgia’s Center for Food Safety.

Emphasis mine. Reassurance, not reform. Nothing to see here, folks, move on!

That’s an excerpt from the Balitmore Sun, whose Jonathan D. Rockoff is still hanging tough on the “16 dead pets” line. Well, “at least16,” he writes. Yeah I guess a few thousand (which even the FDA says is likely true) is “at least 16.”

Again, this is not about “just” pet food. It’s about food safety for us all. Buying ingredients from a country with no real regulation and widespread fraud is just not good policy, no matter how much lipstick you put on that pig.

Update: Bringing up from comments (and from Itchmo, thanks!), Menu Foods has added claims information to its recall Web page. Menu Foods says it has received “hundreds of thousands of calls from concerned consumers.”

But only, multiple media sources continue to report, “16 dead pets” confirmed — most of whom died in feeding trials at Menu Foods.

Go to the latest blog post | Go to the PetConnection home page

|Technorati Tags: pet food recall, dogs, cats,veterinarian, veterinary

Filed under: 2007 food recall,animals: pets,news — Gina Spadafori @ 8:30 am

Comments (129)

129 Comments »

How you gonna put lipstick on a pig, Gina?

Never heard that one before. :) Thanks for the laugh!!

Comment by Peggy (AKA: Big Fat Momma Cat) — May 16, 2007 @ 8:39 am
“Companies will soon begin working out the technical details of hiring government-approved testers to certify the identity and safety of pet food ingredients shipped from overseas, said Duane Ekedahl, president of the Pet Food Institute, which represents manufacturers.”

First - coming from Duane-y-boy, I feel no reassurance whatsoever. The day of that ever happening is long gone. Mooooooobing along indeed….

Second - IF I decide to remain purchasing commercial pet food in lieu of home cooking (or ever have to rely on it for one reason or another, ie: travel, etc.) I refuse to ever buy from a pet food company again that utilizes foreign countries for any of their ingredients.

Third - if a pet food lists “U.S. sourced” they sure as heck better have a list of who in the U.S. is sourcing their ingredients. U.S. sourced no longer means didley squar in my book. They could be importing ingredients via a U.S. sourced broker. Thanks for playing, but I’ll pass.

I don’t envy the pet food companies. Now that the lid has been blown off and to kingdom come on many of their deep, dark, not so pretty secrets, they all have a severely tough road ahead to regain our trust. That’s assuming of course they CAN ever regain our trust. At this point in time, I can’t say whether or not that will ever even be possible for me.

Human food stuffs…….I’ll let go for now. That’s fodder enough for an entire novella of another thread.

Comment by Ally — May 16, 2007 @ 8:49 am
“Mooooobing” = “Moooooving”

Comment by Ally — May 16, 2007 @ 8:50 am
This article from the UK describes what SHOULD HAVE been done with the poultry and hogs that ate the tainted feed.

Note that it was intended for humans and was incinerated, not allowed to be sold into the pet food industry!

The inspectors there seem to really be on the ball!

“Chinese beef goes up in flames after raid”

Article is lengthy:
http://tinyurl.com/2fylf6

“The illegal meat had been sneaked in from China and was destined for restaurants and takeaways across the region.

But trading standards officers from Northumberland County Council swooped to seize the banned food, worth £4,000, from a storage unit in Bedlington.

Inspectors from the Food Standards Agency were called in to inspect the `Acrid Tang’ beef fat, which belonged to an Oriental food wholesaler.

And amid fears it contained diseases and dangerous levels of chemicals, they ordered its destruction and the haul went up in flames.

Jim Rutter, head of Northumberland County Council trading standards, said: “Animal by-products from China are subject to fairly strict protective measures due to shortcomings in their veterinary medicine regulations and control systems in live animals in China.

“We worked closely with the Food Standards Agency and after these were analysed, the product was destroyed by incineration.” “

“The Acrid Tang beef fat is used for Oriental cookery and is a key ingredient in many dishes, such as battered Dim Sum items.”

“It is believed the wholesaler planned to sell it on to restaurants and takeaways to use in their cooking. As well as this market value loss, the council can bill the wholesaler for the destruction of the product.”

“”Although in this case the product contained beef, similar controls are in place prohibiting the import of other meat and meat products including poultry and other bird products from China due to recent concerns over avian flu.

“Trading standards officers are constantly on the look-out for illegally imported foods during the routine course of their inspections. This may be at a warehouse, takeaway, restaurant or any other business involved in the food chain.”

“Customs officers have made a string of large food seizures in recent weeks.

People arriving at Newcastle International Airport have been found with huge quantities of products banned from being brought into the UK.”

“Officers say the people bringing banned products into the region range from wholesalers looking to sell it on to make a profit to students bringing delicacies over for their own cooking.”

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 8:53 am
The Wall Street Journal also has an article about food safety and says , the magic number 16 Pets!!!

Comment by Elaine — May 16, 2007 @ 8:55 am
The place that has really helped the most is the University of Guelph.
http://www.labservices.uoguelph.ca/urgent.cfm
http://www.uoguelph.ca/

AAFCO, PFI, FDA, AVMA, ASPCA, USDA, and probably others; not so much. How long has it been? And we still don’t know for sure what is safe?

I think we need something new, independent, non-profit, run by a committee.

Pet Supply Verified http://www.petsupplyverified.com/ might help. but who are they. Not to say anything bad but I’m just saying, that anyone can pop up during a crisis and throw up a website. We probably need more information about them such as what they will actually do such as which tests they will use.

Either way that is not enough, we need a CDC of sorts for the pets and for livestock too. (they eat pet food, we eat them; it’s important!) My vet keeps saying (screaming) to “keep him in the loop”; he has no ability to know what is happening outside his office, this is extremely problematic for him.

How is he suppose to know, why couldn’t he have know sooner, why does he still not know? Could somebody at least tell him what foods are safe and nutritious!

Comment by Peggy (AKA: Big Fat Momma Cat) — May 16, 2007 @ 9:16 am
I just wrote a very kind e-mail to Mr. Ekendahl describing the remarkable “post-recall” changes in my two dogs since I have been home cooking for them. I let him know that there will be no future purchases of commercial prepared pet food or treats in this household. Because of the rapid positive changes in their condition (more muscular, dropping pounds, no gas, no bad breath, no longer lapping up bowls of water a day, etc.), I have proof positive that they have been killing my pets.

Since melamine was “an open secret” in Chinese food production for the past fifteen years, what is their excuse? They didn’t know?

“Trust me” as a watchword and byword of this administration and its corporate sponsors is the name of the game. I, for one, no longer believe anything that comes out of their mouths.

If they tell me the sky is blue I will check for myself.

Comment by Black Lab Owner — May 16, 2007 @ 9:30 am
As pet owners, I think the testing done by states like Massachusettes & Kentucky would be a good starting place to look to see how pet foods do by state. I saw a Kentucky pass/fail report in a pdf file somewhere… substantial report with the results and reasons for failing by name (Merrick I remember seeing in it)

Having all States adopt, test & enforce adherence to AAFCO standards would be a plus (or else take that seal off the packages), truth in labeling laws-Major plus, COOL Huge Plus, Food Safety Agency with teeth.. then if the pet foods companies test, they’re doing it for their own backs and still don’t have the incentives to protect the consumer IMO.

I’ll see what I can find tonite..

Comment by Ann H — May 16, 2007 @ 9:44 am
Not that the Pet Food Industry is going to recover their credibility any time soon……but in my opinion a logical place for them to start would be to replace Duane Eckedahl. He is the face of the PFI at the time of their (and our) worst nightmare, and they need a new face if they want to demonstrate a desire to “change” and restore trust. Duane may be a perfectly lovely man but he picked the wrong industry to represent and he (knowingly or unknowingly) misrepresented the situation from the beginning. He can no longer be effective because no one believes him. In fact, if he had integrity he would resign and write an insider book about this fiasco.

Comment by elizabeth R. — May 16, 2007 @ 9:45 am
I’m not sure yet how this would be effectively implemented (just starting to explore this line of thought in my mind) but whatever system is used must have some form of “checks and balances”. Things that come to mind are such ideaa as “auditing the auditors”, doing random cross-checks of test results, working cooperatively with consumer-funded agencies doing some form of oversight, and so on. The objective being transparent information, available to and verifiable by whoever has an interest in doing so, and NOT vested in any SINGLE entity - either directly or indirectly.

To understand that last point, consider Gina’s description from above of “gutted government agencies with strong industry ties” v.s. “private laboratories paid for by an industry itself”. The thing that’s wrong with this picture is the strong controlling hand of industry for both of these options. Some form of “checks and balances”, independent verification completely divorced from industry influence, etc. is the idea I have sort of half fleshed-out here.

Comment by The OTHER Pat — May 16, 2007 @ 10:04 am
Comment by Elizabeth 9:45am

Right on Elizabeth. You go girl.

Comment by VJ — May 16, 2007 @ 10:10 am
China Urges U.S. Not to Punish All Food Exporters

“The government seems determined to paint the two Chinese companies blamed for exporting melamine-tainted wheat flour to the United States as rogue companies, or “special individual cases” in a largely well-managed export industry.

