Pig Ears and Cow Hooves Recalled

Due to possible Salmonella contamination:

The recall includes all pig ear products packaged under the brand names Doggie Delight, Pork Tasteez and Pet Carousel. The affected beef hooves were packaged under the brand names Choo Hooves, Dentley's, Doggie Delight and Pet Carousel.

All of the recalled products were distributed nationwide in both bulk and retail packaging for sale in pet food and retail chain stores. The company said all sizes and all lots of the pork ears purchased on or after Aug. 16, and all beef hoof products purchased on or after Sept. 16, are included in the recall.

Pet owners who have purchased any of the recalled products should take them away from their pets and return them to the place of purchase. Consumers with questions can contact the company at 800-231-3572.

Wysong Hits Back at Blogosphere

Pet food watchers have been critical of Wysong for posting the recall notice for certain batches of their foods a week after notifying retailers. The company has now responded to some of the online comments from consumers with an expanded notice.

Batches of Wysong Dog Food Recalled

From the Wysong website:

The following batches of Wysong Canine Diets Maintenance™ and Senior™ have shown above acceptable moisture levels and may contain mold.

Wysong Maintenance™: lot #: 090617
Wysong Maintenance™: lot #: 090624
Wysong Maintenance™: lot #: 090706
Wysong Maintenance™: lot #: 090720
Wysong Senior™: lot #: 090623

PetAg: Not Recalling KMR but Don't Use It if It Smells "Off"

I posted the other day about a reported lab analysis of Esbilac (puppy milk replacer) made by PetAg. Today I see PetAg has put an "update" - not a recall - on their site regarding KMR (kitten milk replacer):

Recently, a limited number of KMR powder users have experienced product producing an off odor. Normally, the product exhibits a faint "milky" smell.

It has been determined that some packaged KMR powder may have been exposed to excessive heat outside the manufacturing process.

Do not use the product if it has an off odor.

They provide no geographical location or product code information about this "limited" problem. They want consumers to call them and provide that info. Not sure exactly what qualifies as "off" smelling. I know some people can't smell 6 wet dogs in a van so hopefully consumers will be able to define "off" sufficiently so no kittens get fed this powder, which PetAg doesn't tell us what problems might result if they did. Vagueness-as-usual.

Pet Food Problems

Nutro has recalled some varieties of puppy food but they haven't posted about it on their website which seems totally in character odd. Pet Connection has the details.

Premium Edge recalled two varieties of cat food due to thiamine deficiency which causes neurological problems.

Esbilac puppy formula has not been recalled but there is an internet posting from a group claiming to have sent the product to an independent lab for analysis. The analysis turned up some discrepancies with the product label. The makers of Esbilac deny any problems with their product according to the posting.
Note: I have done supplemental puppy feedings with this homemade puppy formula and had great results.

With Apologies to Elizabeth Barrett Browning

Oh Peanut Butter Product Recall, how do I consider thee similar to the 2007 Pet Food Recall? Let me count the ways:

1. We now know that such diverse brands as Little Debbie, Keebler, Nutri System and Kashi all use the same ingredients (at least as far as peanut butter goes, maybe more). But wait a minute here - I thought if I paid more, I was getting a higher quality product? *sounds buzzer* Sorry, thanks for playing.

2. You can check a product’s website one day and it has an announcement reassuring consumers that their foods are safe. But the next day: recall! Are we supposed to believe the company didn’t know they were using the contaminated peanut butter from the mildew plant yesterday? Come on!

3. If you ask a company why only certain lots are being recalled (when presumably the other lots contain the same ingredients, at least they say so on the label) and if they’ve switched peanut butter vendors, they can’t give out specifics - it’s "proprietary info".

4. Non-PB products that were processed on the same equipment as the recalled products now have to be recalled due to cross-contamination because apparently they don’t clean the lines between runs!

5. The Salmonella/Mildew peanut processing plant “lab shopped” until it got the “right” results on its food safety tests. Those records only have to be made available to the FDA after people start dying from their greedy scheme.

