FDA rules out acetaminophen findings
By Gina Spadafori
June 13, 2007
From Karen Roebuck of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday ruled out acetaminophen as a pet food contaminant after a Texas lab insisted it found the painkiller in numerous varieties.
“My bottom line is I’m pretty confident in the FDA’s findings,” said Dr. Steven Hansen, lead veterinary toxicologist with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ animal poison control center. “Acetaminophen is not hard to find.”
The FDA found no trace of the medication in five samples of one type of cat and two dog foods it tested in the past week, said spokesman Mike Herndon.
“At this point, FDA sees no compelling need to analyze any more samples for acetaminophen,” he said.
ExperTox Inc., in Deer Park, Texas, found varying levels of acetaminophen — which is toxic to pets, especially cats — in up to a dozen samples, lab operations manager Donna Coneley said Monday. She did not return calls yesterday seeking comment on the FDA’s findings.
It is not clear, however, whether the agency tested the type of food in which ExperTox said it found the highest level of acetaminophen. That sample had been submitted by the manufacturer, according to Coneley. FDA officials did not contact ExperTox until yesterday.
Agency and lab officials are reviewing scientific data, said Julie Zawisza, assistant commissioner of public affairs for the FDA.
“We cannot validate their findings,” she said. “… If they give us something new, we’ll look into it.”
A third lab hired by a pet food company and a university lab hired by a consumer could not verify ExperTox’s findings, Zawisza said.
Here’s the rest of the article.
Wasn’t there one poison that, when exposed to sunlight, did not show up in lab test? Was it acetaminophin?
Seems to me, it could have been in some batches and not in others.
Comment by Evelyn — June 13, 2007 @ 7:58 am
According to the lab the FDA never bothered to contact them so how the hell can they even come to this new conclusion? It just amazes me everytime they open their vile mouths.
Comment by Tammy — June 13, 2007 @ 8:04 am
Evelyn said: Wasn’t there one poison that, when exposed to sunlight, did not show up in lab test? Was it acetaminophin?
Seems to me, it could have been in some batches and not in others.
Comment by Evelyn — June 13, 2007 @ 7:58 am
*******************
The poison that is light sensitive is aminopterin (rat poison/cancer drug used 40+ years ago in the U.S. and is presently being used for research only now, I understand) which was the first contaminant found — by the NY State Food and Agriculture Lab in Albany, NY. Scientists there found 40 parts per million levels. Once the FDA came up with the melamine story, they shifted attention only to the melamine. The University of Guelph (Canada) also verified the aminopterin finding, but in parts per billion or trillion, which would make sense if the samples were exposed to light. We’re told the NY Lab exposed the samples to light, so they were degraded. Yeah, right… as if the scientists there don’t know how to handle and protect their samples - I sense a huge cover up!!! Those scientists certainly knew what they were doing. The rat poison is in there just as the NY lab said, and so is the acetaminophen. The FDA wants us to focus only on melamine. I’m sure as more pet owners’ food test results come back that even more poisons will be discovered. Anyone email questions to Sundlof at stevespetworld at aol dot com ?
Comment by petlover — June 13, 2007 @ 8:21 am
I would not trust a pet food company to send in any samples for testing… they have unlimited supply and can easily switch lables! (and test batches before sending it in)
I want the FDA to test products from off the sales shelf.
This makes me insane! We already know some pet food companies can’t be trusted so why are we still trusting them?
Rose
Comment by Rose — June 13, 2007 @ 8:25 am
No acetaminophen? I wonder what foods were tested? I wonder which one of the biggie companies now feels even more safe to sit on their information about their confirmed poisoned food as more pets die?
Comment by petlover — June 13, 2007 @ 8:25 am
Comment by Evelyn — June 13, 2007 @ 7:58 am
The light factor affected testing of aminopterin, the first finding by the NY St. lab.
Regarding the FDA finding, how do they expect anyone to believe them when they won’t give any details of what they tested. Let’s see, 60 million cans, bags, pouches recalled; 5 samples tested.
From Karen Roebeck’s article: “FDA officials did not contact ExperTox until yesterday.” (June 11, 2007).
Astonishing!
Comment by Maureen — June 13, 2007 @ 8:28 am
well. if the pet food in question has a clean bill of health, there shouldn’t be any problem with FDA releasing the name of the food, right? that way, we can all know just how wonderful it is (wink wink nod nod)
Comment by explodinghed — June 13, 2007 @ 8:32 am
Note that they used an ASPCA toxologist. What’s up with that?
My bottom line is I’m pretty confident in the FDA’s findings,” said Dr. Steven Hansen, lead veterinary toxicologist with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ animal poison control center. “Acetaminophen is not hard to find.”
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 8:35 am
RE aminopterin: Isn’t the NY lab one of the ones that was brought in under the HLS umbrella and is supposed to be better equiped etc?
“Acetaminophen is not hard to find.”
If you weren’t looking for it it is.
“It is not clear, however, whether the agency tested the type of food in which ExperTox said
Comment by straybaby — June 13, 2007 @ 8:35 am
Well, even my own state agriculture department said that they had to get new testing equipment reagents, protocols.
The methods they currently use will NOT detect acetaminophen - and they don’t have it set up yet.
So figure out if the labs testing used the GC or the LS methods- to see who is discounting the findings. One of them simply CANNOT find it because of their testing methods - NOT because it isn’t in the product.
Midwest can’t find it - ExperTox can - and the different methods used in testings is why.
See Itchmo or, call & ask your State Agriculture Animal Health/Feed what method they use in the commercial feed tests they do.
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 8:38 am
I think there’s all sorts of unknown nasty stuff in pet food. I believe the rat poison was present - probably just not in every case. Lord knows what else is lurking in our food.
Comment by Carol — June 13, 2007 @ 8:44 am
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 8:35 am
is he basing that comment on what? The FDA’s word? a question that was asked? test results he’s seen? does he know if they tested the same batches as the other lab? Or is that just his opinion on the overview info out there?
“At this point, FDA sees no compelling need to analyze any more samples for acetaminophen,” he said.
interesting.
“ExperTox could not contact the FDA or publicly identify the manufacturer of the food in which acetaminophen was found because of client confidentiality, Coneley said. ExperTox could share the information and the frozen samples if the FDA contacted the lab, she has said.”
so the FDA is basing their findings on an assumption again? Or did the manufacturer send the samples to both? Or do they have special powers?
“ExperTox found acetaminophen in samples submitted by two manufacturers . . .”
ugh, didn’t relize it was 2. ‘sigh’
#heads to the freezer, never too early for chocolate ice cream#
Comment by straybaby — June 13, 2007 @ 8:44 am
well one of the reasons why. ..They need to compare the using same protocols.
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 8:44 am
I just called Hill’s. I had an email a few minutes ago and they said to contact them. I did. They’re in a meeting until 12:30 central time.
I definitely will ask what test method if they give me this FDA/ASPCA spin.
wonder if some organization just got a huge charitable contribution.
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 8:59 am
The ASPCA should be taking a more active role in this. Why aren’t they sounding the alarm too? It doesn’t look good when organizations supposedly looking out for the interests on animals are so dismissive potential problems.
