Pet food recall: Thoughts on today’s media telebriefing
By Christie Keith
May 17, 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).
UPDATE: Here’s the transcript of today’s briefing.
One of my hobbies is trying to come up with phrases other than “press conference” to describe these twice-weekly media phone calls.
Everyone is present by telephone. One week, someone was obviously on their car cell phone. The journalists can only listen, not speak, until it’s our turn to ask our question. We indicate we have a question by typing in a code, and if we aren’t called on, we don’t get to ask. We’re limited to one question and a follow-up. This isn’t adhered to all that strictly, in the sense that some reporters ask multiple questions during their “one question,” and a few even get to ask more than one follow-up question. However, you can’t ask a question about something that comes up later in the briefing, because you already had your turn. It’s tightly controlled.
Today’s media briefing, although I can see it made some of our readers’ heads explode, actually was the most informative one we’ve had in a long time, perhaps since this all began. They actually described in more detail the testing that is (or, well, mostly isn’t, but that’s a different story) being done on the vegetable protein concentrates being held under the import alert, as well as some additional sampling being done by Customs and Border Protection. The news that none of the held 46 shipments has been released was very welcome, and more than they’ve indicated before.
I was also glad to be able to ask about ongoing testing of pet foods from China. While the vegetable protein companies themselves are being asked to test their own products under the import alert, the FDA itself is actually sampling and testing pet foods made in China. I certainly would like more details on that process, but Dr. Acheson stated quite clearly that the testing was still ongoing and that so far, there had been no samples positive for melamine or related compounds.
I was particularly glad to get to be able to ask that question today, because I’ve been emailing it to the FDA press office for over a week now, and they’ve never responded. In fact, while they have always responded to my questions in the past, as of a week ago, I stopped getting even a courtesy reply of “we’re working on it.” A couple of my other questions were answered today, at least in part, and one of them was asked (although the answer was non-responsive) by another reporter on Tuesday.
Things that jumped out at me today:
Julie Schmit of USA Today asked who imported Cereal Byproducts’ rice protein concentrate – updated with excerpt from the transcript:
I think this probably is a question for maybe Michael if he’s there. Who is the importer of the product that was recalled by cereal byproducts?
MR. ROGERS: I don’t know that we’re prepared to announce that. I think the headline we’ve said in the past is that most importantly all the positive samples for wheat gluten and rice protein concentrate have all linked back to two suspect sources in China. Those were the two suspect sources that were the target of our visit to China as well as working with AQSIQ. At this point I don’t know what value it would be to walk you through the trace-forward information, but maybe that’s something we’d provide at a later date.”
The Washington Post asked, as well, about other firms in China itself. Marketwatch asked about the $2 billion in fish we import each year from China, and if we’re going to be testing those.
In light of what CNN, the NY Times, and others described as the widespread and “open secret” nature of melamine contamination in protein concentrates and animal feed in China, those questions seem to be narrowing in on the heart of the story here — a heart we may never get to, given how much of it will involve China’s government and regulatory agencies.
Which only underscores the need for the same things Gina and I have been talking about all along:
- Country of origin labeling, so consumers can make informed decisions
- Complete and accurate pet food labeling, so consumers can make informed decisions
- Disclosure of suppliers, importers, and actual manufacturers, so consumers can make informed decisions
- Rationally designed testing programs that actually serve to monitor the safety of the foods being imported to the United States, whether for humans or animals
The only one of those that is even partially a “pet food only” issue is the second. Human food labeling laws still have some weaknesses, but they are much more useful and precise than the laws, regulations, and conventions that apply to pet food labeling laws.
I had a few other things to cover, but Gina apparently is doing a news roundup simultaneously with this, so I’ll leave those to her. And we’ll post the media conference transcript link when it’s available.
Go to the latest blog post | Go to the PetConnection home page
|Technorati Tags: pet food recall, dogs, cats,veterinarian, veterinary
You and your team are going a great job and a great service to all pet lovers.
I check your web site morning and evening for the latest re-calls and information so that my two pet cats have a better chance of living out their nine lives they are entitled to.
Comment by Bill Draper — May 17, 2007 @ 3:17 pm
Thank you, Bill!
Comment by Christie Keith — May 17, 2007 @ 3:28 pm
Love the kitty photo. Makes me want to adopt a kitty from the county pound. Wonderful blue eyes and such beautiful fur too. Seeing the sweet pets just makes me appreciate my gang so much. There’s nothing better than the “soul eyes” of these lovely animals.
