Our story so far: On May 21st, Nutro Products voluntarily recalled several varieties of their Nutro Cat Food and Nutro Natural Choice Complete Care Cat Food due to a problem with a premix they buy from another vendor. The premixes (there were actually 2) were either low in potassium and had excessive zinc, or were low in potassium alone. Ok, so the company did what they were supposed to do in this type of event...get the product off the shelves via their distribution network. Nestle has just had to do the same thing, recalling frozen cookie dough due to Salmonella. I haven't seen any tweets (yet) hounding Nestle for being a bad company out to kill people for money...
Next, my "favorite" website, ConsumerAffairs.com did yet another disparaging piece on Nutro on June 3rd, claiming that they were receiving reports of sick and dying cats. Yet, once again, in only one of these multiple cases was there any evidence of the food being tied to the unfortunate sick cats. In all other cases, the food being fed was a coincidence.
Now on June 16th, the Pet Food Products Safety Alliance announced that they had a bag of Nutro Cat tested at Washington Animal Disease Diagnostic Lab and found 2100 ppm zinc in the food. YES! That is a very high number and obviously beyond what should be there. Wanting to know more about PFPSA I did a little research and found that the owner of the site, Don Earl, attempted to sue Menu Foods (on his own) and Kroger for adding cyanuric acid to his cat's food. He lost that suit, even after at least one appeal. AND, I believe the gentleman was told to pay the court costs of the defendants. I am not an attorney, but that sounds to me like he lost.
Ok...you are now caught up. So, being the Twitterphile that I am, I responded to a "tweet" and said simply this: "FYI group testing cat food also soliciting for class action lawsuit. Ulterior motive??" And now, the "you know what" has hit the fan....
From one tweeter: "Sad that you are more worried about a lawsuit than sick pets" Another tweeter sent me numerous references to journals discussing zinc toxicity. Actually, I am glad I got this response. First, because I love to get information and maybe we can find out what is actually happening and second, because I get to see how people use information for their own purposes.
I really appreciate the links to the journals....I have found some good stuff in the short time I read them. I also found that several of those links were to articles discussing zinc toxicity due to metal ingestions (like pennies).
Other tweeters asked me if I doubted the vet toxicologist...I am assuming that they are referring to Dr. Hansen at the ASPCA who is quoted in ConsumerAffairs.com's recent article. The quote is "That’s definitely a high level of zinc. Is it deadly? That’s an interesting question. It sure seems possible. But we don’t have access to information on the long term effects of high levels of zinc in cats.” Now, I read this as a concern, but one of unknown consequence at this time. According to Small Animal Clinical Nutrition, as obligate carnivores, cats seem to have a higher tolerance for zinc. PLEASE NOTE: I am not saying that they can handle 2100 ppm...I am simply quoting experts! Sidenote: Dr. Hansen has also repeatedly stated that he does not believe Nutro Dog foods are causing all of the deaths and illnesses that ConsumerAffairs reports. So, its okay to use his "sound bite" about the zinc levels in the cat food, but we ignore his expert opinion on the Nutro dog food? Just seems odd to me...
I follow a lot of veterinary news type of stories and to date, no one on the Veterinary Information Network is talking about this other than the original recall. The only discussion is coming from websites (as I have noted above) that have links to and interest in class action lawsuits. I have spoken with Nutro Products communications people and they are not reporting any proven connection with any consumer complaints and this recall. Even noted author Marion Nestle has said "Nobody really knows". Now, that may change in the future as we understand more about this problem...
Also, I have sent emails to veterinary nutritionists and toxicologists, including one at Washington State for their opinions. I am very interested in finding out what is going on here. BUT, the whole point of this blog is to make sure that all the information is presented, not just what one group (or the other group) wants to present. And, for everyone who says that Nutro (or any manufacturer) is all about profit and money, why does the same standard not apply to the people advertising for pet owners to join class action lawsuits?
Finally, my most recent Twitter reply comes from someone who says that the food should have been quality tested before it was sold. Ok...I agree with that, but in this world of increasing costs for ingredients, packaging, transportation, etc, where does the line get drawn? How much will people pay for their pet's food (or their own food ) to be tested, retested, and tested yet again? Is there a better way to insure our pet's safety and can we get there without driving companies out of business? And, in the meantime, can we try to avoid the mudslinging and attacks until some clear facts show up??
I am trying to keep updates going at PetDocsOnCall.com as more information arrives. Thinking I need to head over there and post some of these great articles folks sent to me via Twitter....