Gee, PB recall and 2007 Pet Food Recall - you guys are like twins. Let's hope there isn't a triplet happening out there right now which we will only be made aware of after people start dying.



Related:

• Science Friday discussed the sad state of affairs at the FDA as part of the show today.
• Owner who fed his dog PB crackers and then the dog died
• FDA does basically nada about Salmonella tainted pet food

Peanut Butter Products Recalled

In case you haven't heard, it seems like a long list of processed foods containing peanut butter as an ingredient (crackers, ice cream, dog treats, etc.) are being recalled due to Salmonella contamination. From the FDA:

Peanut Corporation of America (PCA), is expanding the recall of peanut butter and voluntarily recalling peanut paste made at its Blakely, Georgia facility because the products have the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.
[...]
The recalled peanut butter and peanut paste were distributed to institutions, food service industries, and private label food companies in 24 states, the province of Saskatchewan in Canada, Korea and Haiti. The U.S. states are the following: Arkansas, California, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah and Virginia. In addition, affected product was used as an ingredient in other products that may have been distributed in other states.

None of the peanut butter being recalled is sold directly to consumers through retail stores by PCA.

PCA is not the only peanut butter manufacturer involved in this recall so you might like to take a look at all the recent FDA alerts. For now, they are saying that regular peanut butter on your grocery store shelf is not affected. As someone who eats a lot of peanut butter, I hope they are telling us the whole story.

Solid Gold Canned Dog Food Recalled

Solid Gold has issued a recall Voluntary Product Withdrawal on their canned Turkey, Ocean Fish, Carrot, & Sweet Potatoes Formula for dogs:

Turkey, Ocean Fish, Carrot, & Sweet Potatoes Formula Canned Dog Food
13.2 oz
Cans – POP-TOP CANS ONLY WITH A 'USE BY DATE 01/02/2010' located on the bottom of can

[...]

Solid Gold has received several complaints regarding mold found in a batch of 13.2 oz canned Turkey, Ocean Fish, Carrot, & Sweet Potatoes Formula, with Pop-Tops.

This follows their October recall of moldy treats.

Orijen Dry Cat Food Problems in Australia: Answers

Champion Pet Foods, makers of Orijen, have posted a pdf explaining why the Australian cats developed neurological problems and some had to be euthanized as a result. In a nutshell, Australia required Orijen cat food to be irradiated at a very high level which knocked out the food's Vitamin A and caused the fatty acids to oxidize. The Orijen dog food coming into Australia is also irradiated but no dogs have been reported ill by their owners. Champion explains:

[C]ats require higher levels of vitamins than dogs (AAFCO 2008), and cats are highly
sensitive to changes in vitamins or oxidative by-products (such as occur from irradiation).

As a result, Orijen will no longer be shipped - cat or dog (since it's possible cats could eat the dog food) - to Australia.

I think this a good response from a pet food company faced with a recall in which pets, in this case cats, became ill and died as a result of eating the company's product. Imagine if other pet food manufacturers handled past, present and future problems reported with their foods in this same manner. Yeah, I'm looking at YOU Menu Foods and Nutro. ahem.

Orijen Dry Cat Food Linked to Illness/Death in Australia

A number of cats in Australia have become ill and some have died. Orijen brand cat food is apparently the only thing these cats have in common:

A cat neurologist, Georgina Child, has put down five cats over the past week and treated or consulted with other vets about more than a dozen others suffering from paralysis.
[...]
First symptoms included wobbliness or weakness in the animal's hind legs, which could then progress to the front limbs. The condition did not appear to be infectious, Dr Child said, nor typical of a nutritional deficiency.

I hope they are able to determine the cause definitively and I'll post more information as I come across it.

One More Time for Old Times' Sake

Mars Petcare US is (again) recalling food due to Salmonella concerns. Affected brands include Pedigree, Ol' Roy, and Pet Pride. I guess we're supposed to be thankful that they told us about the Salmonella at all, even if it was on a Friday night, during a hurricane, and the problem has been going on for some time already.