Comment by Linda — May 17, 2007 @ 3:38 pm
My questions yet unanswered:
1. Has all contaminated pet food been removed from shelves and storage?
2. How is/was that contaminated pet food being handled after recall?
3. Some contaminated products ended up in livestock feed. How did that happen? Is there no protocol of what to do with contaminated product?
4. Why is USDA/FDA unwilling to name companies who distribute chicken and pork products that consumed contaminated feeds. If a Health Department inspection of a restaurant and resulting score (with detailed records) are available for public view, then why not companies who sell questionable products? Obviously these products have USDA approval and should be public record.
5. If 46 shipments of vegetable protein have arrived from China since 4/27, why have they not been tested at port of entry by FDA? It would seem this would be priority due to the pet food recall. Why wait for exporters or importers to do something they have shown no responsibility for thusfar?
Their conference may have been more informative this time, however, I still do not feel confident with pet food or human food. Choices in the marketplace will be different from this point forward.
Comment by Donna — May 17, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
I was listening to the Ag. SubCommittee on Food Safety on CSpan3. Rep. Davis asked Acheson to give a rough estimate as to the percentage of food imported. Acheson said he could get more exact numbers, but believed it to be 15% total food. He mentioned some foods were higher, like fish at 70% imported, and some lower. 15% total imported foods seems really low, especially when you read labels. Is there any way to get data like that?
Comment by Donna — May 17, 2007 @ 3:46 pm
Anybody else get a nice thank you letter from Senator Durbin today? We are making a dents in this enormous issue of our food safety. He sent what appears to be a mass mailing.
Comment by Maudigan — May 17, 2007 @ 3:57 pm
“3. Some contaminated products ended up in livestock feed. How did that happen? Is there no protocol of what to do with contaminated product?”
Donna
As I understand it the contaminated food was sold to the feed lots before they realized that is was bad, or that is what they would have us believe??
sam
Comment by sam — May 17, 2007 @ 4:08 pm
Okay why isn’t anyone asking in these press conferences what is going to happen to the chicken & pork by products of the animals that have been okay’d for processing even though they ate melamine tainted food? It was noted that the melamine is in the kidneys and other innards (included in by-products) but not in the muscle. My guess would be it will wind up back in the dog/cat foods.
Why hasn’t the press posed that question to David A?? Am I missing something?
Comment by JAG — May 17, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
Jag
I believe that most reporters, excluding Gina and Christie, don’t know how pet food is made, otherwise I believe they would be asking those questions. Maybe if some of us would send information to reporters they would know to ask.
sam
Comment by sam — May 17, 2007 @ 4:21 pm
I don’t understand why these press conferences aren’t televised. My non-computer friends don’t know anything until I call and tell them. Who gives a rats butt about Paris Hilton and the other phoney-baloneys from Gag-me-wood? This is vital information and involves all Americans and our furbabies. This is so wrong and like you said “controlled” with thone questions.
Maybe they’re afraid of a revolt. The French Revolution was a food issue. God help us all if that should ever happen. They better get their ducks in a row before something like that does happen.
Comment by Kathi — May 17, 2007 @ 4:25 pm
Comment by JAG — May 17, 2007 @ 4:17 pm
A docile and well trained media, told what to ask and how to behave, lest they not get invited back, makes for very comfy media events, no longer held on camera because the lies were too easy to catch!
Comment by E. Hamilton — May 17, 2007 @ 4:26 pm
That 15% total food from China. Which contaminated what % of our food supply. Going back to July when this really started.
I had an idea what this mystery flour might be and why they had to boost it with 20% melamine?
Wonder if they tested it as the stalk of the grains, wheat, corn, rice stalk, with a little of the grain still on the stalk. Like after harvest.
Just a thought I had watching the cat eating the stalk of the grass.
The FDA has all but made clear they don’t know what it is, gluten, no, flour, not quite. Not rice protien either?
Comment by Maudigan — May 17, 2007 @ 4:42 pm
After all the weeks of dealing with death and illness, I just have to share some good news. We did a C-Section on a kitty this afternoon. She had delivered one still-born kitten this morning at 2:00 am and nothing after that. This afternoon we delivered two kittens, neither one breathing, but one of them we were able to save and he is now mewling and crawling around on his heating pad here with me. He is just incredible… 90 minutes ago he wasn’t breathing, now he’s getting stronger by the minute. Mama is beginning to wake up. There’s nothing like the sweet cries of a newborn to make ‘ya go all mushy inside. And, suddenly, the world seems like a much more promising place.
