Can a pet food say ‘human food grade’? A court decides
By Gina Spadafori
November 8, 2007
The Ohio Department of Agriculture denied Honest Kitchen pet food a license to sell product in that state, saying that the company’s claim of “human food grade” was misleading. Honest Kitchen took the state the court, and won. From the company’s Web site:
The Honest Kitchen has prevailed in its six-month lawsuit against Ohio Department of Agriculture. The department earlier this year refused to grant a license to The Honest Kitchen, to sell its products in the state, citing the fact that the labels were misleading because they describe the company’s pet foods as ‘human food grade’.
The court has ruled in favor of The Honest Kitchen, citing the company’s right to truthful, commercial free speech. Ohio Department had acknowledged that the products were human food grade, yet claimed that stating the fact on the labels could be confusing to customers, who might be unable to determine if the diets were intended for animals or humans.
The court determined that the labels were not in fact untruthful or misleading and ruled that the company had a constitutional right to make truthful statements about the quality of its products, on the labels.
Yeah, because consumers are soooo stupid they’d see and dog or cat on the label and pour some Honest Kitchen in a bowl for a kid.
Interestingly enough, I’ve just been reading (in Marion Nestle’s “What To Eat”) about all the gymnastics government entities make well-meaning companies go through so labels protect established industries. Among the example she cites is how milk that’s labeled “bovine growth hormone [BGH]-free” has to be further noted to “inform consumers” that there’s no proven benefit to “BGH-free” milk. That way, the “BGH-free” milk won’t have a real or perceived sales edge over other milk products.
Seems like more government by the lobbyists, of the lobbyists and for the lobbyists to me.
Here’s the rest of the release from Honest Kitchen. Honestly, I’d really prefer that various government entities do more to force companies to inform consumers — hello, Country of Origin Labeling — than to protect industries that want labels to be as vague or misleading as possible.
Give us the information, and let us decide.

And if your toddler decides that your pets dinner looks pretty appetizing, eating human quality food doesn’t pose a risk.
Someone should inform the Department of Agriculture (states and federal) that they are there to protect citizens, not lobbyists.
Comment by 2CatMom — November 8, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
Have you heard of the recipe for ‘puppy chow’ when you cover chex cereal in chocolate and peanut butter, then powdered sugar, so it looks like, well, kibble?
Yeah, neither had I as a child. Now *that* was confusing.
Glad the courts got something right this time.
by the way, on the BGH, I thought Dolittler had some good insights on dairys (I cannot find the entry - mostly, some are good, some are bad, whether they are organic or anything else doesn’t really have a correlation). Wish I had her expertise to make similar judgments locally.
Comment by ellipsisknits — November 8, 2007 @ 1:27 pm