“The government’s announcement, however, seems quite at odds with local .Chinese agricultural industry officials who in recent weeks have said in interviews that for years producers and feed makers have either used melamine in animal feed, sold it to animal and fish feed producers or knew of the sale and use of melamine in animal feed.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05.....7food.html

Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 10:12 am
I have absolutely no faith in the current “safety” system and it will take a lot of work on the manufacturer’s part and FDA’s part to convince me at some point in the future that I can trust the system to work. If they ever can.

I have a friend whose three small dogs are not doing well on 100% home-made food. {They probably would if the meal content was consistent.] Anyway, since I consider these to be my “niece and nephews” I am sending an unopened newly purchased bag of their favorite kibble food [not on the recall list, but is a brand that has some varieties on the recall list] to an excellent tox lab for screening. If it passes, then the pups’ mom will blend it in with the home made food.

It annoys the hell out of me that the so-called safety system in this country is so disgustingly ineffective to the point where I feel compelled to spend $150 to test a bag of food at an independent lab. I’m just happy to do it for the dogs.

Comment by Lynn — May 16, 2007 @ 10:23 am
Anybody feed the EVO dry food made by Natura? My kitty isn’t too thrilled with his current Royal Canin dry (the one he loved I took away because it had Wheat Gluten) so I’m searching for something new to supplement his NB cans that I can trust (well maybe trust).

Thanks!

Comment by BengalMom — May 16, 2007 @ 10:24 am
RE Comment by elizabeth R. — May 16, 2007 @ 9:45 am

I agree - Duane’s got to go. The man is not of this planet.

However, until the entire foundation of the FDA is changed, that is, until the mfr-FDA relationship is broken, the FDA will never, in my eyes, be an advocate for pets. And quite frankly, I don’t see the two entities getting out of bed together any time soon.

Comment by Lynn — May 16, 2007 @ 10:26 am
Seeing as the FDA has failed to protect the American public, and the American farmer, from melamine-contaminated feed, pet food, and the future potential risks of eating these contaminants, it may be time to expand strategy, here. How about contacting foreign governments, e.g. Canada, Australia and the EU for starters, and recommending they ban US pork, poultry and fish shipments?

I really don’t want to screw the American farmer here, but I would bet a lot of them, especially the smaller operations, are fairly pissed off that FDA/USDA didn’t protect them from this contaminated feed in the first place. It’s unfortunate that they are getting caught in the middle of this whole debacle.

Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 10:32 am
My two cats like the Innova Evo dry food, which is grain-free. Innova (Natura) has pledged to start its own canning operation for wet food, and I give them points for that.

Comment by David — May 16, 2007 @ 10:34 am
RE Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 10:12 am

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05…..7food.html

Are you kidding? The Chinese want the US not to take punitive action against other Chinese food exporters because of the pet food recall? When they have so many problems with sanitation and safety in China? Oh please. Simply stated, you don’t screw around with the food we or our pets eat. You do and you pay the consequences.

Comment by Lynn — May 16, 2007 @ 10:34 am
RE Comment by The OTHER Pat — May 16, 2007 @ 10:04 am

As far-fetched as this sounds, maybe the best check of safety, given our lax USG system, is to train a select group of pet parents, not affiliated with the government or manufacturers or suppliers, to go into the plants and have enough knowledge to do safety checks on a spontaneous basis. I know, lots of training needed, but I wonder just how much training would be involved. If a step-by step protocol could be developed for these volunteers, followed by exacting reports to the public, then there might be an answer.

We’ve gone over this before and many will argue that we shouldn’t have to do the government’s job. But when you get right down to it, someone needs to do it and the FDA does not have the resources. I feel a lot better about one of our own doing the checking than the FDA inspectors at this point.

Comment by Lynn — May 16, 2007 @ 10:41 am
Will someone tell me which countries have good, viable, working governmental systems that protect animals and the food they eat? I’d like to do some research and see exactly what their systems are comprised of.

Comment by Lynn — May 16, 2007 @ 10:43 am
RE Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 10:12 am

I agree. Chinese, and most Asian, imports need to be flat-out banned, if we really want our food to be safe. What about all the children’s toys encrusted with lead and other chemicals that keep turning up? This problem isn’t even limited to food.

Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 10:56 am
Lynn: Please do that research!

We would all like to know.

Comment by spocko — May 16, 2007 @ 11:03 am
I’ve never posted before, but I do read almost daily. but I just wanted to pass along an FYI… Dr’s Foster & Smith ( some recalled but not all) has pulled their recall page from their website. It happened within the last few hours, because I looked this morning and it was still there….. looked this afternoon and it’s gone. Be on the look out because I’m sure more sites will be pulling their pages as well.

Comment by Terri — May 16, 2007 @ 11:07 am
It’s probably about time to start contacting senators, representative, and particularly the executive branch all over again. This would include the president, vice president and anybody in an executive branch agency - e.g. Customs and Immigration, FTC (what about lead in baby bibs at Wal-Mart, and melamine dishes, to name some ideas), Department of Agriculture. And of course the much loved FDA and USDA.

Some members of Congress will be meeting with representatives of the Chinese trade mission arriving here this weekend starting as early as next Monday or Tuesday. The main part of the “summit” will be with the President on the 23rd and 24th, next Wednesday and Thursday. This is of course perfectly timed, so that any bad news from next week’s negotiations will emerge on Friday, thus allowing the Administration to sweep it under the rug until the following Monday, at which time it will no longer be news!

Nevertheless, and regardless of whether or not you agree with “free trade” (I personally don’t), it is a great opportunity to put pressure on our government to GET TOUGH with China, and at least insure that they take the problem of our sick and deceased pets seriously.

Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 11:13 am
here come the fishies.

http://tinyurl.com/2y63sk

Comment by pat — May 16, 2007 @ 11:14 am
The summit is concerned about trade deficit - it should be concerned with food safety too,
but I suppose there’s more than one way to take over a country, besides poisoning us, a hostile government could take all our money and then buy up our property and businesses, hire lobby groups to influence the politicians, sit on corporate board of directoros, squash all laws to make our food safe - thereby silencing all objections -…..ummmmmmmmmmm?

Comment by Linda — May 16, 2007 @ 11:19 am
Comment by TC — May 14, 2007 @ 6:51 pm

“we planned to learn to make sausage last year, long before this mess and just because you never really know what is in sausage, and I know I can do it better. Plus, thought it would be fun.

But as I was reading on this food crisis, I am came across the fact that a large number of sausage casings are imported from China. Don’t know why but that surprised me. Okay, now how the heck do I go about finding the origin of such an obscure thing like a sausage casing?”

TC,
I was talking to a friend this morning about what would now be “highly suspect” sausages because of importing casings from China, and about your delimma.

She said when she was a kid her grandfather had hogs and when they made sausage they never had enough intestine for the amount of sausage. What they did was buy a couple of yards of unbleached muslin and washed it twice and rinsed it really good, when dry they ironed it flat. They cut strips and just ran a side seam to make into tubes. Tie off one end with twine and stuff it full and tie off the other end. They then hung it in the smoke house or put it in the freezer. You have to take the muslin off of course before you cook it.

I’ve made my own venison sausage before but didn’t use casings. I made rolls and put in the freezer and then sliced in to patties or used it in chili. It made some great tasting chili.

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 11:25 am
China takes a pass on trade reforms

Chinese officials made it clear that they aren’t interested in implementing trade reforms demanded by the United States.

BY JOE McDONALD
Associated Press

http://www.miamiherald.com/103/story/108168.html

Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 11:34 am
Communists: intransigent and arrogant as always! (A different take on the same story posted above.)

China warns U.S. critics ahead of trade talks

2007/5/16
BEIJING, AP

Chinese officials warned American lawmakers on Tuesday against threatening sanctions over trade disputes ahead of talks this month and said there are no plans to speed up currency reforms despite U.S. pressure.

http://www.chinapost.com.tw/ne.....109815.htm

Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 11:37 am
In my new role as leader of our - now very small - pack, I am becoming more and more skillful at my hunting trips. Yesterday I took down a buffalo and put my paw in the water and pulled out a fish, and the pack was happy. I don’t care what they say, what they pledge, what patsy groups they prop up to represent themselves, the pet food people have lost us. I trusted them and the pack trusted me and Skeeter died as a result.

So we’re learning together. Some things go better raw. Some we hustle off to the fire. What we can share, we share. With the cumulative and rich memory of our kind(s) we know that life was good before cans and bags and mystery meats and chemical additives and we are doing as well as can be expected given the recovery process.

You’ll notice I’m not hysteric (why would a little thing like mass poisoning make a person hysteric?) but no matter how hard it is (and yes, we’re feeling our way here everyday) I am not letting another company get the last of the pack.

Comment by Nancy Nielsen — May 16, 2007 @ 11:37 am
Comment by Lynn

“Will someone tell me which countries have good, viable, working governmental systems that protect animals and the food they eat? I’d like to do some research and see exactly what their systems are comprised of.”

The UK has become extremely strict since all the problems with “Mad Cow”. They don’t allow GM products and I think it was earlier this week they tested and rejected rice protien destined for pet food and found it was GM. The supplier was in the Netherlands but the rice protien was from China.

Also there was this artice that talked about their inspectors and some of the process:

“Chinese beef goes up in flames after raid”

Article is lengthy:
http://tinyurl.com/2fylf6

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 11:39 am
Lynn…don’t know for sure but my guess would be that New Zealand and possibly Australia might be good countries to start with. I remember when I visited NZ about 6 years ago they were very tough about inspecting incoming bags with dogs for any fruit, food, etc. they might be carrying in (none allowed), and they were even particular about dirt on shoes, hiking boots, camping equip., etc.