***

Purina Beneful dog food has been pulled from the shelves of a pet supply store in Virginia due to contamination with grain mites. Predictably, Purina is trying to plant the idea that the infestation occurred after the food left their facility. It's the same old pet food corporation song and dance: deny first, discover truth later (or never, as the case may be). Hey Purina: give the American consumer a little credit here. We can comprehend that a problem like grain mites might occur with a grain based pet food product, that a company can deal with it responsibly and that future products can be deemed safe. What really pisses us off is when companies immediately respond to any and every question with We know nuffing. Again.

***

And in the oldie but goodie department, we have the Chinese adulterating food with melamine in order to try and boost profits (again). Unlike last year, when melamine tainted ingredients from China killed and sickened thousands of pets, the victims this time are infants and the tainted food is baby formula. Nice.

Got Any Old Pet Food That Fell Behind the Lazy Susan?

The website Pet Food Recall Facts is putting out a call for unopened canned/pouches of old pet food for testing:

If any pet owners have unopened samples of pet food manufactured prior to the end of December 2006, and would be willing to make them available for testing, please contact me. The samples I’m interested in would be store brands with expiration dates of “09” for canned food and “08” for pouches. I’m interested in the “loaf” style of pet food that does not list gluten as an ingredient. If anyone has such samples available for testing, I would most sincerely appreciate your making them available. Personal information of those making samples available will be held in the strictest confidence.

If you are interested in helping or learning more, visit their website.

Recalls: Beef and Pedigree Dog Food

Seems like it's been hard to keep up with all the recalled foods lately...

Nebraska Beef has expanded its recall due to E. coli illnesses in California, Colorado, Connecticut, Idaho, Illlinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Although the feds said last month the company had cleaned up its act after its ground beef recall, apparently they still can't keep the BEEF separated from the POO.

Mars, maker of Nutro and other pet foods, has issued a limited recall of some of its Pedigree products due to possible Salmonella contamination (from some ingredient they decline to make public). I can't help but think of the last time Mars put Salmonella contaminated pet food on shelves, sickening people in 19 states, and then issued only a limited recall, never revealing what brands and how much food was potentially contaminated.

Land O' Lakes Purina Feed Recalls Lamb Feed

UPDATE - June 12, 2008:  The FDA has updated its release and there are now four lamb feeds being recalled due to lambs dying.  Full updated release here.

As I have previously wondered when Purina recalled aflatoxin contaminated horse feed, is there any possibility of cross contamination to Purina pet foods from the recalled livestock feeds? Any sharing of ingredients, suppliers, storage facilities or processing equipment between the livestock feed manufacturing and pet food manufacturing?  I sure would like to know.  But Purina says that's "proprietary information" and won't answer those questions.  All we can do is hope that the pet food is safe.

Original post:

From the FDA:

"The Land O'Lakes Purina Feed plant in Fremont, Neb., has initiated a limited voluntary recall of two lamb feed products due to higher than acceptable levels of copper.

[...]

The recall was initiated after receiving a customer complaint regarding the products. In addition, Land O'Lakes Purina Feed stopped producing the lamb feeds at the Fremont, Neb. plant and immediately began product testing.

To date, the presence of copper above acceptable levels has been found, which can cause serious health issues, and at high levels, mortality in sheep."

Full release here.

AAFCO - The Pet Food Industry Fails to Regulate Itself

The National Research Council (NRC) has traditionally set the standard for nutrient requirements for dogs and cats with their publications. The NRC recommends feeding trials in order to determine if a food is truly "complete and balanced". I don't have a degree in animal nutrition but that makes sense to me. How else can it be determined that a pet food is nutritionally adequate unless it is actually fed to pets over a period of time and the health of those pets monitored? The Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) has another idea: chemical analysis.