Comment by Carol — June 13, 2007 @ 9:00 am
A post at Itchmo’s Wed. Update says that the FDA set lower limit at .10 for acetaminophen, and the Expertox lab set it at .1?. This would explain why FDA’s tests didn’t find acetaminophen.
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 9:02 am
Here’s some info on the test protocols.. another one of the reasons for disparity in findings?
http://www.norchemlab.com/services/technology.html
excerpt from the Norchem website:
Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) has long been the “Gold” standard in forensic toxicology laboratories as a confirmation technique for drugs of abuse. Currently, GC/MS is rapidly being replaced by a superior confirmation method using Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry /Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) instrumentation. While similar to GC/MS in terms of function, confirmations utilizing the new “Platinum” standard LC/MS/MS technology provide many selectivity and sensitivity advantages. Overall, LC/MS/MS is fast becoming the choice of top forensic laboratories to provide legally defensible confirmation results with improved turnaround times.
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 9:03 am
Ann H, you are right. Should be same batch of food. And, who knows, maybe the FDA equipment used did not have ability to test for acetaminophin.
My gut says not to trust the FDA findings.
I guess the FDA wants a whole bunch more pets to die and then they will do more testing.
Comment by Evelyn — June 13, 2007 @ 9:03 am
Trusting the FDA to test for something the FDA does *not* want to find and waited a month to look for, gee, that settles the situation in MY mind.
How reassuring, how comforting, and what a huge load of hooey!
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 9:03 am
Is it OK to copy and paste an Itchmo post to this site? I didn’t know if it would be right, so I didn’t, but you can go there and see it. I think she had called the lab that did FDA’s tests.
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 9:04 am
Better to put the link in instead. :)
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 13, 2007 @ 9:05 am
Please, go to the Itchmo site and read the post about FDA’s tests!
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 9:06 am
Thanks Gina
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 9:07 am
If I had not *already* had the State Agriculture department tell me that they couldn’t find acetaminophen because of the way they tested, then I *might* be confused.
I’m *not* confused by this article.
If I didn’t know that the state is already setting up the testing procedures & protocol that *would* find acetaminophen, then I *might* be confused.
I’m *not* confused by this article.
It’s third class scientific findings and 1st class political findings.
I feel shafted once again by FDA, but it sickens me that the ASPCA took that position.
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 9:09 am
Here’s a new diet drug for dogs:
http://cbs3.com/pets/local_story_163213800.html
Comment by Linda — June 13, 2007 @ 9:21 am
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 9:09 am
Have you writen to the ASPCA and their vet? I would, but you have a much better grasp on the testing than I do. I think they should hear what you have to say, and know that we are/have lost faith in them. Especially because they are the only animal wefare group that has been somewhat involved. I expected a lot more from them. That I will write to them about.
Comment by straybaby — June 13, 2007 @ 9:23 am
OT and on a more positive note:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/.....823D22.DTL
Japan Plans Nursing Home for Dogs
06-13) 05:18 PDT TOKYO, Japan (AP) —
Japan will get its first nursing home for dogs with round-the-clock monitoring by doctors and a team of puppies to help aging pooches feel younger, a pet products company said Wednesday.
Comment by straybaby — June 13, 2007 @ 9:24 am
Hey, I just went back to Itchmo’s site to find that post and post the link, and I couldn’t find the post now! Am I going crazy? Did anyone else see that post? I think she said it was MidWestern lab? that did the FDA test that didn’t find acetaminophen.
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 9:26 am
On another note: Science is studying dog personalities - we all knew they had them - science is catching up. Newsweek article:
http://tinyurl.com/2c7ah2
Comment by Linda — June 13, 2007 @ 9:43 am
I would not trust the FDA’s findings.
Comment by Jill — June 13, 2007 @ 9:49 am
I can not fathom why the FDA is not asking to check the samples that Expertox has. That would be the best way to go about it.
They may be thinking they could be tampered with, but I would imagine there is technology out there to rule that out.
Comment by DMS — June 13, 2007 @ 10:07 am
dma - the FDA sits at desks and push pencils.
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 10:15 am
What lab did the FDA use for these tests? Anyone know?
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 10:18 am
Here’s the link to MidWest to see for yourself - they test melamine at 10 ppm
https://store.midwestlabs.com/catalog/viewcatalog/wfview.asp
They test at the same level, 10 ppm, for cyanuric acid. Info can be found in same area as above link.
That’s part of the “argument” that one lab tests at 0.1 ppm and another tests at 10 ppm.
Obviously, 0.1 ppm will detect at much greater levels.
Comment by Dee — June 13, 2007 @ 10:24 am
Why should the FDA even bother actually testing the samples, when they knew for, oh about a month, what they were going to say ?
I really doubt they even tried.
If the FDA says the sun rises in the east, look to the west for the dawn.
The FDA is incapable of the truth, as in so many other things.
But they are just faboo at the sweetheart deals with big drug companies!
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 10:25 am
Aha! I found it, here is the link at Itchmo, I am not going crazy after all.
The post is on June 13, at 10:50 am
http://www.itchmo.com/read/rec.....9_20070612
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 10:26 am
It’s obvious the FDA has been bought off yet again. But why should we expect anything different?
Comment by Debra — June 13, 2007 @ 10:27 am
Elaine,
Look a couple of posts above yours for the actual link to MidWest Labs if you need proof of the level they test at. It is on the “order form” for pet food testing.
Comment by Dee — June 13, 2007 @ 10:28 am
It also appears the ASPCA veterinary toxologist has been bought off.
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 10:35 am
Elaine, I believe the post you’re referring to is about cyanuric acid, from a lot that first was reported by a consumer that had an open bag tested. itchmo readers found other bags with same lot number, itchmo sent to midwest lab for testing. it came back negative, but there was apparently a difference in the protocol, so itchmo is seeking another lab to submit another unopened sample.
Comment by explodinghed — June 13, 2007 @ 10:35 am
When I called Accutrace back in May,the owner said the lab they use[Expertox] Had gone out & gotten samples of recalled food so they could make sure their test protocals were properly set up to find the contaminents. They also ran the tests over & over until they could detect the lower levels. Why haven’t the other labs followed suit ? It seems that only 2 labs have had any success; Expertox & the 1 in NY that found the rat poison. If the FDA & pet food co’s also know this they are deliberately using testing protocals which will come up negative.
Comment by Leslie k — June 13, 2007 @ 10:37 am
If I read that correctly, the FDA randomly picked 7 samples to test for acetaminophen this week, didn’t find it in those, and now has declared ALL pet food free of this contaminant.
They didn’t talk to Epertox or sample the Epertox pet food samples either? I have always suspected that the multiple pet food contaminants are varying from sack to sack or at least production run to production run, based on what I have read of other people’s experiences with the course of dog and human food illnesses. Does anything like this ever occur to FDA employees? Do they train ANYONE to think outside of the box at the FDA? Okay, that was funny - let’s not go that far, how about just the basics of INVESTIGATION and scientific principles?
Oh, forgot that they are in the middle of closing down over half of their labs, so expecting them to take this testing seriously would be like expecting to buy a well put together car, when you know it was built on hangover Monday.