Comment by Marilyn — May 17, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
“A docile and well trained media, told what to ask and how to behave, lest they not get invited back,”
How true, I had forgotten about that. Press are by invitation. If you are bad you don’t get to come back.
You know in my opinion government is all about control. Control the press/media briefings, control how the public perceives the crisis, control how much information and what the content is.
I guess that is the only way they( the government) feel safe.
sam
Comment by sam — May 17, 2007 @ 5:00 pm
Ok, they can’t test the meats?
In 1991 they had this:
“Cyromazine and melamine are extracted from tissue samples using acetonitrile1
water, followed by a cleanup through a C,, Solid Phase Extraction (SPE) device.
They are then quantitated by High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC)
equipped with an amine column and UV detector. This procedure is a
modification of the Ciba-Geigy AG-417A method.”
http://www.fsis.usda.gov/ophs/clg/Cyromazine.pdf
Guess that’s about as hard for them to find as the synergy between melamine & cynanuric acid from the University of Guelph and written about in several articles, much less finding it out from vets.
Flagrant bobby socks.
Comment by Ann H — May 17, 2007 @ 5:24 pm
Cyrozamine btw is a China problem too.
Comment by Ann H — May 17, 2007 @ 5:25 pm
Well I sent a list of questions to Marcia Larkins at FDA yesterday. I sent it receipt attached so I know it was at least looked at today. Im hoping she will respond….and I think my next self-assignment will be to e:mail the reporters who are at the “FDA non-briefings” to see if next non-briefing they can ask some of my questions.
Comment by Sandi K — May 17, 2007 @ 6:29 pm
Comment by Marilyn — May 17, 2007 @ 4:50 pm
Thanks for reminding me of newborn kittens. They sure grow fast those first couple of days. Sorry about the ones that didn’t make it, that’s too bad. Glad you could save the one and his momma is alright. Good luck!
Comment by Peggy (AKA: Big Fat Momma Cat) — May 17, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
Speaking of sending letters - results of my campaign so far . . .
1st round sent to:
Senators/Reps - 32
FDA - 8
USDA - 7
AAFCO - 1
PFI - 1
grocers (national chain) - 4
food companies - 5
restaurants ?
Responses:
1 industry rep
1 grocer
2 chicken producers
1 egg company
Comment by Donna — May 17, 2007 @ 7:18 pm
Marilyn - you are great. Thank you.
Comment by elliott — May 17, 2007 @ 7:29 pm
Tomorrow we will be taking the food that we feed to Midwest Laboratory in Omaha for testing. It will not be inexpensive, but worth the peace of mind. Do not know their time frame for results. We would not be taking this step if we home fed. Our vet still thinks prescription diet is still best to cure the evils of the prescription diet which we fed that was recalled which caused our problems in the first place. What a catch 22 situation. The non-prescription food we feed is Nature’s Variety. I will post results. They do a combo test for melamine and c-acid. Didn’t FDA today say they do not test for this combo as it was a melamine only thing. Why does a lab offer a test for both? Confused.
Comment by elliott — May 17, 2007 @ 7:39 pm
Just saw this blurb at the end of an article on todays Tele-Farce.
Couldn’t find any other info on it:
“Meanwhile, Chenango Valley Pet Foods said it is expanding its pet food recall to include foods that do not contain the suspect rice protein concentrate but were manufactured during periods when the formulas were being processed. The company said the recall is precautionary, due to the possibility of cross contamination.
Consumers with questions may contact the company at 1-610-821-0608.”
Comment by Aunt Granny — May 17, 2007 @ 7:41 pm
Comment by elliott — May 17, 2007 @ 7:39 pm
Elliott,
Please keep us informed of the findings with the lab results.
Midwest Laboratories was contracted a few weeks ago by NaturaPet (Innova, Calif.Natural, etc) to test all of their ingredients and finished product.
Comment by Donna — May 17, 2007 @ 7:50 pm
Donna - certainly will post any findings. This lab is minutes from my home and husband does a lot of work with them in connection with his business. If we can be of help, please let me know.