Comment by BengalMom — May 16, 2007 @ 11:43 am
Re Palomino comment at 10:32

As a family rancher, I appreciate your sentiment that you don’t want to screw the family farmer.

From my perspective, we are getting screwed bigtime by “a handful of gutted government agencies with big business ties” (Gina’s words, I couldn’t have phrased it better)

My thought is that this can do nothing but help the small farmer, if the consuming public comes to the realization that imported food is not good!

Comment by Elaine — May 16, 2007 @ 11:54 am
Add to my comment above:

If we can all work to have mandatory Country of Origin Labeling for our food, this will give us all the choice of how much risk we are willing to take with our food purchases.

Comment by Elaine — May 16, 2007 @ 11:58 am
We shouldn’t be importing any food items that we can’t inspect - especially from countries known to have lax regulation.

Comment by Carol — May 16, 2007 @ 11:58 am
Carol,

I am in 100% agreement with that statement!

Comment by Elaine — May 16, 2007 @ 12:04 pm
Nancy Neilsen—Your post was very powerfull. I am out there with you. I have a little “pride” of two right now. We are taking down chickens, sardines, salmon and clams and occasionally a turkey. From time to time we kill a can of Wellness and some Innova Evo dry (as a treat).

Comment by Shawn — May 16, 2007 @ 12:28 pm
Quote:
Companies will soon begin working out the technical details of hiring government-approved testers to certify the identity and safety of pet food ingredients shipped from overseas, said Duane Ekedahl, president of the Pet Food Institute, which represents manufacturers.

Ahmmmmm - isn’t that what a (pet)food manufacturer should have done all along?

You produce something - you are responsible for it. You produce food - you test the ingredients as well as the finished product, neh?

I couldn’t care less if you have it tested inhouse or at the University of Smartassia, but as a producer *you* are responsible for the product.

The second step is random tests by the health/food organization of the country in question.

Regardless, proper labeling and COOL are non-negotionable, IMO.

And ‘proper labeling’ does not mean ‘PR-speak’ for waste products.

Comment by MaKo — May 16, 2007 @ 12:29 pm
My daughter that has 3 beautiful dogs went out yesterday to get the California Natural Lamb, Meal & Rice and started it today, the dogs really like it and don’t hesitate to eat it like they did with the Royal Canine. Have talked with some our our clients, some are feeding the “raw” diet and seeing improvement in their dogs also. Of 8 of our dogs tested, 4 that were getting the NutroMax dry as were in the house, the UA’s found the Struvite Triple 3>AMP out of 3 of the 4 dogs, the younger dog didn’t show any problem. One dog had a problem the first week of April, had blood work, UA & UA C&S, the C&S showed a Staph infection - did not show up in the blood lab and no crystals, treated with antibiotics for 2 weeks, then on 5/10 shows 4+ Struvite Triple 3-AMP. The other 2 have the same crystals also. Are any other people seeing this trend? Especially, the laboratory experts in the early stages! I have been wondering or possibly believing that only the dogs/cats that died had “blockage” in their urinary tracts, whereas, the melamine, cyanuric acid, etc wasn’t excreted due to the blockage, so that is why they were finding it and we are not finding it in our cytology laboratory results, after all we are the fortunate ones. Recent visits to our vet, looks like the symptoms to add are pet allergies, dry skin, course hair, bloating, dark urine, as well as the other symptoms mentioned earlier.

Comment by JJ — May 16, 2007 @ 1:01 pm
Comment by Lynn — May 16, 2007 @ 10:43 am

“Will someone tell me which countries have good, viable, working governmental systems that protect animals and the food they eat? I’d like to do some research and see exactly what their systems are comprised of.”

Just off the top of my head, I’d suspect it would be countries where the established cultural norm does NOT include the idea that it is acceptable to do just about anything as long as you can get away with it and cut a profit (any two countries come to mind, people?)

Comment by The OTHER Pat — May 16, 2007 @ 1:05 pm
Comment by JJ — May 16, 2007 @ 1:01 pm

Yes, the deaths are caused by blockage. Contrary to the FDA’s assertions, melamine causes these blockages regardless of the presence of cyanuric acid and other chemicals.

Melamine Crystalluria in Sheep, 1966

http://www.avma.org/aa/petfood....._sheep.asp

Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 1:07 pm
Nothing the Pet Food Institute does can be trusted, NOTHING.

Are the warning signs of a pet being poisoned being made public by the PFI?

Have people struggling to pay vet bills for poisoned pets gotten a dimes worth of help YET?

Is there STILL poison food on the store shelves?

The PFI members are STILL killing and sickening pets today, just as they have been all along and until I see a whole lot more effort on making it right than covering the butt, NOTHING any of them do will change my mind.

Comment by E. Hamilton — May 16, 2007 @ 1:08 pm
Just announced on Ch 4 in Detroit, Mi at 4pm. Gordon Foods has recalled beef products due to ecoli contamination. 2 people reported ill. The recalled beef items cover 9 pages. Don’t know if this is just in the Michigan area. Attempting to get more information and will post.

Comment by VJ — May 16, 2007 @ 1:12 pm
Mako: Can I get an degree from the University of Smartassia?

Because I want one.

Comment by spocko — May 16, 2007 @ 1:22 pm
I just called the TV station. They have not put the information up yet and Rob, the man I spoke with could not give me a time when the story would be posted. I asked if this is just a Michigan problem or wider. He said they weren’t sure. Are checking it out before posting it on their website.

Comment by VJ — May 16, 2007 @ 1:25 pm
Geez, they don’t know how wide-spread the problem is but are checking it out. More tainted food. Didn’t you guys say beef would be next. Ecoli.

Comment by VJ — May 16, 2007 @ 1:26 pm
Quote:
China takes a pass on trade reforms

Chinese officials made it clear that they aren’t interested in implementing trade reforms demanded by the United States.

BY JOE McDONALD
Associated Press

http://www.miamiherald.com/103/story/108168.html

Comment by Palomino — May 16, 2007 @ 11:34 am

US consumers take a pass on China’s exports, because China takes a pass on trade reforms

US inofficials (customers) made it clear that they aren’t interested in implementing trade with China.

Read more here: petconnection.com

*That would be a headline I’d love to read….*

Comment by MaKo — May 16, 2007 @ 1:27 pm
That’s because China wants all our money so they can buy up our land and kick us out of our own country -ooops, their soon to be country - United States of China.

Comment by Terry — May 16, 2007 @ 1:33 pm
The pdf file for the beef recall is up on the USDA website but for some reason I can’t read it. I know the products listed, but could someone please tell me if it says these products were sent to Indiana?
thank you

Comment by Terri — May 16, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
I have some questions about current production going on with the foods that have been recalled. I know alot of people mentioned seeing full shelves in supermarkets. I wanted to add that it may be due (like what happened this past week at PetsMart) to the fact that the shelves have been reset in order to hide the “holes” that were present. To my knowledge none of the foods from even the initial recall have returned to the shelves. As there have only been a few companies that I am aware of say that they are either actively seeking a new manufacturer or looking into builiding their own facility, what has happened to everyone else? Has Menu and Americian Nutrition really had all production halted during the FDA “investigation” or does it just take this long to rebuild the supply that was pulled? I would think that resetting the shelves would signify that it is still going to be awhile before any of those products return.

Comment by Amara — May 16, 2007 @ 1:50 pm
Lynn,

I believe that Japan is a country that probably has some of the strictest requirements as it applies to food safety. Many additives/chemicals that are used in the USA, are banned there. It comes at a high price tag though. My Japanese neighbor goes back to Japan each year for a visit but does not mind paying those prices for safe food. And he has always been an avid label reader in the USA even before the pet food scandal.

Comment by Serijna — May 16, 2007 @ 1:56 pm
Bengalmom,
I’ve been feeding innova evo for almost 3months..
my cat likes the food.. im pleased as it is grain free? other foods that i’ve used, and have the cats aproval> Wellness core/no grain
Timber wolf organics serengeti/brown rice with
several meat meals.. very good, im rotating
dry ,and canned every 2or 3weeks. im now trying felidae dry, looking to try natures variety raw
instincts dry/grain free, and Orijen/grain free
if you feed canned food you might try solid gold, innova evo,tiki, natures variety prairie
weruva (cat loves this)probably hard to find?
i checked all of the listed foods for ingredients they’r safe thus far(i’ve fed them
almost 3months).

Comment by johnypaycut — May 16, 2007 @ 1:58 pm
Here are the states that were sent the now recalled beef

The beef recall affects beef products which Davis Creek Meats and Seafoods shipped between March 1, 2007 and April 30, 2007. The meat which may be contaminated with the E. coli bacteria was shipped to various distribution centers and stores in the following Midwest and southern U.S. states: Arkansas, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

Comment by Terri — May 16, 2007 @ 2:00 pm
On my earlier posts and also Terri’s, you can go to http://www.ClickonDetroit.com for more information and list of recalled meats. Also http://www.fsis.usda.gov for
complete information on the massive beef recall from Davis Creek Meats & Seafood of Kalamazoo, Mi.

Comment by VJ — May 16, 2007 @ 2:05 pm
I heard from another site that some people have seen the same thing and they have been told that the people at the store have put the food back because they have not been told what to do with the food so they put it back on the shelves. The store I go to have a sign that says that the food will be there soon. The shelves are still empty. I hope they are not putting the recalled food back on the shelves.