Man, if this is honestly their best efforts at being effective regarding safety issues, I seriously am NEVER shopping at a chain grocery store again.
I can’t tell what is in all of those cans on the shelves, and apparently, that is the only reassurance these jokers ever plan to provide. Yo - FDA? I will be back once I have developed either my own testing lab at home here or X-Ray vision to see into those cans….
Comment by TC — June 13, 2007 @ 10:37 am
http://www.ucsusa.org/scientif.....mmary.html
In 2006, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) and Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) distributed a 38-question survey to 5,918 FDA scientists to examine the state of science at the FDA. The results paint a picture of a troubled agency: hundreds of scientists reported significant interference with the FDA’s scientific work, compromising the agency’s ability to fulfill its mission of protecting public health and safety.
Lots of links on the summary page. You MUST read the FDA survey summary brochure PDF. Confirmation of what we’ve all come to believe…
Comment by Kim — June 13, 2007 @ 10:39 am
I need a 4.4lb bag of Evangers dry dog pheasant & rice for testing. If you have or can get a sealed bag; date Oct 19th 2009 & code 001 I will buy it from you. 1 of my dogs was sick & another of mine & 1 of my neighbors had symptoms.I already have 2 open bags; just need a sealed 1.
Comment by Leslie k — June 13, 2007 @ 10:40 am
Thanks explodinghed,
You are right, I just didn’t check out the original article, so I thought it was referring to this latest FDA claim.
Comment by Elaine — June 13, 2007 @ 10:42 am
Leslie K, what part of the country are you in and can you get more of the code number posted along with the best by dates (if there is more)? If we have it here, I’ll send it to ya for free ;)
Good luck with your dogs!! Paws croseed for full recovery!
Comment by straybaby — June 13, 2007 @ 10:46 am
I just don’t believe this. This is after 9/11 and they can’t get it right? don’t you all feel safe? I don’t trust the FDA, but I have a few reasons not to trust the ASPCA too. I don’t feel safe at all. In fact, i feel sick over this. And We need to know the other foods. Who in this country and this administration can We trust? No one? We really are on our own. This is a sad state of affairs.
Comment by Trudy Jackson — June 13, 2007 @ 11:38 am
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 9:03 am
“Gas Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry (GC/MS) has long been the “Gold” standard in forensic toxicology laboratories as a confirmation technique for drugs of abuse. Currently, GC/MS is rapidly being replaced by a superior confirmation method using Liquid Chromatography/Mass Spectrometry /Mass Spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) instrumentation. While similar to GC/MS in terms of function, confirmations utilizing the new “Platinum” standard LC/MS/MS technology provide many selectivity and sensitivity advantages. Overall, LC/MS/MS is fast becoming the choice of top forensic laboratories to provide legally defensible confirmation results with improved turnaround times.”
Ann H, your find regarding the different tests is really helpful here. The FDA protocol that they issued on May 7th was developed and standardized for labs to use for testing pet food. It’s a GC-MS test, called “GC-MS Method for Screening and Confirmation of Melamine and Related Analogs Version 2 May 7, 2007”:
http://www.fda.gov/cvm/GCMSscreen.htm
So in their testing — and that which they commission from other labs? — is that all they are screening for? Until and unless they make public precisely what protocol and type of test they used to search for presence of acetaminophen, no one will believe them.
And what is the scientific rationale for testing only 5 samples of pet food out of 60 million recalled and millions more suspected but not recalled. What’s the huge margin of error in such a test? Even non-scientists like most of us on this website know this is a farce.
Comment by Maureen — June 13, 2007 @ 11:44 am
Thank you Kim for that link (took me a minute, as pdf files seize up my computer, and it even gave an “overheated message” before it died - looks like this stuff is even frying my computer’s mind, lol).
But that was some interesting stuff to read.
Comment by TC — June 13, 2007 @ 11:53 am
Kim’s link to the article titled “Evidence of Political Interference: Summary of the FDA Scientist Survey” is a MUST READ. Senator Durbin and our state reps need to see this.
I’m going to print copies of this. Go to the PDF of survey responses if you want your head to explode. Very candid.
http://www.ucsusa.org/scientif…..mmary.html
“The focus should truly be on protecting public health instead of catering to the interest of industry…FDA leadership should let FDA scientists do the jobs they were hired to do.” - said by a scientist for the Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) of the FDA
I wonder what this scientist of the CVM knows about the pet food scandal. I wish he/she would come forward with the rest of the information we need!
Kim, this entire document is one that everyone here should read and SEND to state reps, Senator Durbin, and news media. What a great find. Thanks.
If someone knows how, please copy some of the quotes from the scientist survey to this site.
Comment by petlover — June 13, 2007 @ 11:56 am
We are not the only one who doubt the FDA!
Good story
http://tinyurl.com/yozure
Please leave positive feedback for the editor, bottom of the story , so we can help this person keep writing the news!
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 11:59 am
Looks like the next great kitchen innovation is going to be outrageously expensive lab equipment!
Comment by Patricia Hill — June 13, 2007 @ 12:04 pm
Maureen, and that is what part of what I asked Hill’s as they gave their *new* PR spin. I got so upset. The first time I just told her ok, fine, you read your script and I am done & hung up. 2nd time, reasonably calmed down, I called and asked for the person that sent me the email, like duh, they could help me. They know about the guy that posted the picture and report on the internet(itchmo) but they don’t know which protocol they use and parameters to test their foods. That one ended with well, you know what, I won’t even use a vet that sells Hill’s and I’d bet my animals will live longer too (I hung up)
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
Comment by Ann H — June 13, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
That is rapidly becoming the gold standard for vets, if they sell the Hill’s, view them with extreme caution.
Hill’s has brought this on themselves and the vets may not be real happy with malpractice problems that *will* occur if someone feeds a bad product, which the vet sold them or told them to feed the pets, resulting in huge vet bills.
The lawyers must be drooling over the fine pickings to be had from that, one case alone could put a vet out of the business and some lawyers kid through college.
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 12:21 pm
Among the contributing factors to the decline of the FDA: past leadership.
Remember the previous head of the FDA, veterinarian Lester Crawford?
(Dr.) Lester Mills Crawford…resigned from the FDA in September, 2005 - just two months after his approval by the Senate. On October 17, 2006, he pleaded guilty “to conflict of interest and false reporting of information about stocks he owned in food, beverage and medical device companies he was in charge of regulating.”
(…)Prior to becoming FDA Commissioner, Crawford had served as Deputy Commissioner of FDA since February 25, 2002.
(…)On October 16, 2006, the US Justice Department formally charged Crawford with lying and violating conflict-of-interest laws for falsely reporting his ownership of stock in companies regulated by the FDA.[4]. Specifically, according to the charging documents, he falsely stated in a 2004 government filing that shares of Sysco Corp. and Kimberly-Clark Corp. had been sold when he and his wife continued to hold them, and also failed to disclose income from exercising stock options in Embrex Inc. He pleaded guilty the next day.
(…)On February 27, 2007, (Crawford) was sentenced to three years’ supervised probation and fines of roughly $90,000.