Comment by elliott — May 17, 2007 @ 7:56 pm
Got my test results back from Accutrace today. Tested Pur 1 sens systems dry dog. Luckily no melamine or cyanuric acid. The crystals were vitamin e dumped into food some time during processing. It’s supposed to be clear but had turned white from high temp exposure. Anyone know of problems due to excess vit e ? Pur did send me a prepaid mailer for the sample & a free coupon[which I will never use !] They also sent me a refund for the other food which got contaminated by exposure. But not til I said I was having private testing.
Comment by Leslie k — May 17, 2007 @ 8:07 pm
Note to self - when testing, ask re Benzoguanamine.
Comment by elliott — May 17, 2007 @ 8:18 pm
Comment by Leslie k — May 17, 2007 @ 8:07 pm
Leslie, which test did you have run at Accutrace. We were think about sending a sample to them. Thanks.
Comment by Donna — May 17, 2007 @ 8:22 pm
Great idea Sandi!
I have the list of journalists. I could send them Donna’s questions too.
Comment by spocko — May 17, 2007 @ 8:31 pm
I can’t believe they are not testing the imports. I can’t believe they admitted it!
Comment by Sharon — May 18, 2007 @ 4:12 am
Leslie:
“It’s supposed to be clear but had turned white from high temp exposure. Anyone know of problems due to excess vit e ? “
I can’t address the excessive E question,but I would be very surprized if there would be much E left after being sbjected to the high temps mentioned anyway.
Lorna
Comment by Lorna — May 18, 2007 @ 4:40 am
Sam said: You know in my opinion government is all about control
….hey you want live action no one can control? Go to your local govt meetings. Our county meetings are televised later in the evening and you can buy a tape cheap. I think the city meetings are also, but I haven’t got that far yet in my role as *citizen pest*!
Sharon - As a taxpayer, why should I pay for testing of imports? As far as I can see this is the proper way to do it - make the owner of the goods pay. Then they can spot check them to see if they’re telling the truth. (They might be doing that anyway, but they sure as heck aren’t going to talk about it ahead of time.) That’s what China is having a cow about right now - how expensive it’s going to be to do all these lab tests to prove the product isn’t contaminated. It’s mostly the supposedly *good companies* that are complaining. Too bad I say, as if spiking feed was so widely known and they didn’t do anything about it, well, they can just lay in the same bed as the criminals.
Comment by CathyA — May 18, 2007 @ 3:20 pm
No elliot, they said they didn’t have a standardized test for cyanuric acid in MEAT. I’m sure they test food items for it.
Comment by CathyA — May 18, 2007 @ 3:23 pm
RE: Accutrace
I put some samples in the mail to them Friday. I had emailed them awhile back with questions on different substances, and was less than pleased with the response. They wanted 10 times as much money as UC Davis on two items, oxalic acid and non protein nitrogen. On a recent visit to their site, they seem to have put together two decent general package deals. One is melamine and aminopterin, which also includes an unknown toxin scan that evidently covers quite a few substances. The other package is melamine and common melamine byproducts/contaminants, which I believe also includes the unknown toxin scan.
Cyanuric acid has received a ton of slanted attention in the media and from the U of Goof. It would be strange NOT to find cyanuric acid, along with several other trace items, in melamine. I have yet to see anything which would suggest cyanuric acid is present in other than expected trace amounts. If melamine is present, it is safe to assume cyanuric acid is also. That is the way the stuff comes.
Anyhow, I ordered the melamine and aminopterin test, and may add some other items if the cost is reasonable. My guess is the unknown toxin scan is going to produce the most interesting results, and I hope these guys compile and publish data on what they find in these tests. Melamine, cyanuric acid, and even crystals formed from the combination should not have been deadly in the amounts alleged to be present in the food. The crystals cooked up at the U of Goof have an LD 50 of 2500 mg. per kg. of body weight. That compares to 3100 for melamine, 8000 for cyanuric acid, and 3000 for table salt. Note: the lower the number, the more toxic the substance.
IMO, the melamine hype is a smoke screen to hide the fact we have not been told anything like the whole truth. Does anyone realize that a over a month and a half into the melamine hype, there has not been a single statement on the quantity of the stuff found in the food? The first thing they told us on aminopterin was it was found at 40 parts per million. Why hasn’t there been a similar statement on melamine? Is it because it would have to be present at 84,000 parts per million to produce the results claimed in the Menu Foods taste tests?