Comment by Jill — May 16, 2007 @ 2:07 pm
Please contact Congress to STOP Fast Track.Sign a petition (search “Fast Track” and pick a petition site) or write your own letter to your Congress reps.The following quote is from democracyinaction.org : “Fast Track – the outdated, outrageous law that Richard Nixon cooked up to take away Congress’ constitutional authority over trade policy – is expiring on June 30, 2007.
President Bush is now asking Congress for a blank check to negotiate even more NAFTA-style “free trade” deals. He wants Congress to extend “Fast Track”, the undemocratic Nixon-era piece of legislation that is responsible NAFTA, CAFTA and the WTO.
For 198 years of our nation’s history, prior to the Nixon-hatched Fast Track passing Congress in 1974, Congress was in the driver’s seat of U.S. trade policy. Our nation needs a totally different way for Congress to authorize presidents to negotiate trade pacts – a way that ensures Congress controls the contents. The very structure of Fast Track – with its broad delegation of Congress’ powers – destroys the most essential checks and balances of our democracy.
Fast Track has allowed transnational corporations and other special interests to seize control of the U.S. trade negotiating system, establishing a model of globalization that has caused our middle-class living standards to decline, our manufacturing base to be undermined (threatening our national security), OUR FOOD SAFETY TO BE GUTTED and our environmental laws to be attacked, while poverty and inequality has only spread in developing nations.”
It’s nice to vent on forums but we must also take action.Keep up on legislation about trade,food safety & sneaky additions to bills,then write your Congress people.Also, boycotting only works if you let companies know you’re boycotting and why.I know a lot of people have trouble composing letters,but you can use online petitions as guides and you can make phone calls.If we do not organize and help ourselves,we’re going to get nowhere because nobody else seems at all interested in helping protect our food supply.

Comment by Elena L — May 16, 2007 @ 2:13 pm
Comment by johnypaycut — May 16, 2007 @ 1:58 pm

thanks for your info on cat food - we tried to switch to a raw diet - my 4 babies would have none of it (sniffed the stuff then looked at us like we were trying to kill them) - they will eat cooked liver and some fish

so we just bought some of the innova evo and all 4 seem to like the canned - only 3 of them tried the dry so far - Sassy the pickiest actually spit one of the dry pieces at me after I gave it to her like a treat - so it’s nice to have some other suggestions that we can try

we have been lucky so far but I worry every day…..

Comment by Deborah — May 16, 2007 @ 2:15 pm
I just got back from the grocery store, and the shelves look like they have for the past few weeks: Jammed Full, NO One In The Aisle Shopping.

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 2:22 pm
Does anyone have the link handy to the info on FDA that told pregnant women not to perform the testing on the tainted food? I have gone thru FDA’s maize and cant find it now….thank you!

Comment by Sandi K — May 16, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
23.5 Million chickens. Safe.
50,000 million hogs. Safe.
X million fish. Still to be determined, “They look healthy.”

Safe. Safe. and they look fine.

So. Whose chickens and hogs are they? Where were they sent? Do the people who got them know their status? Should they? Would you like to know? Why shouldn’t you know? What is the reasoning that you shouldn’t have this information?

They have established the safety of the chicken and hogs. There should be absolutely no reason for NOT revealing the names.

Comment by spocko — May 16, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
For Sandi K:

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/protsurv.html

SAFETY PRECAUTIONS

Melamine and additional related contaminants have been found in concentrations of up to 20% in analyzed samples. The MSDS for pure melamine is attached as Attachment B and includes warnings “to avoid breathing dust, avoid contact with eyes, skin and clothing”. Chronic exposure may cause cancer or reproductive damage.

The following personal protective equipment is recommended to prevent such exposures:

* a minimum of the half-face, face-sealing respirator (P100) with HEPA filter cartridge (wipe or rinse the respirator facepiece w/o filter cartridge before reuse)
* face sealing goggles (vented goggles will be protective) wipe or rinse before reuse
* disposable suit (remove and bag prior to entering vehicle)
* either disposable shoe covers or wipe/brush shoes prior to entering vehicle
* disposable gloves

Pregnant women should not perform this assignment.

For questions, contact your Regional or District Industrial Hygienist #

Also refer to the Safety Precautions information in Investigations Operations Manual (IOM), section 1.5. at: http://www.fda.gov/ora/inspect.....tml#SUB1.5

Comment by spocko — May 16, 2007 @ 2:29 pm
Comment by Sandi K

“Does anyone have the link handy to the info on FDA that told pregnant women not to perform the testing on the tainted food? I have gone thru FDA’s maize and cant find it now….thank you”

FY 2007 Protein Surveillance Assignment—DFPG #07-20

http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/protsurv.html
Date: May 1, 2007

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 2:32 pm
Thanks Aunt Granny! I noticed also it said:

The following personal protective equipment is recommended to prevent such exposures:

a minimum of the half-face, face-sealing respirator (P100) with HEPA filter cartridge (wipe or rinse the respirator facepiece w/o filter cartridge before reuse)
face sealing goggles (vented goggles will be protective) wipe or rinse before reuse
disposable suit (remove and bag prior to entering vehicle)
either disposable shoe covers or wipe/brush shoes prior to entering vehicle
disposable gloves
Pregnant women should not perform this assignment.

So was I supposed to have been wearing all this protection every time I opened a can of pet food for my kitty before she died?

Comment by Sandi K — May 16, 2007 @ 2:41 pm
“16 dead pets”

They keep repeating the same lie over and over and over. Protect the guilty at all costs - never let up on the spin.

Comment by MFEMFEM — May 16, 2007 @ 2:48 pm
Comment by Sandi K

“So was I supposed to have been wearing all this protection every time I opened a can of pet food for my kitty before she died?”

Sorry about your kitty… :(

It would seem so! From what I’ve read from studies in other countries it is toxic to the fetus. Also causes infertility, but melamine as a cause for that would be hard to prove.

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 2:59 pm
The big lie is an old tactic, and it might even have worked in this case if not for the teensy problem of the poison getting loose in the human food chain. Well, that and a bunch of internet bloggers.

I understand that the PFI and the FDA thought that the signed and sealed pact with Satan and his minions was going to protect them.

The bad news for the PFI and the FDA is that even the devil has a problem when you kill his pets and then lie about it.

Comment by E. Hamilton — May 16, 2007 @ 3:02 pm
Thanks for the comments on the EVO dry everyone! I just might try it. He’s VERY picky so it’s hard finding food - both dry and wet. He liked the NB Venison & green pea dry but then it got recalled. :(

For the wet he’s a “cuts and gravy” kind of guy and the only “pate loaf” style wet I can get him to eat so far are the Natural Balance. Guess it tastes good enough he doesn’t care about texture as much? On top of that, he has to have a variety of non-fish flavors or after a week he turns his nose up at it so unfortunately the EVO cans are out - only 1 flavor. I guess “leopards” don’t eat fish or pate! ;) I was looking at the Merrick though…it looks like it might be more chunks and gravy so when he decides he’s had enough pate (or it gets recalled) I have a fall back!

I don’t want to be switching brands too much because he does have a sensitive tummy like a lot of Bengals.

Comment by BengalMom — May 16, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
Lou Dobbs (CNN) just had a short piece on about the cat fish raised in China — very toxic — Antibiotics are used in China that are banned here. 70% of the fish imported to the U.S. are farm-raised in China.

Dobbs was very upset at the government’s indifference to this very serious issue of contaminated imported foods.

Gee… and we were told years ago to eat more fish servings per week… Sounds like a quick ticket to the grave, to me.

Comment by petlover — May 16, 2007 @ 3:32 pm
MaKo,

http://thehill.com/the-executi.....04-07.html

Here is a link to news of a coalition of meatpackers, NCBA,and others joining together to try to defeat COOL.

I did a search on Google for Tyson on COOL and Cargill on COOL, and there were many articles with quotes from these companies.

Comment by Elaine — May 16, 2007 @ 3:37 pm
The Lou Dobbs piece was short but good. Contaminated and poisoned food products from China are everywhere and we are in the dark with no country of origin labeling. The FDA doesn’t care - it only wants to protect comerce with China.

Comment by MFEMFEM — May 16, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
I was cruising around looking at some AAFCO links, and I came across this:

http://www.aafco.org/Portals/0/Public/q_and_a.pdf

“To establish a lower standard of compliance and safety for companion animals (pets) would be unwise and would not serve the public interest.”

Does anyone know what works best to clean off the Pepsi spewed all over my monitor?

Comment by The OTHER Pat — May 16, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
To get COOL implemented, we are up against the “big guns” so to speak. They do have influence in the political arena.

But isn’t there a quote about the “tireless minority”? We can move mountains if we all work at it and keep the pressure on congress.