(…)Crawford followed his position at the FDA by joining a Washington lobbying firm, Policy Directions Inc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.....ing_career
About Crawford at Policy Directions Inc:
“Crawford is listed as “senior counsel” to the firm Policy Directions Inc. Among the companies and organizations listed as clients are Altria Group Inc. (formerly Philip Morris Companies), Merck & Co. Inc., the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA,) the Grocery Manufacturers of America and the American Feed Industry Association. A spokesman for the firm said neither Crawford nor anyone else wished to discuss his appointment.” (Note: you can’t make this stuff up. The head of the FDA goes to work for big tobacco and pharma!)
http://www.welikeitraw.com/raw.....index.html
The next and present FDA director, Andrew von Eschenbach, wasn’t confirmed until December 2006, 15 months later.
Comment by Maureen — June 13, 2007 @ 12:27 pm
Here’s Dr. Steven Hansen’s contact info. He’s quoted in Karen Roebuck’s article, as you know, as saying he’s pretty confident in the FDA’s findings re: acetaminophen. Sure wish he would comment further on the FDA’s testing protocol, and how could testing 5 samples out of 60 million lead to such an assumption by the FDA that acetaminophen isn’t in pet food?
Dr. Steven Hansen
Senior Vice President
ASPCA National Animal Poison Control Center
1717 S. Philo Road, Suite #36
Urbana, IL 61802
(voice) 1-217-337-5030
(fax) 1-217-337-0599
Comment by Maureen — June 13, 2007 @ 12:45 pm
So it’s business as usual at the FDA. Protecting big business over the health of the people (or animals for that matter). Testing 5 samples and calling the rest safe. I know I’ll sleep better tonight. Won’t you?
Comment by Ann Jackson — June 13, 2007 @ 12:53 pm
“pretty confident” is not acceptable. 5 samples out of 60 million don’t cut it. Any “doctor” using that kind of terminology ought to lose his license. He has no business saying anything.
Comment by Sharon — June 13, 2007 @ 12:54 pm
“Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money.”
~Cree Indian Proverb~
Comment by Ann Jackson — June 13, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
Good catch, Kim! Powerful stuff!
Comment by Kat — June 13, 2007 @ 1:03 pm
I *might* be willing to believe that the food tested clean if there had been any real action, by any pet food company that was not a cover the butt spinfest, any ads on TV that stated the symptoms of the poison, any pressure on the FDA to come clean with the numbers and quit insulting the pet parents, any action on the part of the pet food industry to GET THE POISON OFF THE SHELVES( they put it there they can damned well get it back-ticks me off that volunteers have to go out and look!), any trust funds set up to pay the medical costs, any sign, however faint, that they understand the magnitude of what they have wrought.
Seen any of that?
Me neither.
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 1:16 pm
So do I understand this correctly. The FDA chose the samples it wanted to test (they must have gotten a call from the higher ups with lot #’s that were safe..) and now based upon that, everything is safe! I guess they don’t quite understand: pets got sick and pets died! Something is in the food. We didn’t imagine it and a lot of us lived and are living a nightmare.
Someone with lots of clout and money sure did make a statement with the government agency. Who are they protecting????
I thought after 9/11 and all the money that has been spent and all the new gov’t agencies that have been created, etc. I should feel safe. No way, no how.
Katie
Comment by Katie — June 13, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
Not to worry! China has food safety under control! What a crock!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19187456/
China has some problems with food safety, but they are not major and should not be overblown, Li Dongsheng, vice minister for the State Administration for Industry and Commerce, said.
Comment by Barb — June 13, 2007 @ 1:42 pm
RE: “Only when the last tree is cut; only when the last river is polluted; only when the last fish is caught; only then will they realize that you cannot eat money.”
Cree Indian Proverb
Comment by Ann Jackson — June 13, 2007 @ 12:56 pm
A friend just sent me this poster..titled Indian Prophecy. I love it! So true.
Comment by Barb — June 13, 2007 @ 1:50 pm
Face it. The whole lid has been blown right off this thing. And it’s not going away. The FDA can protect it’s big business buds all it wants, looking like idiots in the process.
But it won’t make any damn difference.
Americans will hit these businesses where it hurts.
The Pocketbook.
Comment by Steve — June 13, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
Oh shooey mooey to FDA and a few *&(#)$^%!’s added in also! Sorry but right now my expected role of non-hysterical ex-pet-parent went right out the door.
Comment by Sandi K — June 13, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
Does anyone here have any special experience with switching to a homemade diet for a dog that has cancer? If you do and have had any success, please share. Thanks.
Comment by Linda — June 13, 2007 @ 1:55 pm
Today I just got a written letter from Ken Salazar, my United States Senator, dated May 29, 2007 stating:
Thank you for contacting me about pet food safety issues. I appreciate hearing from you.
I understand your concerns about pet safety. As you may know, the Food and Drug Adminstration is conducting an investigation into the deaths and illnesses of cats and dogs affected by contaminated wheat gluten. I hope their investigation is robust and thorough, and that it results in policies that prevent a similar catastrophe from occurring in the future. In addition, should legislation regarding the safety of pets come before the Senate, please rest assured that I will keep your concerns in mind.
Comment by Evelyn — June 13, 2007 @ 2:17 pm
All right people, Do you WANT the pet food tested? DO YOU?
We CAN, no begging involved.
I am setting up a cafepress site and we will sell all the t-shirts we can. And whatever other stuff they sell.
EVERY dime goes to Ben at itchmo for testing the foods. EVERY PENNY GOES TO TESTING, unless Ben does a runner with the money, which I consider as unlikely as..well.. the FDA telling the truth.
YOUR part is to help come up with the slogans and then, of course, pay for some t-shirts.
You *KNOW* you want a pair of panties with PFI on the butt!
(they do NOT own the alphabet)
It is a win-win because the food gets tested and you get shirts that will make people talk to you about this tragedy! Who you show the panties to? Entirely your business.
Here is what I got, Sandi K I stole an idea from your post above.
I TRUSTED THE PFI AND ALL I GOT WAS A
DEAD CAT!
Menu Foods made me an hysterical Ex-Pet parent
Ask me about my dead pets!
THE LIE MUST DIE!
Thousands died to save YOUR pet.
I LOVED my Canary!
50% Lethal ON SALE NOW
AT A MARKET NEAR YOU
LethalDose50 Pet Food
Made my pets 100% dead!
Melachicken, it’s crispy
and FDA approved!
You get the drift, if you can do any design work, get to it and get it to me. Forums, itchmo , Alice Army thread.
BRING ON THE SNARK- I KNOW YOU CAN DO IT!
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 2:37 pm
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 2:37 pm You KNOW you want a pair of panties with PFI on the butt!
Actually E, I dont know if I can fathom the idea of Duane being so near my fanny. (-:
Comment by Sandi K — June 13, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
Has the FDA actually been in communication with the Texas lab?
Has the FDA been in communication with the pet owners who paid their hard-earned money to have the contaminated food tested?
Can the FDA prove they had samples from the same coded lots in question?