Comment by Don — May 18, 2007 @ 11:09 pm
Don, please keep us posted with the results of the samples.
Do you have any suggestions to what the culprit poison(s) might be, if not melamine and cyanuric acid? Are you thinking aminopterin really was the toxin? Something else? I would like to do further sleuthing, using your thoughts.
Thanks.
Comment by shelly — May 18, 2007 @ 11:31 pm
Polyethylene Glycol
son-of-a-gun
Polyethylene Glycol
Comment by shelly — May 19, 2007 @ 12:00 am
Dear Sam, I don’t believe in trusting criminals to do the right thing. I don’t trust the government either but at least they should be on our payroll. I pay taxes, I expect food safety standards that are not third world. You can take my tax money that your spending on the war and test imports. If you can’t do it then turn them away at the port. I don’t want to hear money used as an excuse for anything. It was greed that created this mess. Are you willing to sacrifice your children for a dollar?
Comment by Sharon — May 19, 2007 @ 6:40 am
Shelly,
This will be my second round of testing, as the first lab I used wasn’t able to test for everything I had on my list.
Early on, the first few lab people I talked to explained I had to know what substances I wanted to test for. I spent the next week doing search engine work trying to identify substances which are toxic to kidneys and might reasonably end up in food. On the list I started with as a result, I had testing done for ethoxyquin, sodium nitrate, sodium nitrite, aflatoxin, mercury, phosphorous, chromium and cadmium. Those all came out either negative or within safe limits.
As I understand it, oxalic acid is the toxin in the various glycols. According to anecdotal media reports, ethylene glycol has been ruled out. Considering it was identified as the toxin responsible for pet deaths in South Africa last December, I don’t believe it should be ruled out without a whole lot more testing. Sulfa drugs used in livestock feed can bio accumulate in organs, are not broken down by heat, are toxic to kidneys, and can end up concentrated as a result of the rendering process. A response to an email I sent to the U of Goof said sulfa drugs had been ruled out. IMO, nothing credible is coming out of the U of Goof, so I don’t think sulfa should be ruled out without more testing either.
Melamine and aminopterin are obvious suspects as they’ve both been identified as being present in some food samples, although I remain unconvinced melamine and related substances alone could account for the deaths.
Unfortunately, there are apparently an unholy number of substances, toxic to kidneys, that are sprayed all over the place or are otherwise used in industry. Trying to pin down every last one of them might be rather difficult.
I wouldn’t be surprised if there were a number of different toxins involved, and just because something wasn’t found in one batch, doesn’t mean it is not present in another. I saw one account where a lady who worked in a lab tested 6 cans of food she had, and found melamine in only one of them. That makes it hard for those of us who don’t work at a lab. If a person has samples to spare, it might make sense to send several with instructions to mix them together to test them all at once.
Anyhow, that’s what I’ve been working on. Everything about this situation is outside my experience, so I don’t know if I’m going about it the right way or not. I’d certainly be interested in hearing what other folks are doing along those lines.
Comment by Don — May 19, 2007 @ 10:35 am
Comment by Don — May 19, 2007 @ 10:35 am
Round Up Ready by Monsanto might be something to look at too
It’s in an abundance of seeds now; soy, corn. Alfalfa. California? sued the gov recently to have it back to regulated status and the alfalfa seed is being taken off the market (temporarily?) - evidently it’s bad for the environment, human health, etc. But those that bought the seed as of March 12, 2007 can plant it but anything after that cannot.
It’s a chemical put into seeds to make them be able to withstand fertilizer use - not die when things like Round Up are used to kill weeds,bugs,etc. The soy, corn,alfalfa etc. won’t die if that is the seed that was used - Round Up Ready seed. Made by Monsanto
Comment by shelly — May 19, 2007 @ 10:53 am
http://tedeboy.tripod.com/drmichaelwfox/id74.html
This article too is getting a lot of (worthy!) attention here today. Have a look.
Comment by shelly — May 19, 2007 @ 10:54 am
FWIW I sincerely doubt genetically engineered grains are very high on the suspect list. I wouldn’t be surprised if Menu Foods was rendering lab animals or medical waste though. If we rule out intentional sabotage, that would be the only way I can think of that a substance as rare as aminopterin could find its way into a can of pet food.
Comment by Don — May 20, 2007 @ 5:10 pm