Comment by Elaine — May 16, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
Anybody got $50 to drop to find out what the AAFCO regulations actually are?

http://www.aafco.org/Portals/0.....NVOICE.pdf

“The official publication of the Association of American Feed Control Officials is an
essential reference manual for anyone involved in the feed industry, including pet food.
Industry, consumer and government personnel will benefit from the use of this manual.
The manual contains up-to-date information on the following:
• Model laws and regulations for commercial feed, pet food and recycled animal
waste
• Feed control contact person in each state, Canada and Costa Rica, including
address, phone and FAX number
• FDA, USDA, EPA and industry contact personnel
• Approved feed ingredients and their definitions
• Regulatory requirements for distributing feed products in each state
• Medicated feed labeling guide
• Enzyme Marketing Coordination Document
• Analytical methods and analytical variations
• AAFCO committee members, including industry advisors
• Proceedings of the most recent AAFCO annual meeting
• Statements of AAFCO interpretation and policy
• Canine and Feline nutrient profiles and protocols
• New feed labeling format for nutritional indicators
• Forms used for tonnage reporting, pet food affidavits and medicated feed mill
inspections”

Comment by The OTHER Pat — May 16, 2007 @ 3:45 pm
I read about the pregnant women and they were told that they could not go investigate because it was a risk. I read it near where it said NEW job at FDA and I read it in This web site. It was very small article and I went to find it and I can’t find it at all.

Comment by Jill — May 16, 2007 @ 3:48 pm
*****comment by Aunt Granny**** What they did was buy a couple of yards of unbleached muslin and washed it twice and rinsed it really good, when dry they ironed it flat. *****

Thanks so much Aunt Granny for the tip - I have used unbleached muslin for other things, never would have thought of that. Nor have I used venision in any form for chili, but that would be a great addition as sausage. (my browser keeps closing, so I hope this message doesn’t show up multiple times. Sorry in advance in case it does).

Comment by TC — May 16, 2007 @ 3:51 pm
If we can’t rely on Country of Origin labeling, we can rely on Community Supported Agriculture and buying direct from farmers via Farmers Markets, or state lists of organic farmers like “Minnesota Grown”. Did anyone catch the NPR piece on southern catfish farmers put out of business by Chinese catfish imports? Imported fillets have antibotic residues not allowed by U.S. They use heavy antibiotics because their ponds are so filthy. Check your catfish labels.

Comment by Kristi — May 16, 2007 @ 3:53 pm
Add to my post: After I threw out dry dog food, I started with rice (etc) with lean ground beef. Last week the expensive ground beef I bought was RECALLED because of E COLI contamination!!! (WP, Windom, MN)Which is why it is COUNTY of origin and FARM of origin for us from now on.

Comment by Kristi — May 16, 2007 @ 4:05 pm
Somebody correct me if I’m wrong, here - but if you thoroughly cook the ground beef, then is the e. coli even an issue (assuming you were careful in handling it before it was cooked)?

Comment by The OTHER Pat — May 16, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Pat - that is right, but your ground beef, premium or otherwise - should not be contaminated with fecal material to begin with. If you eat your burger with a pink center - watch out.

Comment by Kristi — May 16, 2007 @ 4:10 pm
>>> Any of you “internet sleuths” want to have some FUN??? >> Look what I just found!!! >> Email to your hearts content! david.acheson@fda.hhs.gov stephen.sundlof@fda.hhs.gov

Comment by Kat — May 16, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
I found the Kentucky 2005 testing url:
Kentucky feed testing 2005

http://www.rs.uky.edu/sections.....yr2005.pdf

DIAMOND PET FOODS CO, META, MO
Samples 14 Passed 8 Percent Passed: 57%
Tests 156 Passed 148
Violations: 1 Protein, 2 AH Fat, 3 Calcium, 1 Phosphorus, 1 Ash
Sampling Emphasis: Dry Dog Food

THE BLUE BUFFALO CO LLC, WILTON, CT
Samples 1 Passed 0 Percent Passed: 0%
Tests 11 Passed 10 Violations: 1 Zinc
Sampling Emphasis: Dry Dog Food

CASTOR-POLLUX PET WORKS, CLACKAMAS, OR
Samples 4 Passed 4 Percent Passed: 100%
Tests 34 Passed 34 Violations: None
Sampling Emphasis: Dry Dog & Cat Food, Speciality Dog or Cat

FROMM FAMILY FOODS LLC, MEQUON, WI
Samples 1 Passed 1 Percent Passed: 100%
Tests 13 Passed 13 Violations: None
Sampling Emphasis: Dry Dog Food

THE MEOW MIX COMPANY, SEAUCUS, NJ
Samples 5 Passed 5 Percent Passed: 100%
Tests 59 Passed 59 Violations: None
Sampling Emphasis: Canned Cat Food, Dry Cat Food

MERRICK PETFOODS INC, AMARILLO, TX
Samples 13 Passed 11 Percent Passed: 85%
Tests 146 Passed 144 Violations: 2 Protein
Sampling Emphasis: Canned Dog & Car Food, Dry Dog Food

NATURA PET PRODUCTS, SAN JOSE, CA
Samples 7 Passed 6 Percent Passed: 86%
Tests 75 Passed 74 Violations: 1 Ash
Sampling Emphasis: Speciality & Canned Dog & Cat Food, Dry Dog Food

OLD MOTHER HUBBARD DOG FOOD, CHELMSFORD, MA
Samples 14 Passed 10 Percent Passed: 71%
Tests 137 Passed 132 Violations: 2 Protein, 2 AH Fat, 1 Ash
Sampling Emphasis: Speciality & Canned Dog or Cat, Dry Cat Food

WYSONG CORP, MIDLAND, MI
Samples 3 Passed 3 Percent Passed: 100%
Tests 36 Passed 36 Violations: None
Sampling Emphasis: Dry Dog & Cat Food

Comment by Ann H — May 16, 2007 @ 4:40 pm
TC-

Friend said her grandparents smoked and canned a lot of meats, and froze very little as electricity wasn’t dependable.

With the muslin “casing” she said that sausage usually has enough fat in it that as it smokes the fat leaches out to the muslin and seals it. That sometimes there might be a place on the muslin where there was not enough fat to seal it. They checked it during the smoking process, and any spots without fat they would just rub some lard on that spot and continue smoking.

Also, that they would cook up venison and other meats, make a gravy and can it using a pressure canner. Then add veggies later on to make stew. She said they also boiled then pressure canned ribs in the boiling liquid.

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
“16 DEAD PETS”

This is the Big Lie, isn’t it? and one that has made me go ballistic for weeks.

Those 16 were MURDERED by Menu Foods, hands on and with intent. Who knows where they gathered them from?

Thousands of other animals perished, some by the original malfeasance, but many, many THOUSANDS due to MF’s slow pace of warning and recall while they began to create lies and spin.

A lack of government oversight and protection, which many of us in the USA (and presumably Canada) assumed was a birthright, is the second culprit. They continue to be little but a roadblock to reform and the truth.

Lastly, the media response has been a tissue of lies, innuendo, and apathy, and continues to be so in most cases. They bear a share of the guilt for the animals that have died since recall.

Many of those animals would still be alive today were it not for this triumvirate of ghastly commercial links — all three together.

Time to start getting the story out once again, and over the same ground if need be, until there is no way for anyone to ignore it. More than anything else, “they” would like everyone to just shut up about it.

Every time you see “16 DEAD PETS”, re-dedicate.

Comment by Jay — May 16, 2007 @ 4:43 pm
What I’m not understanding is why did the FDA and all those committees just sit on stuff and not “do” something before now. We’ve spent tons of dollars on committees, some as far back as 2001- and here we sit. Between the State Agriculture Depts, Vet Nutritionists and the piles of work done in the committees there seems to be substantial groundwork done.

Key points I haven’t seen - Truth in labeling, COOL, Certification programs with sufficient regulatory authority to shut the manufacturers/brands down and pass tests to reopen, official fines for passing the buck and not taking responsibility for product quality & nutrition.

DRAFT Framework of the FDA Animal Feed Safety System

http://www.fda.gov/cvm/AFSSDraftFramework.htm

Comment by Ann H — May 16, 2007 @ 4:47 pm
Kristi, Elaine and “The Other Pat”
Thanks for the info.

If you talked to one of the companies against COOL, what would you ask them?

Say for example you asked them why they are against it. I’m pretty sure they have a very good answer. It will be something like:

1) It is going to be really expensive. It will cost between 583 million and $3.9 billon during the first year.
Everyone will have to pay more for their food if COOL was implemented. This will make food much more expensive for the poor and people who can’t afford organic.
What is your response to that?

2)They will probably say that the imported meat must meet safety standards already established by the USDA Food Safety Inspection Service.

Why do you need country of origin labeling when if they don’t comply they won’t be stamped with the inspection sticker anyway? (Note: no inspection sticker means they can’t be sold for human consumption)
What is your response to that already well established USDA inspection service?

3) They will also point out that we don’t need more mandatory regulation. When government gets involved it’s always expensive and sucks up taxpayer money. It is in the best interests of the companies to provide safe food anyway. They have children too and it would be silly of them to not want to provide safe food. COOL is really more information than is necessary. Also, food safety is as important to companies as to their end consumers, they don’t need government to tell them that and keep looking over their shoulder.

Your reply?

4) Government (and especially regulatory government) isn’t really competent. Many people will agree on this. Why spend more on a group that isn’t don’t the job anyway?

4)) This will hurt small family-owned businesses the most. They will be burdened by having to keep track of a bunch of information about every single tiny ingredient. Is it really necessary for people to know which country their ground pepper comes from? If COOL passes every single tiny bbq sauce maker will have to spend thousands of dollars getting this info.

Finally,the one that they might intimate quietly to convince people of a different political stripe.