Update (later in the evening): The LA Times has picked up the recall story. Again Dr. Hansen is quoted as saying: Do those high levels of zinc pose health problems for cats?
"The problem in this case is that we believe no one actually knows (or at least has published) the effects of 2100 ppm dietary zinc long-term in cats. Typically, cats are more tolerant of high zinc than other species, including dogs and humans.
"But it’s certainly possible that those levels of zinc would likely cause health problems in cats that could involve significant intestinal upset and liver and kidney damage."
So again, he is stating that we need more information, as I keep saying as well. BUT, the fine folks in Twitterland still are finding fault with my plea for calm and rationale thinking. One tweeter actually tweeted "Dont f___ with pet parents trying to warn others of poisoned pet food" I guess it's ok to f___ with someone trying to call for more information though.
She also seems to think that I am selling something, actually accusing me of a pyramid scheme. I guess I have some income that I am unaware of! :-)
16 comments:
I am one of the people who made the comment about quality testing. What has my dander up is the fact that Nutro says on their own website that they quality test their raw materials (from http://tiny.cc/QMNuV) and they also state they test their finished products (see also: http://www.nutroproducts.com/quality-assurance.shtml).
First, if they truly test raw materials for "quality, safety, and consistency" then how did TWO faulty premixes escape notice until an "audit of our documentation from the supplier" turned up the problem? Why wasn't it found in their quality testing of their raw materials?
Seven DIFFERENT varieties of cat food were listed in the recall (here: http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm154317.htm), which means that at LEAST seven different lots (or batches) of foods were produced with the faulty premix. Nutro states in the recall notice that zinc and potassium are "essential nutrients for cats" and states in their QA section on their website that "every lot of food is tested for key nutrients" (emphasis mine). This would lead a reasonable person to conclude that every lot is tested for zinc and potassium levels. So how did at least SEVEN DIFFERENT LOTS escape notice if EVERY LOT is tested for essential nutrients?
The issue for me isn't that Nutro should perform even more tests (thus driving up costs, blah blah blah) but rather that it seems to me that they are in fact NOT DOING the tests they claim to already do. As consumers, we rely on companies to actually be doing what they claim they are doing to ensure that we are purchasing a safe and quality product.
The other thing is with bandying of language. So they conduct tests of raw materials - they don't specify how often, which gives them an out when the spit hits the fan, as it has done now. So they conduct tests for essential nutrients - they don't specify WHICH nutrients, which again, gives them an out. This is misleading at best, and treads very close to outright dishonesty at worst - and is also why I am angry. Again, all we have to go on is their word, and at this point, why should I believe anything they have to say?
Claire...you bring up some very valid points and these are questions that Nutro needs to answer. As I stated many times, there are many issues that are yet to be resolved. My main issue is that without having all information available, the blogosphere and Twitterworld stand ready to condemn Nutro on less than all the facts.
Our food supply chain has become so cumbersome and complex that I personally believe it is next to impossible to test for every nutrient and every possible contaminant without causing undue problems for companies and consumers. We can no longer rely on what is essentially a 19th century organization (FDA) to perform effectively in the 21st century. The bigger question here that only a few are asking is: HOW DO WE FIX THIS CONTINUAL PROBLEM?
As you know, this is not only a problem in pet foods, but human foods as well. Salmonella in peanut butter, E. coli in cookie dough, melamine in infant formula...it's a big mess.
When I hear from Nutro regarding this apparent discrepancy, I will be happy to post here. Thanks for reading and I look forward to more discussion.
Tomcat: Would you care to clarify that through your veterinary practice, you sell no commercial pet food diets at all, made by Mars, Nestle, Purina, Science Diet, DelMonte, or any other commercial pet food manufacturer, and therefore have no vested economic income from commercial pet food sources at all? In the case of veterinarians, some sources indicate as much as 20 percent of income can come from in-office sales of commercial pet food diets, and therefore veterinarians may not be totally unbiased sources of information on commercial pet food products. Just asking as a concerned pet food consumer for clarification on your possible economic interests here. And while you are at it, how much income do you derive from veterinary medicines sold in your practice?
Hi, Tom. I followed your link to the Pet Food Product Safety Alliance, but no where on that website did I find a single request to join up for a class action lawsuit. The only request made is for donations to continue testing. Can you explain, for the PFPSA site only, what you were referring to when you said, "Also, between ConsumerAffairs.com and PFPSA.org, you can find numerous references to contact them for participating in class action lawsuits."
Thanks.
A.C.
Sorry Tom - you're just plain off the mark.