Comment by Dee — June 13, 2007 @ 2:43 pm
Linda re cancer and dog diets
I don’t have any experience with the switch, but that is the first thing I would do if I had a dog with cancer. Strombeck’s book (which I love) says “No commercial pet foods meet dietary requirements for cancer patients.” He has some recipes, and to help slow weight loss recommends high fat diets, not high carb diets.
Comment by Carol PW — June 13, 2007 @ 2:47 pm
Thank you so much Carol. I will look into it. I put her on homecooked right away and now need make it fit her cancer.
Comment by Linda — June 13, 2007 @ 2:51 pm
Comment by Sandi K — June 13, 2007 @ 2:42 pm
Sit on it ! is a phrase I remember fondly so I used the idea.
I would use Duanes face if I thought I could get away with it. NO JOKES about that sit on my face pickup line!
MY butt sqooshing the PFI makes ME smile!
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 2:52 pm
E., you are too funny! (-;
Comment by Sandi K — June 13, 2007 @ 2:55 pm
Sandi, I better not be the ONLY funny one, we got a lot of pet food to test!
Give up the snark, come on, you know you will feel better!
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 3:03 pm
What is the FDA saying about the Acetaminophen in the cat and dog food?
Comment by Jill — June 13, 2007 @ 3:13 pm
WOW! E!! What a GREAT idea!!
I’m in!!
Any & all of those phrases sound grrrr8!
Comment by Kat — June 13, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
I just received a note from ExperTox that the FDA would like permission to take some of the acetaminophen positive samples to test. Now, perhaps I have the wrong attitude, but that strikes me as passing strange considering the FDA has already said they are going to stand down on investigating acetaminophen. After all, they tested 5 samples from who knows where out of 60 million cans, and couldn’t find what ExperTox has found after testing a thousand samples. I’d be curious to know what protocol they used. Did they perhaps put bits of kibble in their ears and see if it affected their headaches?
In any case, my response to ExperTox is the FDA is welcome to test my samples at ExperTox facilities, under ExperTox’s observation and supervision. If news cameras are handy, so much the better. I for one would love to see it.
Comment by Don — June 13, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
Comment by Kat — June 13, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
Good,because all of that and any other snarky stuff we can come up with is what we will be selling.
There should be pics of pets that died too, if we can get them, or sick pets, whatever works.
Got ideas? Got the snark? PROVE IT!
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 3:54 pm
Gina
What is the FDA saying about the Acetaminophen in the cat and dog food?
Comment by Jill — June 13, 2007 @ 4:00 pm
Linda,
I don’t have a dog with cancer, my dog has reactive histiocytosis (awhile back it was considered a cancer)now an autoimmune disease.
You might want to visit smilingblueskies.com Suzi the owner is a supporter of cancer research in dogs and has some info.
Also, Monica Segal who is an animal health care worker and moderates K9Kitchen at Yahoo groups has a booklet out on Canine Cancer, the Dietary Role. She follows Dr Ogilivie of Colorado State. The booklet is 20pages and cost $9 at dogwise.com
Most cancer diets are low in carbs, mod protein and higher in fats (omega 3) the fatty acids are used for inflammation. This is what Dr Ogilvie at Colorado State found.
Monica also has a web site and email address: monicasegal.com
other Yahoo groups: CanineCushingsAutoimmune group is awesome! there is also a canine cancer group at yahoo and diet is always a big discussion.
Katie
Comment by Katie — June 13, 2007 @ 4:09 pm
Thank you so much Katie. I will check it out. We are waiting for the biopsy results right now but the vet is fairly certain it is lymphoma.
Comment by Linda — June 13, 2007 @ 4:11 pm
I don’t understand why they are saying that there is no Acetaminophen in the cat food. Please explain what they are talking about. thank you.
Comment by Jill — June 13, 2007 @ 4:12 pm
Leslie k. can you please tell me what kinds of symptoms your dog has and also the other dog? i got a free sampler case of canned evangers dog and cat foods after a couple of days on the food my dogs bowel movements got very tiny and then he got a very loose stool one day i have stopped feeding it and have gone back to home cooking again my cats are not crazy about the cat food i am going tolet them finish the open cans and thats it they did not get sick please tell me more info
Comment by lindak. — June 13, 2007 @ 4:30 pm
Leslie k: A while back I was considering purchasing a 4.4lb bag of Evangers dry dog pheasant & rice. I noticed though, that it did not seem to be sealed right, and had some kind of pupae-looking thing on the outside near the seal. Yuk! Anyway, the shop owner told me that it needed to be sent back to the company. I have no idea if it is related to your situation or not, but thought I would pass on the info. I have no idea what the date was on the bag, sorry.
Comment by ango — June 13, 2007 @ 4:51 pm
Comment by Don — June 13, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
Agree! I’m not certain how you can totally discount an analysis when you do not actually look at the samples in question.
Also, did they only test from products that have been publicized, how would they know the posted brands are the only ones that yielded contamination?
Comment by Donna — June 13, 2007 @ 5:15 pm
Comment by Jill — June 13, 2007 @ 4:12 pm
“I don’t understand why they are saying that there is no Acetaminophen in the cat food. Please explain what they are talking about. thank you.”
Jill, none of us understand why there are saying that either. But then we don’t understand why they are trying to cover up this whole debacle, especially in not getting all toxic food pulled from the shelves. In this case they claim (as you read in Gina’s introduction to this thread) that they tested 5 samples, then concluded that there isn’t acetaminaphen in 60 million cans, bags or pouches from that sample. It’s obscene.
They appear to realize they need to be more credible. Read Don Earl’s post a little earlier (Don has the new website that displays tests done by individuals that have shown positive for various toxins, including acetaminaphen; petfoodrecallfacts.com:
First, go read his latest comment on hearing from the lab that found acetaminaphen for him:
Comment by Don — June 13, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
Comment by Maureen — June 13, 2007 @ 5:34 pm
EatFried melafish-FDA O.K.’d
No poison found until testing
Fry the melabacon-something new to swallow
Comment by Evelyn — June 13, 2007 @ 5:50 pm
Straybaby- I am in southern NJ. None of the pet food or feed stores carry it. We ordered direct from Evangers online. It was made 3 weeks ago so I don’t think it would be the same batch if I order again. Joel[the owner] has been very concerned & helpful. They are testing & sending me a refund. I would still like to test thru Accutrace at Expertox. Between us my neighbor & friend & I have 4 types to test. I already did 1. At approx. $166 per food w/shipping plus vet bills its getting a little hard !Even if we can’t find a sealed bag we will test the 1 that made the dogs sick.
For anyone else in NJ don’t bother to call the state. Our ag. dept. has no lab. They contract out & the lab they use is not set up for any of the toxins in the pet food. They aren’t keeping any records of complaints,so don’t send them any private test results either.
Time to email the govs office again !
Comment by Leslie k — June 13, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
Could the problem be at the rendering plants where they are accepting drug refuse etc. and this ends up in the pet food? So depending upon the batch bought by the pet food companies, each one would contain a different contaminant…and hence account for labs getting varying test results. I think an in depth study of these rendering plants and what they accept in their facility is needed - something akin to an undercover 60 minutes approach.