6) “COOL is actually racist. If we start putting country of origin labeling on food, it will allow people to tie their raciest views to food. They might SAY that they care about the safety, but they are really just getting an opportunity to spread racist lies which will hurt the small business people in those counties.

What would be your response be to that?

BTW, I’m not just making these up. Some of these arguements are drawn from actual documents. Others are based on standard arguments used against government and regulation.

This is how the “Big Guns” do it. Think you can push back at them? First you need to see what they use to convince and block. Then you have to be smarter than them to win. (I won’t get into the other method$ used to convince people and to obtain access.)

Comment by spocko — May 16, 2007 @ 4:48 pm
“Purpose To provide the proposed framework for the FDA’s Animal Feed Safety System (AFSS)”

PROPOSED FRAMEWORK ???

Does that mean it never got off the ground?

OR, that they didn’t have the authority to do anything except “propose?

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 4:58 pm
Comment by Elaine — May 16, 2007 @ 3:37 pm

Elaine,
thank you! I have to apologize - usually I am quite good at finding out, but today is one of *those* days (and the cat lost another 30 grams, which sends me into the ‘brainless zone’)

:)

Comment by MaKo — May 16, 2007 @ 5:05 pm
Comment by Jay — May 16, 2007 @ 4:43 pm

“16 DEAD PETS”

Yes, the big lie. The industry and their political puppets in government are still hoping this poisioning inconvience will go away so they can get back to business as usual.

Comment by MFEMFEM — May 16, 2007 @ 5:08 pm
In 2004, the AFSS published this document. “know what you are getting”. Wow. If only, there had been some fines and enforcement.

ELEMENTS OF AN ANIMAL FEED SAFETY SYSTEM
http://www.fda.gov/OHRMS/DOCKE.....kg0002.pdf

“1. Incoming materials - know what you are getting
a. Assure identity of material. If Certificates of Analysis [COAs] are used,
consider periodic audits of suppliers of COAs.
b. Is the material susceptible to any contamination? Do you need additional
assurance such as testing
c. Receiving procedures - control measures [when does it occur, who does it, is
the equipment dedicated], clean-out
d. Storage - labeled bins, designated bins, clean-out between receipt of
different shipments, what else is stored with or near materials
e. Inventory and periodic accountability
f. Written SOPs”

I think hindsight is truly 20/20 and so maybe our government and our states can put together a system to truly make the system safer than what we’ve seen by brands that don’t monitor, manufacturers who don’t QC the ingredients (step 1 above)

Makes you want to cry that it took all these animals to wake the system up….

Comment by Ann H — May 16, 2007 @ 5:11 pm
about pregnant FDA employees

http://www.petconnection.com/b.....wn-before/

Comment by Kat — May 16, 2007 @ 5:20 pm
Comment by Ann H — May 16, 2007 @ 4:40 pm

Re: the KY testings for pet food. I believe that the states test to verify if the label claims re: percentages of protein, calcium, etc. are accurate. So the melamine/cyanuric acid spiking would give a false reading to the protein (nitrogen) reading. I imagine the states’ testing lab staffs are plenty p****** at being duped.

Comment by Maureen — May 16, 2007 @ 5:28 pm
Here’s KY’s index pg. Wonder why they updated all those pgs on 4-11-07.

I’m typing w/one hand. My dog bit me today.

Comment by Kat — May 16, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/protsurv.html

“Melamine and additional related contaminants have been found in concentrations of up to 20% in analyzed samples. The MSDS for pure melamine is attached as Attachment B and includes warnings “to avoid breathing dust, avoid contact with eyes, skin and clothing”. Chronic exposure may cause cancer or reproductive damage.

The following personal protective equipment is recommended to prevent such exposures:

a minimum of the half-face, face-sealing respirator (P100) with HEPA filter cartridge (wipe or rinse the respirator facepiece w/o filter cartridge before reuse)
face sealing goggles (vented goggles will be protective) wipe or rinse before reuse
disposable suit (remove and bag prior to entering vehicle)
either disposable shoe covers or wipe/brush shoes prior to entering vehicle
disposable gloves
Pregnant women should not perform this assignment.

For questions, contact your Regional or District Industrial Hygienist #

Also refer to the Safety Precautions information in Investigations Operations Manual (IOM), section 1.5. at: http://www.fda.gov/ora/inspect.....tml#SUB1.5 “

Comment by Kat — May 16, 2007 @ 5:49 pm
I found something similar on NE or IA(I think) about 4-6 weeks ago. They do their own random testing of distributors/manufctrs.

Comment by Kat — May 16, 2007 @ 5:52 pm
Maureen- I did write them and ask if they had tested in 2005 for crude protein or natural protein. I also asked if they would be recommending changes to AFSS and to their testing program in light of the recent food contamination issues.

I think I’m landing very solidly on a consolidated agency for food safety with regulatory authority and enforcement authority in conjunction with the State Agriculture Depts and Veterinarians.

AFSS should be fast-tracked and any pet food manufacturer would be required to acknowledge and perform to the standards of AAFCO and AFSS. If they didn’t submit the required documents indicating they were taking responsibility for the products, then they would be closed down and fined heavily.

One item I’d like to see implemented is that the manufacturers are required to have and pay for internal audits of their ingredients and procedures on a semi-annual basis and that procedures would dictate that any ingredient imported, from a new vendor, or a new ingredient to the receipe would have to be tested prior to use and documented. Cleaning the machines would also be mandated between change outs of ingredients due to the cross-contamination. I think they would have to have a report submitted to confirm that they are in accordance with AAFCO to be able to use that on the labels.

Here I wonder about an independent audit by parties without financial prejudice to the outcome. Transparency hasn’t been standard and I have no expectation that it will become standard. That makes the independent auditing of the pet food manufacturers a vital component in a system of checks and balances.

Comment by Ann H — May 16, 2007 @ 5:55 pm
Here’s KY’s index pg. Wonder why they updated all those pgs on 4-11-07.

http://www.rs.uky.edu/sections/feed/feedbulletins/\

Comment by Kat — May 16, 2007 @ 5:55 pm
What An Article! From The Catoosa County News (GA)

“B.J. Darnell: Pet food recall: Who to believe?”

Whole article here:
http://tinyurl.com/33hzxj

Sadly… “Editor’s note: This column is a web exclusive. Due to constrictions of space, this column was not able to run in the paper.”

“FDA officials stressed the reports were unconfirmed, and said a report on the deaths and illnesses of pets would not be available until fall of 2007. The wheels turn slow in the halls of bureaucracy.

The effects of the unprecedented recall of 60 million plus containers from over a 100 brands of whatever got into the pet food are going to be felt for months if not years to come.

Reputations of some companies may take a long time to recover, if ever, from the badly handled recall and the governments unusual restraint in announcing just who did what to whom.

The final count will never be known. The loss of their pets will never be forgotten by the people who loved them or by the veterinarians who tried to save them.

The big question — what went wrong? The answer will be a long time in coming. But looming nearly as large is the question of how the recall was handled and why it could have been handled better in order to protect the pets.

It is not a great leap to see that there are important issues of human health and consumer protection here. If you couldn’t care less about animals it will still affect your life.

The country’s veterinarians who needed to know the most were caught unaware of the recall and were unprepared for treating the desperately sick animals they were besieged with. Veterinarians had no little or no access to the critical information they needed.

The recall was a disaster. Pet owners had no idea that so many foods from so many brands were manufactured by the same company. This lack of knowledge is greatly unacceptable. We now realize such information is just as necessary to consumers as is any of the nutritional analysis already required to be on a pet food label.

That label should add the manufacturers, plus complete contact information for both the brand and the original manufacturer. Specification of the country of origin for the food’s ingredients is mandatory. The consumer has a right to know these things when making a decision on which food to buy.

The veterinarian community needs to be respected for the healthcare professionals they are and be provided with what they need to protect animals and humans alike.

This is a wake-up call for the nation. We hope the loss of so many beloved pets serves to change the status quo. We deserve better than what we received both for our pets and for ourselves.”

***It’s really a shame the Editor couldn’t find enough space to squeeze it into the print edition.***

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 6:26 pm
Comment by Ann H — May 16, 2007 @ 5:55 pm

Great post, Ann. I especially second what you wrote here:

“I think I’m landing very solidly on a consolidated agency for food safety with regulatory authority and enforcement authority in conjunction with the State Agriculture Depts and Veterinarians.”

Also second what you said about the need for this check and balance, an independent auditing of pet food manufacturers.

I think that looking at the mega issue of pet food manufacturing means making a sea change that will be very difficult to effect. Our pets nutritional needs need to be taken seriously; that should be the bottom line in this business. Pet food should not be a profit opportunity that takes the dregs from animal processing plants and ag products not fit for human consumption.

Comment by Maureen — May 16, 2007 @ 6:26 pm
“The food industry should be doing these things, but it’s up to government to verify,” said Michael P. Doyle, director of the University of Georgia’s Center for Food Safety.

“Companies will soon begin working out the technical details of hiring government-approved testers to certify the identity and safety of pet food ingredients shipped from overseas, said Duane Ekedahl, president of the Pet Food Institute, which represents manufacturers.”

http://www.baltimoresun.com/ne.....-headlines
************

Looks like they want to make a move before the government steps in to effect some true reforms. Well, I WANT the government to step into this mess. I’m sure Duane and the members are hoping this will look as though they’re doing enough to prevent another catastrophe, and at the same time, are taking the “burden” off the beleaguered government agencies since they’re understaffed and don’t check ingredients any way. Well, I SEE RIGHT THROUGH THIS!