First, the Nestle recall is upsetting - but doesn't compare to the Nutro recall - or any pet food recall for that matter.
Nestle did not claim that their product was 100% nutritionally complete. Nestle did not suggest that people eat their product, and their product only, day in day out, at every meal, preferably for ever.
Secondly, Nutro DID, as previously noted, advertise widely that EVERY ingredient and EVERY batch was tested for contamination and nutrient profiles. This is fraud.
Regarding your assertion that pet food should not be subject to testing due to cost concerns... give me a break.
My brand of choice goes above and beyond what you consider too costly.
Each and every ingredient is tested before even being allowed to enter the facility. They are tested for contamination, bacteria, nutrient content and other quality control concerns.
Each and every batch is tested at several points throughout processing, and EVERY batch is tested for contamination, bacteria and nutrient content to ensure continuity. Samples are saved at each step to maintain an accurate record.
The plant, their suppliers, and their product is inspected and re-certified by the EU quarterly.
The plant is currently operating within HACCP standards and will be receiving certification soon.
All ingredients used are passed as fit for human consumption, as per EU standards. Also per EU standards, GMO ingredients are not permitted.
Suppliers are not only public knowledge, but are of such quality to be promoted to bragging rights.
Oh, and for the record, their product, as fed, is cheaper than Nutro. You read that right - Nutro, with its less than quality ingredients and its nonexistent quality control. My product retails for $4.18/lb. Cats eat about 1/3 cup per day. Nutro's product retails for $4.00/lb for their max cat (average cat eats around 3/4 cup per day) and $5.50/lb for Natural Choice (average cat eats around 1/2 cup per day).
Obviously Nutro's issue is cutting corners to increase profits. Of course, higher profits are necessary when your product has a huge marketing and promotional budget. Best to spend your money in promoting a crappy product than creating a safe, high quality one, right? That's the logic, isn't it?
Sorry Tom - I'm not buying it - or Nutro.
Hi Tom,
I agree that it isn't always possible to test for everything. Contaminants are by their very nature things one doesn't expect to find, therefore it is hard to pre-emptively test for them. ("Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!") In other words, it's tricky to test for something when you don't even know what it is you are looking for.
I want to reiterate again that I am not expecting Nutro (or really any other food company) to test for EVERY nutrient - but as a sole source of food for cats, I would expect their statement that they do test for "key nutrients" to include zinc and potassium since they are "essential nutrients" for cats - per their own statements.
What also is bothering me, now that I think about it, is this "audit of our documentation" statement. Does this mean they actually RECEIVED some documentation indicating the premix was not what they had ordered - either through testing or by some other means? Are we actually to believe that NO ONE checked this paperwork BEFORE the premixes went into production? Quality control is worthless if you don't pay attention to it prior to using the raw materials in production. Why aren't heads rolling? Certainly it will read better with the public to say that someone screwed up and they've been sacked.
My personal opinion is that Nutro is not being completely upfront about their quality control systems. If nothing else, I would like to see Nutro be held accountable for betraying consumer trust with misleading statements about the breadth and depth of their quality program, if it should turn out that they have in fact been misleading. If they have not been misleading, I personally believe they would have produced the documentation that would exonerate them, rather than resorting to a public relations campaign for damage control. Since they have not produced such documentation, as a consumer I am left to conclude that they are in the wrong - and because my pet's health is on the line, I will continue to believe this until proven otherwise.
Last of all, without meaningful consequences for cutting corners and putting the health of the public at risk, these foods scares and recalls will continue. Corporations answer to one thing and one thing only: profit. Until it becomes so unprofitable to do the wrong thing, most corporations won't do the right thing - the #1 reason corporations exist is to generate profit for shareholders. That's why people like me keep demanding answers and want to see some accountability.
Concernedpetparent: I no longer work in a veterinary practice. I did for about 14 years, but I now do journalistic work, research on pet related stories and help provide veterinarians with accurate resources about animal stories in the news. So, to answer your question, my income has no relation to the sales of any sort of pet diets. And, to clarify, in the studies I have read while in practice, most veterinary practices generate less than 3% of their total gross income from the sales of foods. Some quit selling foods because it's too much of a hassle between floor space, stocking inventory and the limited return.
And, I don't think I need to say this, but I will for clarity sake, since I am not in practice and I am not a veterinarian, I don't make any money from the sales of veterinary medications.
The Dog House: What brand do you feed?
Claire: LOL..love your comment about the Spanish Inquisition.