In the early 1990's, AAFCO dropped the NRC guidelines and established their own nutrient profiles based on the formulas of 3 generic pet foods with which they conducted feed trials. The idea being that as long as pet food manufacturers followed one of those 3 formulas, there would be no need for more feed trials. What was so wrong with the NRC requirements? To my mind, nothing. I use them myself. By disavowing the NRC standards, AAFCO could ignore the very expensive recommendation for feed trials and simply give a Nutritional Adequacy stamp to any food which passed their chemical analysis.

Again, I'm a layman but does chemical analysis tell us how biologically available any nutrients are for pets? Or how digestible they are? I don't see how that information could be determined in the absence of feed trials. For example, chemical analysis tells us that cereals, the main ingredient in most pet foods, have many nutrients. It does not tell us however that pets are unable to fully utilize the nutrients in cereals. These nutrients are biologically unavailable to pets. And since cereals make up the main part of commercial diets, it is at best misleading for AAFCO to label these foods as "complete and balanced".

AAFCO Speaks for Themselves

From AAFCO's website Q & A:

Regarding the use of downer cattle and other such animals in pet food, AAFCO says meat by-products may include "materials from animals which died by means other than slaughter" - which I interpret as animals who may have been too sick and/or diseased to survive the trip to the slaughterhouse - and are ok for use in pet food as long as the materials have been rendered according to "regulations to destroy any potential microorganisms". In other words, AAFCO says your pet food may contain bits and bobs from animals suffering from cancer, BSE (Mad Cow Disease), or any other unknown lethal illness or condition. And the carcass from said animal may have been rendered some days after the animal actually died. Yum.

Regarding the wholesomeness of pet food ingredients, AAFCO subtly reminds consumers that it's "Buyer beware" out there, stating that even though a food is AAFCO certified as complete and balanced, "the specific nutrients may be assembled from a variety of ingredients. If consumers have a preference for certain ingredients, they should review the ingredient list to
determine if their preferences are being met." In other words, if you don't study the ingredients list on every bag or can of pet food you purchase, don't blame AAFCO if it turns out you're feeding your pet icky stuff. Tip: The healthful looking whole foods often pictured on the front of the bag or in the television commercials do not necessarily represent the ingredients used to manufacture the food inside the bag.

I'm leaving this question and answer intact as I think it illustrates the double speak and spin AAFCO seems to be so fond of:

7. Does most of the protein come from scrap and byproducts left over from human meat processing?
The animal proteins used in feeds are frequently, but not exclusively derived from the production of human food.

Couldn't they simply have answered YES?

In summary, is the AAFCO Nutritional Adequacy statement on a pet food label actually worth anything? "The nutritional adequacy statement, the ingredient list and feeding directions will provide the consumer with the best estimate of the nutritional value and correct use of the product." Yes, you read that right: best estimate. As we saw over and again during the massive pet food recall of 2007, companies don't actually know what ingredients are in their pet foods. The ingredients list on the label, which AAFCO tells us it's our job to study, is just an estimate. To my mind, AAFCO's position is: It's your responsibility as a pet owner to know the ingredients of the food you feed to your pets. And you can't really know the ingredients because what's listed on the pet food label is only an "estimate" of what was actually used to make the food. So good luck and don't blame us if your pet develops health problems and/or dies due to nutritional deficiencies and excesses, or if you just plain fed him toxic food.

From the minutes of AAFCO's 2007 meeting as posted on their site, it is evident that AAFCO, the Pet Food Institute (PFI), the National Renderers Association (NRA) and other industry insiders are extremely resistant to the request of Veterinarian groups to include calorie statements on pet foods. Wouldn't calorie statements be helpful to consumers? Many people are already familiar with studying and comparing calorie statements on human food labels so it would be easy for them to transfer this knowledge to pet food labels. And it would give consumers another tool with which to compare products by revealing one more bit of information. Further, since obesity in pets is such a widespread problem, calorie statements on labels would allow consumers to more accurately calculate how much food to feed rather than relying on the currently printed vague guidelines for feeding amounts. So why are pet food industry insiders so resistant to this request? Could it possibly be related to:

The costs involved in determining caloric content?
The potential for owners to feed less of their products once they know the actual calories being fed?
The possibility that owners may abandon their previously purchased brands in favor of brands better suited to their pets' needs according to the calorie statements?
The possibility that some owners may abandon commercial pet foods in favor of a home prepared diet consisting of ingredients and calories completely determined and controlled by the owner?
Hmmm.