This industry needs a complete overhaul as evidenced from the pet deaths, illnesses, and likely premature deaths to follow, not to mention, the diminished quality of life the animals have and the continuing burden pet owners lovingly and eagerly assume to nurse their pets back to some state of health (if they can still afford to).

With the majority of brands using ingredients from the same major sourcing company or two, this disaster can happen industry-wide again… Let’s see… what are the current figures for recalled products… 150+ brands and over 5,000 individual products, across all food formats: canned, pouched, bagged, treats, biscuits, semi-moist.

Here is a quote from a publication titled Pet Food Industry Electronic Newsletter written after the aflatoxin contamination that killed over 100 dogs (that were counted, at least). Dated January 2006.

“Aflatoxin is a naturally-occurring substance which may be found in some crops, such as oats, rice and corn. PFI members test all of the ingredients they use in petfood as part of their good manufacturing practices to ensure they are safe and free of hazardous levels of aflatoxin or any other unwanted materials….”

http://www.wattnet.com/newslet.....m#industry

I thought I just read that PFI members TEST ALL OF THE INGREDIENTS THEY USE IN PET FOOD AS PART OF THEIR GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES???

If ingredients were tested in 2006-2007, our pets would still be alive and well.

I GUESS ALL 150+ BRANDS from the 2007 RECALL forgot to test the ingredients that went into their name brand foods. Huh… They didn’t even know they received the wrong products, let alone testing for contamination!

The pet food industry will continue to source the cheapest ingredients it can find that will yield them the highest profit margin. They already said in the article above that ingredients sourced ***overseas*** would be tested. Can you say C-H-I-N-A? Do you trust what the PFI will tell you? Or the companies/labs working FOR them? Exactly what does “government-approved” testers mean? The question is WHO IS PAYING THE TESTERS?

THE PET FOOD INDUSTRY ***DOES NOT*** WANT THE GOVERNMENT INVOLVED AT ALL. IT APPEARS TO WANT TO RUN REGULATE ITSELF. WE **SAW** WHAT HAPPENED (and is still happening)TO OUR PETS BECAUSE THE PFI LARGELY RAN ITSELF AND PROVED (WITH THE THOUSANDS OF PET DEATHS ON ITS HEAD) THAT IT COULDN’T PROVIDE SAFE FOOD!

THE LID HAS BEEN BLOWN OFF THE PFI SKY-HIGH!

Do you want real intervention and REFORM or do you want “business as usual”?

I’m not being pacified by this, and I will continue to write and call until my fingers and wrists are cramped. I don’t care if the price of pet food goes up if the food meets my expectations.

I want government intervention! I’ve said many times what types of reform it will take from companies to satisfy my idea of reform. A few are already moving in that direction. These are the companies I hope will prosper. Those companies will get my business.

Comment by petlover — May 16, 2007 @ 6:28 pm
Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 6:26 pm

Catoosa County, GA —- YEAH ! ! !

Great point regarding vets. They should be respected for the wonderful service they provide. It still amazes me there is no method or organization to provide urgent information to vets.

Comment by Donna — May 16, 2007 @ 6:44 pm
Need some input:

Give me your thoughts and please, be concise.

Name 1-2 points you want the government to handle/change (politicians)

Name 1-2 points you want FDA/USDA, etc. to handle/change.

#1 question the press has yet to ask.

What do you want from the pet food companies (name one).

Comment by Donna — May 16, 2007 @ 6:57 pm
On CNN this weekend, Dr. Gupta hosts a program Sat and Sunday at 8 pm EDT called “Poisoned Food, do you what you’re eating?” I hope his program goes into some depth and covers important issues.

Comment by Patty L — May 16, 2007 @ 6:58 pm
GREAT article, Aunt Granny!

Comment by Kat — May 16, 2007 @ 6:59 pm
After my experience with the death of my old friend Brandy in this mess I have almost no respect for Vets at all.
When I requested a post mortem on her my vet got hyper defensive in full mal practice mode and litterally shouted me down.

Later, on March 22nd (or 23rd) a vet from the UW Madison school of Vet Med described their entire nutrition curriculum as consisting of a couple of lectures presented by a rep from Hills Science Diet and seemed prefectly OK with that. My vet, a graduate of that school sells Science Diet. (What idd you expect?)

I reported her death to both Menu (she ate Sprout Beef Cuts and Gravy) and the FDA.
The former told me to expect a claims kit in the mail. None ever came. The FDA told me to hold the remaining cans from the case for collection and testing. No one ever contacted me.

The store I bought her food at? Why when I informed them of what happened, they put their remaining stock on sale!

Maybe if I had explained that to my vet she would have seen that move as a competitive matter and done the PM on Brandy so as to get the competition’s food off the shelves? Why not? Money is all that seems to matter…

I have a new dog now. He eats what I eat.
Yeah, I know… supposedly thats bad for him.
Bet you heard that from your vet, didnt you?

Comment by Bernard J. (Bernie) Starzewski — May 16, 2007 @ 6:59 pm
It would be interesting to hear from others — now that we’ve been educated — about what commercial products you would buy for your dogs and cats.

I’d rather homecook or feed raw, but many people don’t have the time or can’t make the leap to think that pets should eat nutritiously too. And I’d like to have products available to supplement homemade.

If I could reinvent the industry, I don’t think I’d see a canned product. Kibble would just be used as a treat and it would be baked. No ingredients would come from a rendering plant (meal, byproducts, etc.).

Dogs and cats nutritional needs would come first. Meat or fish first, only appropriate grains in appropriate quantities, organic vegetables as appropriate. I see their food in the grocery store in a refrigerated unit, or flash-frozen. Either raw or cooked as little as possible to preserve nutrients. Convenient portion size. Vitamin/mineral supplements to cooked foods? What would we pay for all this if we’re not willing to go homemade?

Comment by Maureen — May 16, 2007 @ 7:04 pm
Comment by Bernard J. (Bernie) Starzewski — May 16, 2007 @ 6:59 pm

Horrible story, too frequently repeated since this all started. But congratulations on giving a wonderful home to your new dog. He’ll be the best thing to start to heal your heart.

Comment by Maureen — May 16, 2007 @ 7:14 pm
I’m not sure yet how this would be effectively implemented (just starting to explore this line of thought in my mind) but whatever system is used must have some form of “checks and balances”. Things that come to mind are such ideaa as “auditing the auditors”, doing random cross-checks of test results, working cooperatively with consumer-funded agencies doing some form of oversight, and so on. The objective being transparent information, available to and verifiable by whoever has an interest in doing so, and NOT vested in any SINGLE entity - either directly or indirectly.

My thought is to have full traceback records from ingredient Source to manufacturer and have them web-based so that there is transparency in records. http://www.scoringcontainers.com tracks all ingredients in real time and even knows the lab tests and brokers that handled each ingredient.I know as we build worldclass databases that work.

Comment by William Kanitz — May 16, 2007 @ 7:14 pm
“Experts praised the idea, which they said borrowed from existing practices that have proved successful in guarding the safety of human food and food considered risky enough to warrant government detention at American ports.”

Wasn’t the contaminated wheat gluten labeled for HUMAN GRADE FOOD????

Doesn’t look to me like the EXISTING SYSTEM worked very well, ya think?

Am I missing something here? Just being a dumb hick from the sticks who doesn’t get FDA speak, silly consumer, me…

The homemade stew on the stove smells pretty good right now. MELA-chcken and all.

Comment by michelle — May 16, 2007 @ 7:23 pm
Donna; FDA: More complete timely information about who is involved in a recall. (voluntary or mandatory) They can have 24 hours (same as CPSC) to notify their suppliers.

Press conferences that are not “one question, one follow up.”

Comment by spocko — May 16, 2007 @ 7:23 pm
Donna,
There can be NO positive support for anything UNTIL THE LIES STOP, the spin and the 16 deaths have to be stopped by those that started the lying and until they get straight and STAY straight I will not help the PFI or the FDA climb out of the hole they have dug.

Comfort and empty promises from proven liars who also POISONED my pets is not gonna fly.

The lies stop, not negotiable.

Comment by E. Hamilton — May 16, 2007 @ 7:44 pm
Wasn’t the contaminated wheat gluten labeled for HUMAN GRADE FOOD????
Yes it did carry that classification . There was a law called the 2002 Bioterrorism Law that FDA was to Enforce. The sent out a news letter warning brokers and ingredient dealers to keep records. Have They???? NO ! all the ever keep is the invoice number, we do better than that but brokers won’t share any info unless the gov. holds a gun to there head.

Comment by William Kanitz — May 16, 2007 @ 7:51 pm
E. — words are sometimes so inadequate — my deepest sympathies for your most recent, and all, of your losses due to this mess. We have all lost so much. You have been in my thoughts this week.

Comment by michelle — May 16, 2007 @ 7:53 pm
The FDA has the gun (probably made of melamine plastic), they just clearly seem to be short on ammo or the guts to pull the trigger.

Comment by michelle — May 16, 2007 @ 7:56 pm
Doesn’t look to me like the EXISTING SYSTEM worked very well, ya think?