I did receive notes back from Nutro when I asked about the discrepancy of testing products. To be honest, I need to take some time and try to decipher the "corporate speak" of the answer. I am a little disappointed with their response to me. As soon as I can make sense of what she was trying to say, I will post it here.
This is another really messed up problem and you are right that their "damage control" is not being accepted by many people. There needs to be some better answers.
My biggest beef, as I have said before, is that there are a lot of people out there who throw around terms like "this food KILLED my cat" when we don't know that for certain yet. And, as someone who dealt with veterinary clients everyday for more than 14 years, I can tell you that many people will use ANY excuse to try and avoid the responsibility of their own actions. The phrase most often used: "Well, he was fine last night". I just don't buy it. And, when I hear (or read) someone saying that the food killed their pet but the animal had not been seen by a veterinarian for a long time, that's just plain suspicious to me.
A.C.: Sorry to leave you for last, but I had to do more sleuthing for you.
You are right...I can't find the comment on the PFPSA website, so I removed the sentence in my blog you referenced in your comment. I wish I could find it but I looked at both PFPSA and the PetFoodRecallFacts site and couldn't find what I remember seeing. So...for that I apologize for posting that statement erroneously.
However, ConsumerAffairs is a different story. If you review my blog from a couple of months ago (Toxins in the Pet Food), you will find a link to Law.com that reveals the pipeline between a group of class action attorneys in Chicago and the CA website.
So...I think, for now, I have addressed everyones comments. Thanks for being part of this blog.
I was purposely leaving that out, not for clarity sake but rather I did not want to appear like I was touting a brand specifically. We do a LOT of research into the brands we feed (we used to feed 100% raw and homecooked, now a good portion of our feeding is commercial). This research consists of constant, ongoing questioning to the people from these companies in charge of customer service, quality control, nutrition as well as ingredient procurement. I have also visited several plants (including Champions) and we are constantly updating our list of acceptable foods.
I'm sorry if my initial post came off a little strongly, but I do NOT accept the "it costs too much" argument against testing EVERY batch for ALL required nutrients, heavy metal and known contaminants. Particularly when these foods carry the statement "100% complete and balanced!" Anything less is FRAUD in my opinion.
The main kibble brand we use is Champion pet foods - we feed some of their Acana line, but mostly Orijen.
Not only do I expect the companies who take my money to provide me with a nutritious, safe product, I also EXPECT that it has undergone rigorous testing and quality control measures. Anything less and well, you can take your product elsewhere. If this was baby formula, the "too pricey" argument would be considered pretty callous, don't you think?
But then again, if this were baby formula the recall could actually be called "voluntary." Since baby food is the ONLY food item the FDA is able to issue mandatory recalls on.
I too was initially skeptical of the Consumer Affairs claims. I am a statistics professor (and an empirical researcher) and know as well as anyone that correlation cannot be assumed to imply causation. That said, I am puzzled by your apparent lack of skepticism for Nutro’s product given the current body of suggestive evidence. We now know that a large number of animals have reportedly become ill while eating Nutro food. We also know that something was simultaneously seriously WRONG with Nutro’s products – something that a respected veterinary toxicologist has said MAY cause illness or fatality. IMO, the anecdotal evidence against Nutro is looking pretty damning. It seems especially strange that you actually assume that the correlation is definitely NOT causal (you state “In all other cases, the food being fed was a coincidence.”) Just because causation has not been proven does not mean that LACK of causation HAS been proven. We can be no more certain that this was a coincidence than we can be that it wasn’t - you are making an equally incorrect statistical assumption! It is certainly true that this relationship (between Nutro and animal illness) may still be nothing more than spurious correlation – but I sure wouldn’t bet MY animals’ lives on it!!
DogHouse: Please don't apologize..I think your post came across as well written and well researched. You have obviously spent a lot of time trying to provide the best possible life for your pets.
I welcome differing opinions because I do realize that I don't know everything (but don't tell my wife that!!) But, I am just incensed at attacks that are thrown up out of sheer passion (like the person who hinted that I was taking money from food companies).
Orijen is a food that I am hearing more and more about, but I don't have any opinions of my own yet. With Internet access and myriad pet products to contemplate, understanding the majority of the is going to take some time!! LOL!
And, I am hearing some rumors that the FDA will be getting stronger powers to force recalls on products. I will try to keep that updated here as well.