Comment by Linda — June 13, 2007 @ 6:04 pm
Linda k-My chihuahua was very lethargic & seemed sore & tender in the abdomin. He wouldn’t jump onto furniture or laps or let us pick him up. Also his face was sunken & his body was bloated.He had blood in his urine & it wasn’t concentrating.His Bilirubin & GGTP counts were high. His Eosinophils were very high & T4 was low. On urinalysis he had a high RBC count. Everything else was normal.He was running a low grade fever. He was eating ,but slowly.He was urinating very frequently & going in the house. My beagle was also having accidents & lethargic & the runs. My neighbors dog[who shared the bag with us] was also sunken in the face & bloated. Urinating & pooing frequently[6 x a day]Also picking at her food. The other dog ate only about 10-15 pieces out of the other bag,luckily no symptoms. This all started within 3 days of starting the Evangers. We started adding more Cal. Natural to the food & they started improving rapidly. When we switched them totally to Cal Nat they were fine in 2 days. They are getting only 1/4 dry,homemade wet & homemade treats. I don’t think it’s the homemade because we are talking about 3 different houses.This makes 5 dry unrecalled foods that have caused problems fot the 3 of us !
Comment by Leslie k — June 13, 2007 @ 6:08 pm
There’s a new toothpaste recall, apparently same dangerous chemical involved:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyo.....211145/543
It’s labeled Colgate, but may be counterfeit. Says ‘Made in So. Africa’, sold in discount stores in 4 states, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania and Maryland.
I’d say the need for a real FDA might break through the fog as more of these stories break…
Comment by Maureen — June 13, 2007 @ 6:35 pm
don, i agree wholeheartedly that fda needs to be supervised during any testing of those positive samples. i think they’ve given us reason to be very wary of their motivations and their methods
Comment by explodinghed — June 13, 2007 @ 6:48 pm
Lesliek. i am glad to hear the dogs are better this whole thing is just absurd! i am not having my pets try out any more new foods! i really hope there is not a problem with evangers now! i am not going to take any chances with my pets health ! i had spoken to Joe about 3to 4 weeks ago he sounded very sincere and educated about pet nutrition but i remember him saying that he has the canned food canned at another company i thought he said at a cannery run by fromm in the u.s. he said they had been using them for years and never had a problem it made me a little uneasy but he reasured me that he never had a problem with their food meanwhile like i posted earlier i have stopped this food for my dog it was having a bad effect on him and my cats will be off of it as soon asthey finish their open can nothing at this point can be fully trusted to be totally safe! i am so sick of this craziness ilove my pet babies too much to keep taking chances with these foods!please let us know your test results!
Comment by lindak. — June 13, 2007 @ 7:23 pm
I know this for a fact that fromm canned food is canned in China. I got this info from a Fromm distributor the dry is made in the states
Comment by Jan — June 13, 2007 @ 7:55 pm
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 3:03 pm
Oh E! Lol, I am still trying to recover from the idea of Duane next to my tushy! I wonder what would make that vision in my mind disappear? I bet if I go down a couple of cans of left-over mela-food that I still have after our kitty died, it would cause amnesia perhaps. See, it might come in handy for something afterall.
Comment by Sandi K — June 13, 2007 @ 9:43 pm
Comment by Don — June 13, 2007 @ 3:42 pm
Don, can you include a requirement that FDA let you know their results immediately (and in writing) if they want some of your food for testing?
Comment by Sandi K — June 13, 2007 @ 9:45 pm
What kind of public affairs office would first say they find no evidence of acetaminophen , say they cannot validate the other labs findings, say if they give us something new, we’ll look into it and not even bother to first test the samples that the other lab had before making such a public statement. Its absurd!
Comment by Sandi K — June 13, 2007 @ 10:11 pm
Teensy, and I *do* mean teensy, correction.
Cringing as I say it, cafepress does not MAKE panties, they makes THONGS. Teensy, scary, looks painful - you go first type, thongs.
So no PFI or Duane’s face on the butt of the panties.
I am, naturally, devastated, though not quite devastated enough to wear a thong.
If you have ideas for HOW to put PFI or Duane’s face on butt floss please, PLEASE refrain from posting them, I cherish my ignorance on this subject.
Frail southern flower of womanhood that I am, you will respect this, and make appropriate suggestions for the t-shirts and bumper stickers.
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 10:31 pm
CHALLENGE TO THE FDA ON ACETAMINOPHEN TESTING (in red)
http://www.petfoodrecallfacts.com/lab.html
Comment by Don — June 13, 2007 @ 10:34 pm
I have an analysis in one hand that states the sample yielded acetaminophen and cyanuric acid.
In the other hand I have a news article that states the FDA rules out acetaminophen.
On the dining room table is 132 pounds of dog food that we will never use.
In the back yard is my girl, gobbling grass and vomiting because she is having a little difficulty transitioning to home cooking.
By the sofa are numerous books on nutrition and cooking for your pet, although I’ve had no time to read them.
On the computer are emails from my new friends who try to give advice on what to do.
On my phone is a message from a friend, an attorney, who said “the truth is an absolute defense.”
In my office is a chair, in front of the computer, by the phone, near the sofa where my “kids” lay quietly while I try to make wise decisions on what to do next – realizing I’m on my own, realizing the FDA, USDA and PFI could care less about protecting my pets, or me.
Yes, I do believe there something under the carpet, and I have a good idea who swept it there.
Comment by Donna — June 13, 2007 @ 10:58 pm
Comment by Donna — June 13, 2007 @ 10:58 pm
Donna, you are here and you are NOT alone and the genie is out of the bottle, believe those things and you can get through this.
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 11:04 pm
*Don, ExperTox et al have challenged the FDA!!*
http://www.petfoodrecallfacts.com/lab.html
Comment by Kat — June 13, 2007 @ 11:35 pm
Kat, this news needs to get OUT there, I am off to spread the word, hit Craig’s list nationwide if you can!
Go Don GO!
Comment by E. Hamilton — June 13, 2007 @ 11:47 pm
OK. I’m on it!
Comment by Kat — June 13, 2007 @ 11:57 pm
Donna,
Sorry to hear your little girl is having a hard time transitioning to home cooked food? I’ve found it helpful to start out with just rice and boiled chicken and the gradually add in the other ingredients to create a balanced diet. And then too open up some slippery elm capsules and use enzymes that aid in digestion, some for the upper and lower track and the stomach. And then gradually I add the oil and veggies etc. And then just recently one dog had such a difficult time, Moon, the one I found on the road, that I had to take him to the vets for some pills and that calmed everything down and he’s back to normal now.
Comment by Linda — June 14, 2007 @ 5:17 am
Donna you’re not all alone. All of us here care and are trying to help. The things that Linda suggest sound good and I hope they help!!
Go Get ‘em, Don!! I am amazed that the FDA asked for your samples *after* closing the case. At lest they are still looking into things even if they say they are not!! Has a date been set, yet?
Comment by Peggy (AKA: Big Fat Momma Cat) — June 14, 2007 @ 6:09 am
“Pretty confident…”
I am pretty confident that the FDA is a useless tax-dollar-grave and should be disbanded immediately.
D’OH!