According to the Food and Drug Administration, "AAFCO has no legal mandate". Well, maybe they should.



Recommended Reading: Home-Prepared Dog & Cat Diets - The Healthful Alternative by Donald Strombeck, DVM, PhD

Downloadable pdf pamphlet from the NRC on canine nutrient requirements

Downloadable pdf pamphlet from the NRC on feline nutrient requirements

FDA Wonders if Pet Foods Could be Made Safer

Veterinary Practice News has an article about the FDA looking into expanding the use of third party certification programs for food products, including pet foods.

"The FDA would like to know what domestic and foreign third-party programs for suppliers are in use by U.S. companies and, significantly, how do these programs ensure independence and avoid the conflicts of interest inherent in accepting fees from the very companies seeking certification."

The FDA needs the public to advise them on this? They don't already know? O yeah and that conflict of interest thing didn't seem to serve the public too well during the pet food recall of 2007 - hello AAFCO?

"It would also like to know if existing certification programs already ensure compliance with FDA requirements and, if not, how the programs would need to be modified to ensure compliance. Many of the existing programs are designed to meet foreign government requirements, which may or may not meet U.S. standards."

Just having a guess - I'll go with "may not".

"The government also wants to know what’s preventing the majority of U.S. firms from participating in existing certification programs."

Since I'm guessing, here's a few ideas -

• Because they are not legally required to do so

• Because there are no significant legal or financial consequences for companies who sell tainted pet foods (which is probably why they keep doing it)

• Because we can't pass County of Origin Labeling across the board which allows sneaky manufacturers to respond to the inquiring public with smarmy answers like "Sorry, we can't tell you where our product ingredients are sourced from and/or made - that's proprietary information."

Full article here including information on how you can submit your comments to the FDA if you are so inclined.

Isn't It Ironic?

It's been one year since the first round of massive pet food recalls in the US and some owners still feel concerned over pet food safety. What's a worried owner to do - make your own pet food? Well, you know what comes next - "Consult your Veterinarian". O the irony: Most Veterinarians I have met or otherwise come across in the media say basically that you'd have to be a rocket scientist in order to feed your pets using real foods from your own kitchen so you'd better stick with canned or kibbled pet food.

It helps to know that Veterinarians receive relatively little education on pet feeding in school and some are actually taught by representatives from Hill's Pet Foods. In fairness, Vets have a very hard job. Their patients can't explain how they feel, what weird thing they ingested, etc. And Vets are supposed to know everything about pets' medical needs from treating skin conditions and parasites to administering anesthesia and performing leg amputations. It's probably a relief for a Vet student to hear something like, "Don't worry about feeding because the widely available pet foods on the market are perfectly balanced for a lifetime of reliable nutrition". That's good, you know - one less thing. But it doesn't mean that's an accurate statement (I'll get to that in a bit) or that all pet owners are going to buy into it. So while I truly value and appreciate my Vet, I have no compelling reason to believe I should consult ONLY her on how best to feed my dogs. She's a general practitioner who does not specialize in canine nutrition and I'm fine with that. But it means I'm going to consider other sources when seeking advice on canine nutrition.

Another bit of worn out advice that I wish I could delete from the universe: "Never feed human food to a dog". When I look at the marketing done by pet food corporations, it seems they are trying to entice me to buy their products by showing me images of beautifully prepared meats, vegetables and grains. They want me to associate these fresh foods with the dried pellets inside their bags of pet food. Somehow they are hoping I will believe that the image of real beef stew has something to do with the product inside the can which actually contains squares of wheat gluten made to look like meat. But hello - aren't meats, vegetables and grains actually human foods? Isn't beef stew something I might prepare for a family dinner? (Again with the irony thing.) So if I take this one step further, do I assume that the folks manufacturing these pet foods are the equivalent of rocket scientists? That they know far more than I could ever hope to about how to feed a dog? Considering the pet food corporations have sickened and killed thousands of pets in 2004 and again in 2007 by selling tainted products - which they say they didn't know were toxic - you'll forgive me if I am skeptical as to their vast mental superiority.