Correct, The existing traceback system says you need 1up records and 1down records.The FDA law says you have to present those records within 24 hours. Most can’t even report who and when the got a ingredient let alone if it was tested for contaminaties or not. At least http://www.scoringcontainers.com can give a report of the same information in 3 seconds or at the speed of google.

Comment by William Kanitz — May 16, 2007 @ 8:01 pm
Just Too Many animals are lost over improper recordkeeping of feed and ingredients.Yes there should be independent testing and record tracing to save pets and better survaliance of companys but FDA has to enforce it,even with fines.

Comment by William Kanitz — May 16, 2007 @ 8:11 pm
Ok…

Let’s just suppose (I know, I know…but just for the sake of supposing) that they can guarantee us that the imported ingredients in the pet food are safe?

My next question is…what are they gonna do about the cheap junk that they add as main ingredients to the food? If the melamine didn’t kill our pets, then the cheap ingredients would have most likely done it slowly but surely over time.

Maureen: I am feeding my survivor Persians a mixture of 2 parts Felidae, one part byNature Organic dry. I have never seen them have so much energy! They are playing like kittens again at times. Their coats are beautiful, and their overall health is noticeable. I am searching for a good canned food for treats…and am thinking of trying Evangers.
They’re not real crazy about Merrick (none of the varieties).

I will never feed just any food to them again. I have to know what’s in it, where it came from, where it was manufactured, and I want to hear testimonials from others.

The pet food companies are not going to reel me in with their slick ads and pretty packaging any more. They’ve “cooked their goose.”

Comment by Marcy — May 16, 2007 @ 8:26 pm
I know this is off topic for the thread tonight, but was discussed a few days ago along with all the additives and GM Franken Foods.

Complete article:
http://tinyurl.com/2cmupy

“Avoidable Causes of Breast Cancer — by Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.”

“a seven fold increased risk of breast cancer from consumption of milk from cows injected with the genetically engineered bovine growth hormone rBGH drug, as approved by the FDA”

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 8:26 pm
Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 8:26 pm

I lost my best friend last year to breast cancer. She was 53. She was also my vet, made at-home calls and was so wonderful. She taught me a lot about organics. She was also totally convinced that hormone use with any livestock had an impact on human health. She also was concerned with pesticides, etc.

Comment by Donna — May 16, 2007 @ 8:46 pm
We all know that the FDA is “planning to begin” - “beginning to plan” - “planning to put together”, etc.

What’s wrong with implementing the food safety plans that are ready NOW???

How could the safe handling of fresh produce possibly interfere/conflict so much with the handling of other foods, that it has to wait for a comprehensive plan from the new Food Czar? Or is it just another stalling tactic?

“HSS Rejects FDA’s Food Safety Plan”

http://tinyurl.com/ys5rn8

“Department of Health and Human Services officials have rejected an FDA food safety proposal that would tighten the regulations dealing with handling and processing of fresh produce.

It is being reported that officials with the Department of Health and Human Services have rejected a food safety plan proposed by the FDA that was aimed at strengthening regulations governing the handling and processing of fresh produce.

At a meeting in February, the FDA presented their proposal that they stated would help cut produce related outbreaks in half, due to their current approach being insufficient. According to HSS spokeswoman Christina Pearson the meeting in February was mainly a background session, with the FDA providing “a wide variety of options available
to us in our efforts to improve food safety.”

“The message to HHS, from the industry, from Congress, is there’s urgency for the administration to act,” says Tom Stenzel, president of the United Fresh Produce Association.

Dr. Acheson of the FDA is planning to put together a strategic plan to help improve food safety, and to meet with officials from the HSS to discuss a range of food safety related issues.

“We believe in the importance of a strong, science-based regulatory process and take our responsibility to ensure the safety of foods, drugs and other items FDA regulates very seriously,” Pearson concluded.”

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 8:46 pm
Donna,

I have a sister and 2 neighbors with BC in the last year. Fortunately they are all still alive, though one isn’t doing well at all. Two of them attribute it to taking hormone replacement.

What a terrible loss, a woman so young and such a great friend and vet.

Comment by Aunt Granny — May 16, 2007 @ 8:52 pm
ASPCA USES CONDUIT COMMUNITY TOOLBAR TO DELIVER URGENT NEWS ABOUT PET FOOD RECALL

The Official ASPCA Community Toolbar Keeps Pet Parents in the Know about the Pet Food Recall, with Life-Saving Alerts

Conduit, the leading platform for building online communities via community toolbars, today announced that the ASPCA® (The American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals®) has been using the Conduit Community Toolbar to notify its pet owner community members of important news about the pet food recall crisis. As new pet food brands are being added to the recall list, the Official ASPCA Toolbar has become an important way to disseminate updates.

http://www.conduit.com

http://www.aspca.org

Article: http://biz.yahoo.com/bw/070516......html?.v=1

Comment by Kat — May 16, 2007 @ 8:56 pm
According to Menu Foods News Release dated May 15/07:
Menu Foods Income Fund reaches agreements with its bank and noteholders.
/Not for release over US newswire services/
TORONTO, May 15, 2007 /CCNMatthews/ - (TSX: MEW.UN):
……”Under the terms of the amended agreements, not more than CDN $45 million may be utilized by the Fund for recall-related costs.”….

This section was taken from http://www.sedar.com. This is actually an increase from $40 million Cdn. That’s what it’s expected to cost Menu Foods - $45 million Cdn.

Nutro finally called and wants to settle my vet bills of approx. $500. And they want the pet food I have for testing of which I am supposed to get a copy of the results.
Not sure if I want to settle as I’ll probably have to sign a release and won’t be able to sue in the future. And why should I give up my evidence? Not everyone kept food and are they being compensated without evidence? Why should I trust them to give me the true results when it took a month after the initial recall to take the Max Cat Gourmet Classics 3 oz cans off the shelves. I asked if they would test for cyanuric acid but they said only for melamine and pesticides. Go figure.
Keep up the good work petconnection. You are the best and your blogs are extremely intelligent.

Comment by Sindy — May 16, 2007 @ 9:16 pm
Melamine is all around us. Apparently used in lipstick/eyeshadow also. Not nice to put on a pig,Gina.

Was reading in a dutch article that wondered why Americans are so afraid to have melamine in their food since they put it on their lips.

http://www.dsm.com/en_US/html/dmm/endmarket.htm

Comment by Serijna — May 16, 2007 @ 9:30 pm
Comment by Sindy — May 16, 2007 @ 9:16 pm

Who says you have to give them all the food in your possession?

Also, you can pay to have a sample analyzed and get the results direct to you.

Be sure to read all the fine print on any release.

Comment by Donna — May 16, 2007 @ 10:08 pm
A silly question -

I’m getting annoyed with the phrase ‘one of the largest pet food recalls in history.’

154 companies, 5,800 products, still new recalls after two months, hearings in Congress, repurcussions spreading to the human food chain.

Was I not paying attention when the really big ones were happening?

Comment by Paul — May 16, 2007 @ 11:46 pm
Comment by Bernard J. (Bernie) Starzewski — May 16, 2007 @ 6:59 pm

I read the label on a bag of Hill’s R/D diet that a friend of mine got from her vet.

Among the healthy and balanced high-quality ingredients are “ground peanut shells (a source of fiber).”

Comment by Paul — May 16, 2007 @ 11:53 pm
Was I so busy the past few days that I missed any discussion about the survey taken of pets and veterinarians with respect to the recall? Here it is. Interesting to read the whole thing through.

http://www.vetlocator.com/news.....esults.php

Now - off to bed. Am taking the morning off and driving down to San Diego with a bag of food to get it tested by an excellent lab. Shows you where MY priorities are. Wish the FDA and all the other agencies shared my sense of ethics. Yeah, yeah, wishful thinking.

Comment by Lynn — May 17, 2007 @ 12:03 am
Anyone know how the pet food recall has effected the pet food makers financially? I would love to find financial info on these companies to see how it has effected their profits. I hope it is stinging like heck!

Comment by Tammy — May 17, 2007 @ 12:40 am
I was going over Menu Foods press releases and testimony transcripts last night… so, speaking of testing… Menu Foods REPEATEDLY states they conduct taste tests REGULARLY. They also admit to pumping out poisoned food by the truck load since November of last year. If animals were dropping dead in March, what happened to the animals involved in the previous 4 months worth of regular tests?

This farce that companies will catch problems as a result of private testing is a bad joke. It simply isn’t possible to believe these guys were unaware of the problem for that long. It is possible to believe it took them several months to engineer a cover up.

In the mean time, how much is a fair price for slaughter house waste mixed with cheap filler? I can buy a 6 ounce tin of store brand tuna for fourty five cents, but a 5.5 ounce can of chicken guts mixed with nickle a pound wheat costs fifty. I’ll go along with the argument that one should expect to pay for what they get, but the first step is to get what one pays for. Obviously you’re not going to get New York steak for a buck fifty a pound, but it should be possible to match the quality of a can of soup at that price. I would argue it is not the consumer who wants something for nothing, but the pet food manufacturers. The argument that a higher price insures higher quality falls apart even further when the problems are identical in the high dollar offerings.

Of course if the argument is we should be willing to pay a little something to keep someone from murdering our pets, I believe that falls under the category of extortion and racketeering.

Comment by Don — May 17, 2007 @ 9:05 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Facebook	Twitter	Google Buzz	Digg
Technorati	StumbleUpon	Delicious	Email

pet connection

Do you like this story?