Comment by MaKo — June 14, 2007 @ 6:34 am
Comment by Leslie k — June 13, 2007 @ 5:54 pm
I’ll check the store by me that sells it and see if they have that particular one. I’m in Brooklyn, so there is a possibility. I can also check with the owner and see if she’s heard of any problems with their food.
Glad the owner is working with you. what a concept!
Comment by straybaby — June 14, 2007 @ 7:10 am
I have an idea, Donna!! Since you already wrote your piece about the FDA, why don’t you send it as a letter to the editors of several big city newspapers? Like the NY Times, the Los Angeles Times, The Miami Herald. The Dallas Morning News has millions of readers. I loved the way you described the whole situation in such a concise way. I think it would attract a lot of attention and also inform those who don’t have the internet about what’s really going on. Just an idea I’d thought I’d pass on. This is the piece I was talking about. And I think it’s excellent!:)
Donna’s piece
I have an analysis in one hand that states the sample yielded acetaminophen and cyanuric acid.
In the other hand I have a news article that states the FDA rules out acetaminophen.
On the dining room table is 132 pounds of dog food that we will never use.
In the back yard is my girl, gobbling grass and vomiting because she is having a little difficulty transitioning to home cooking.
By the sofa are numerous books on nutrition and cooking for your pet, although I’ve had no time to read them.
On the computer are emails from my new friends who try to give advice on what to do.
On my phone is a message from a friend, an attorney, who said “the truth is an absolute defense.”
In my office is a chair, in front of the computer, by the phone, near the sofa where my “kids” lay quietly while I try to make wise decisions on what to do next – realizing I’m on my own, realizing the FDA, USDA and PFI could care less about protecting my pets, or me.
Yes, I do believe there something under the carpet, and I have a good idea who swept it there.
Comment by Donna — June 13, 2007 @ 10:58 pm
Comment by Ann Jackson — June 14, 2007 @ 10:41 am
Comment by Ann Jackson
Thanks - I just may do that.
Comment by Donna — June 14, 2007 @ 1:43 pm
Ditto Ann, I thought the same thing after reading Donna’s post…very concise and to the point. Donna you should most definitely send this to newspapers and the like!
Here’s my local contact info to get you started -
San Diego Union Tribune
Bill Osborne, Sr. Editor
Phone: (619) 293-1395
email: opinion@uniontrib.com
Comment by Barb — June 14, 2007 @ 1:51 pm
*COLGATE ISSUES RECALL*
!!!good GOD almighty!!!
I called Colgate about 3-4 weeks ago!
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=3276328
Comment by Kat — June 14, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
Isn’t it phony colgate?
Comment by Linda — June 14, 2007 @ 2:14 pm
yes, it’s the fake stuff. I had seen it being sold on those various world market boards. That had other brands too.
Comment by Kat — June 14, 2007 @ 2:23 pm
I told Colgate, when I called them, about their brand being on those boards. But someone told me here that they had a factory in China, so I just thought a supplier had bought some of the “authentic” stuff.
One woman at Colgate said she had “seen that ingredient — the di—- glycol word” I sad “really?” She said that was “another ingredient & that if it was in the product, it would be listed.”
ahhhhh!
Comment by Kat — June 14, 2007 @ 2:27 pm
Ugh! Gag a maggot!
Comment by Linda — June 14, 2007 @ 2:36 pm
Next thing it will be phony “ice cream”!
Comment by Linda — June 14, 2007 @ 3:06 pm
“pretty confident”
Recalls to my mind the great blog piece on horsesass: the FDA as FAITH-BASED DINING ADMINISTRATION
“FDA and USDA BELIEVE the likelihood of illness after eating such pork is extremely low.”
– USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007
“We have no reason to BELIEVE that anything other than the rice protein concentrate or the wheat gluten have been a problem in the United States recently.”
– USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007
“But overall, we BELIEVE the risk to be extremely low to humans.”
– USDA/FDA, 4/26/2007
“One of the reasons we BELIEVE that this is very low in humans is due to the dilution effect.”
– USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007
“We do not BELIEVE that there is any significant threat of human illness from consuming poultry.”
– USDA/FDA, 5/1/2007
“We have no reason to BELIEVE those animals are any risk to the public.”
– USDA/FDA, 5/3/2007
Here is the link for the commentary which begins: I’m not a very spiritual person, but I’m having a crisis of faith.
http://www.horsesass.org/?p=2883
Comment by Jay — June 14, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
I remember that Jay! Pretty cool rundown!
** Has anyone been to PetFoodTracker lately? Kim’s been working on the pet foods NOT recalled - yet making pets sick.
She has a great link to the quotes. See left column:
http://petfoodtracker.blogspot.com/
*! GO Kim GO !*
Comment by Kat — June 14, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
Has anyone else noticed that life is returning to normal?
The FDA stopped press conferences with the no new info to report routine. All agency research is “proprietary” with no details released. I’m now seeing few, if any, stories concerning the pet food recall/crisis in newspapers or television. The (great) reporters who remain on this story are only a handful (and doing a tremendous job, I might add). The best research publicized is by Don on his website. Pet related sites are returning to a more routine focus. Posting on blogs is dwindling.
Little by little this story is drying up. My concern is we will never really know what killed our pets. No one will take responsibility for bad decisions with cheap ingredient substitutions. And, no one will be prosecuted for “adulteration” of food products. My guess is we will never have even a good educated guess at the number of pets who have died at the hands of greedy corporations. They continue to make money as we bury our dead and continue to care for the critically ill. Soon it will be considered old news.
A laboratory I contacted for information told me they “didn’t understand the panic by pet owners.” I explained, but he still didn’t get it. No one will understand unless they have suffered with this crisis. Our pets trust us to care for and provide for them. Let’s not give up the battle yet. So, where do we go from here?
Comment by Donna — June 14, 2007 @ 5:39 pm
I don’t think life is returning to normal. I think we’re moving from the “acute” phase of the crisis to the “chronic” phase.
For our pets and for ourselves, we need to figure out a long-term strategy for making sure our food supply is safe.
But nothing can stay in the headlines forever with any level of intensity. Consider the war: When it started, every media organization devoted everything to it, and we all lapped up the coverage.
Now, how many of us follow it day to day? We know people are dying — ours, and civilian Iraqis plus enemy combatants — and yet, it’s “oh, ho-hum, another car bomb,” feeling vaguely sorry for the victims and then back to our daily lives.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 14, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
Can anyone get intouch with Senator Durbin about this? Maybe he can push it further.I have sent him 3 letters.
Comment by Jill — June 14, 2007 @ 8:04 pm
Comment by Linda June 14, 2007 4:11pm
Sorry about your sick doggy Linda. Where do you live? Also would you be willing to provide me your email address. I have some information on her illness that may be of benefit. Maybe Gina would be willing to exchange our email addresses? I don’t feel this blog is the place to carry on extensive conversation regarding any info that may benefit your puppy.
Comment by VJ — June 14, 2007 @ 8:12 pm
Menu Foods Samples Test Positive for Painkiller
Maybe it’s not the Melamine killing the pets after all. See attached article. It is worth reading.