Don't get me wrong - unlike a few others, I’ve never thought pet food companies were intentionally trying to kill pets. I do believe that many of them count on the ability of dogs particularly to survive on low quality foodstuffs and fillers. I believe many of them use the cheapest ingredients they can find (such as meat deemed unfit for human consumption) in order to make a profit from a low quality product. I believe many have been deceiving us for years with their “Made in Grandma’s Organic Kitchen on our Vermont Farm” labeling when in fact they were using - knowingly or unknowingly (read: uncaringly) - untested, cheap ingredients from overseas. And I believe that many of them have financially profited from a “self-regulated” industry which was broadly exposed for the UNregulated industry that it is during the massive pet food recalls of Spring 2007.

Further, the AAFCO 'Nutritional Adequacy' stamp, which we were led to believe meant a dog food is 'complete and balanced for all life stages', does not mean that a food has been tested in feed trials over the lifetime of dogs. 'Nutritional Adequacy' indicates that, if the food was tested in feed trials, it was fed for 6 months (or less, depending on the life stage) to 8 dogs. Animals participating in feed trials are weighed and have their blood tested for a few basic levels. I'm not a Veterinarian but having a guess, 8 dogs could probably eat a pretty poor quality diet for 6 months and still pass the weight/blood tests with satisfactory scores to earn the seal of approval. The bottom line is, an AAFCO Nutritional Adequacy statement on the food does not mean that the food can be safely fed to dogs over a lifetime without any risk to their health. That information simply isn't known since tests longer than 6 months are not performed by any third party organizations.

And, a little news item that I doubt would have been reported by the mainstream media if it hadn't happened during the 2007 recalls: Iams received a letter from the FDA about an unapproved chemical found in six of its Eukanuba Veterinary Diets foods. Iams apparently didn't think the chemical - chromium tripicolinate - was important enough to include as an ingredient on the food labels however the FDA describes the chemical as "genotoxic" - meaning it can alter DNA and cause tumors. Gee, I guess I see why Iams left it off the labels. There was no recall requested or offered regarding the affected foods but Iams said it would stop adding the chemical.

That got me wondering, how do we know what else they don't list on the labels? How about other pet food companies - do they omit unapproved chemicals (or other things) from their ingredient lists too? If a pet ate this food and developed tumors somewhere down the road, how on earth would anyone make the connection between the pet's medical condition and the food? As the recalls wore on, some companies issued statements recalling their products saying they contained possibly tainted ingredients not listed on the labels but "it's not our fault" because they DID NOT KNOW what the manufacturers were actually putting into their products. So: What's on the label isn't necessarily what's in the bag and don't blame us!

OK pet food companies, I won't blame you but I don't trust you either. So I'm choosing to feed my dogs from my kitchen cupboard. No, I have not consulted my Veterinarian and Yes, I'm feeding human foods to my pets. In fact, I've been doing it for years and despite my lack of a degree in rocket science, everyone seems to be doing well. Really well. I'm not going to make any outrageous claims about the benefits of my home prepared diet but I will say that the dogs seem overall healthier and heartier than the kibble fed dogs I've had in the past. And that's good these days because, you know - one less thing...

***

A few links for those interested in reading about feeding your pets at home:

From my bookshelf and recommended reading: Home-Prepared Dog & Cat Diets: the Healthful Alternative by Donald R. Strombeck, DVM, PhD

Mary Strauss has written extensively about home feeding and offers a variety of options for owners to consider

For the gourmet-inclined: One gal who deliciously combines the worlds of human and pet foods is Rachael Ray. Check out her recipes for pets and peeps!