Comment by JAG — June 14, 2007 @ 10:12 pm
http://www.consumeraffairs.com.....all57.html
Comment by JAG — June 14, 2007 @ 10:12 pm
Check This Out
http://www.aspca.org/site/Page.....s_060607_3
Dr. Steven Hansen, is a board-certified toxicologist and senior vice president with the ASPCA, who manages the ASPCA’s Animal Poison Control Center (APCC), located in its Midwest Office in Urbana, Ill. His take on this as sited in the above article does not mention his faith in the FDA. Where is this spin coming from?
Comment by Meo Doyne — June 14, 2007 @ 10:58 pm
Can anyone get intouch with Senator Durbin about this? Maybe he can push it further.I have sent him 3 letters.
Comment by Jill — June 14, 2007 @ 8:04 pm
===========
I don’t know how many letters I have sent him and DeLauro and lately Pelosi. I get no response but am now on Durbin’s form e-letter list. It’s really discouraging.
Comment by DMS — June 15, 2007 @ 1:06 am
Get ready for this — we’ve expected it all along!
*Supplement safety not a sure thing*
AP
Some suppliers rip off consumers by using cheaper ingredients that in some cases could be harmful.
LOS ANGELES — American consumers are being ripped off and their health possibly put at risk because of bogus ingredients slipped into imports ranging from toothpaste to dietary supplements.
Suppliers who substitute cheaper ingredients for the real thing seldom get busted because the government and private labs review few of the products flooding in.
Recent bouts of bad ingredients in pet food and toothpaste showed how suppliers can fool the limited safety checks.
Fad-driven supplements are particularly vulnerable — a rush of demand for a pill with an expensive key ingredient such as chondroitin can present a quick-buck opportunity. Much like anti-doping officials tasked with ensuring that athletes are clean, by the time scientists spot how their tests are being cheated, suppliers have a new trick.
… Multiple private labs that test supply quality have in recent years found a hodgepodge of pills lacking advertised ingredients, including chondroitin, saw palmetto, bilberry and coenzyme Q-10. Each is relatively expensive and many are supplied by China, a country with a long tradition of herbal remedies and a history of poor food safety.
The products are supposed to help with joint pain, prostate health, vision and the heart, though federal law prohibits most claims that supplements treat or cure illness. …
… To fill the void, Asian suppliers began hawking “Chinese saw palmetto” for $60 per pound. It was an obvious scam: The saw palmetto plant grows in the Southeast. The extract being peddled was based on palm oil, which is worth less than $1 per pound and which no one claims has medicinal properties.
Despite the rip-off, suppliers were not held accountable. …
Read MORE: http://www.timesleader.com/bus.....S_ART.html
Comment by Kat — June 15, 2007 @ 1:15 am
ANYONE IN THE CHICAGO AREA WANT A PUPPY??
Just found this on CraigsList-
*Found Puppies in Garbage Can*
————————————-
Reply to: see below
Date: 2007-06-14, 5:21PM CDT
One of my friend’s dad found 4 puppies in the garbage can, mixed male and female. i’m guessing blue heeler/pointer/rat terrier. i’ve taken these under my guardianship and will be taking them for their shots tomorrow morning. if someone would like one of these pups i’ll rehome them to you for the price of shots and food ($85)
http://chicago.craigslist.org/.....96384.html
~pitiful~
Comment by Kat — June 15, 2007 @ 1:25 am
Re: Comment by Meo Doyne — June 14, 2007 @ 10:58 pm
From June 5th (the article you cite) until June 13th is a long time. See this story. Karen Roebuck has been the premier reporter on this story:
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/.....12295.html
FDA rules out painkiller as pet food contaminant
By Karen Roebuck
TRIBUNE-REVIEW
Wednesday, June 13, 2007
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration on Tuesday ruled out acetaminophen as a pet food contaminant after a Texas lab insisted it found the painkiller in numerous varieties.
“My bottom line is I’m pretty confident in the FDA’s findings,” said Dr. Steven Hansen, lead veterinary toxicologist with the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals’ animal poison control center. “Acetaminophen is not hard to find.”
(…)
Comment by Maureen — June 15, 2007 @ 6:02 am
Comment by Meo Doyne — June 14, 2007 @ 10:58 pm
“Dr. Steven Hansen, is a board-certified toxicologist and senior vice president with the ASPCA, who manages the ASPCA’s Animal Poison Control Center (APCC), located in its Midwest Office in Urbana, Ill. His take (trusting FDA’s later testing) on this as sited in the above article does not mention his faith in the FDA. Where is this spin coming from?”
This thread is disappearing from petconnection, so I don’t know if you’ll read any comments in response to your question about Dr. Steven Hansen/ASPCA. When Dr. Hansen made that comment, I would hope he didn’t realize that the FDA didn’t test the same samples, and worse, that they only tested 5 samples out of 60 million recalled. He’s a scientist, so surely he didn’t realize either that the FDA quietly went to the lab that found acetaminophen AFTER they said that they were confident there was none in pet food. It’s hard to believe a scientist would make such a sweeping generalization unless he had been misled by the FDA, or he was careless in his remarks.
Comment by Maureen — June 15, 2007 @ 6:46 am
Maureen (and all): Threads never “disappear.” They can always be found by using the search box at left.
A blog’s not a forum/bulletin board. And that has pros and cons. It’s just a different form of communication, in the end.
Comment by Gina Spadafori — June 15, 2007 @ 6:51 am
*! GO Kim GO !*
Comment by Kat — June 14, 2007 @ 3:56 pm
LOL Thanks Kat! I’ve been sick the past 2 days, I’m pretty sure it was from reading that FDA survey.
Anyway, I’m just catching up and posting all this stuff on my blog… then I’ll get back to the unrecalled food comments. There’s so many more.
Comment by Kim — June 15, 2007 @ 7:03 am
Kim - I know there are so many more. That is sad, but it needs to be done. You are doing a great job.
You might want to take a NO-Nothing vitamin, from China - to keep up your strength! errrr!
I keep wondering — what are they going to do to us next — I’ve given up on when it’s going to end.
—————————-
I don’t know if this was already posted. I found on Don’s website:
http://www.consumeraffairs.com.....all57.html
Comment by Kat — June 15, 2007 @ 7:41 am
Kim, this entire document is one that everyone here should read and SEND to state reps, Senator Durbin, and news media. What a great find. Thanks.
If someone knows how, please copy some of the quotes from the scientist survey to this site.
Comment by petlover — June 13, 2007 @ 11:56 am
I agree. I posted it on my blog, along with Don’s Challenge to the FDA.
And I posted a ton of the comments… here’s a few:
“It is obvious that looking at 1-4% of imported products regulated by FDA is dangerously low and there are not enough field personnel to consistently be thorough in examinations due to the high volume individuals are required to complete daily.”
“Consumers no longer trust FDA decisions or personnel as they know we no longer
enforce the regulations but rather protect regulated industry/big business to the detriment of the consumers.”
“We are so short staffed there is no way FDA can protect the public. It’s just a disaster waiting to happen.”
Um, yeah, those pretty much sum it up.
Comment by Kim — June 15, 2007 @ 11:39 am