M.A. You may have a little confusion with the current state of Nutro and the alleged problems. Consumer Affairs continues to report on complaints (ranging from 600-800)on Nutro Dog Food products over the last 2 years. To my knowledge, there has been no conclusive evidence that the diet was a factor in any of the illnesses or deaths associated with these complaints. Even the chief toxicologist at the ASPCA has agreed that the problems were not likely a problem with the food itself. The most prominent case that keeps being repeated is the case of 2 Italian Greyhounds who were on Nutro and died. Their autopsies showed they died of antifreeze poisoning and no antifreeze was found in any Nutro foods. Yet to this date, CA and the owner continue to maintain that the food killed the dogs.
The current situation is one with the cat foods. Yes, the foods have been shown to have excessive amounts of zinc, although no one can agree what that means to the cat. We know zinc toxicity is an issue, but it is usually associated with ingestion of zinc metal in coins, etc, not dietary zinc.
I can't aruge with your logic about casuality proving or not proving a link between the illnesses and the food. But, what I can say is that "in my experience", some pet owners are reluctant to admit their own mistakes or lack of attention as a potential factor in their pet's issue.
How can someone who let's their cat run outdoors complain that it is solely the food's fault for digestive problems?
Why is it the food's fault for the cat's kidney failure when the cat has not been seen by a veterinarian in years, and thus we have no idea what the kidneys were doing prior to the issue?
Why do we blame the food for the fact that a dog died from antifreeze poisioning?
Ok...I think you get my drift. As I continue to say, there is an issue with the food, but what that means clinically to a cat is up for debate still.
Would I bet my cat's life on it? Of course not, but I also wouldn't try to use the situation for financial gain until all the cards were on the table.
Ive seen Nutro reps at Twitter linking this site to their tweets about the Nutro recall cat food. Ive been following all the exchanges and wanted to comment. First of all, Im not sure the writer of this blog made it clear that one of his first tweets he made concerning the recall was to a Nutro rep named kathy.....they also mentioned direct messaging between each other which allows people to exchange messages privately. So that might explain why some people were irritated as the messaging between the two certainly did not give an implication of open-mindness on his part,if he is trying to portray that.
The blog article also states that the company did what they were supposed to do and that was get the product off the shelves. I would go further and say getting the product out of homes and out of the mouths of cats is also important. Ive read as recently as two days ago, someone just finding out they were feeding the recall food. Nutro writes a press release that says theyve received no consumer complaints, then FDA even posts it at their site. Has FDA confirmed that the content of that press release is accurate? No they havent. So the media reads that no reports of affected pets have been received and is that newsworthy to them? Unfortunately, no. So media doesnt cover news of this recall on TV so how do consumers find out about it? They dont until word of mouth gets around which could be months later, if ever. Its a chain reaction that creates a minimized recall which is good for Nutro, bad for customers and their cats who might still be feeding that food. Why they are continuing with the no consumer complaints story is curious to say the least.
I do think their quality control is a big concern. They go to alot of trouble at their website to say they test finished product for nutrients and so on. Even the supplier says they test finished product. There were at least 7 different types of Nutro dry cat food recalled, where was the testing on any of this. The product was sold for 6 months to the public, then the nutrient problem was detected during a paper audit. Nutrient tests cost very little and I expect Nutro/Mars could get the testing even cheaper thru contract with a lab. I have yet to find or read a reasonable explanation as to why this food problem should have happened in the first place except for a company wanting to cut corners to save money, and apathy on the part of both companies. So what does this all do? It creates a portrait of deceipt that the public doesnt like.
I think it was mentioned that the writer of this blog had received some sort of response from Nutro to questions he had and that he was deciphering their response. There are lots of intelligent people that have been following pet food recalls quite closely since 2007 and I venture to guess they could decipher the corporate speak pretty quickly if just given the chance to see their response. You see, what alot of people have learned is its the same old thing over and over with pet food recalls. Blame the public for over-reacting to numerous pet food recalls instead of demanding the companies actually have some good quality control in place, and an honest show of concern if their food is found to have problems. This is why the public wants controls put in place as they have had more than enough chances to get it right and have blown their opportunity to show they can police themselves.
Dear Tom,
From a legalistic perspective you are right: there is no scientific proof that Nutro sickened or killed the dogs and cats referred to at the Consumer Affairs web site and elsewhere.
Now, why would that be?
Could it be that consumers do not have the $$ to have their own, independent labs that can test the food, check their animals and eliminate other possible explanations for the symptoms?
(BTW Congratulations on smearing PFPSA or whatever they are called. Obviously, their involvement in the 2007 pet food poisoning discredits any scientific finding they may have in the future. Heck of a job, Brownie...)
Or could it be that Nutro by denying that complaints have been filed, avoids having to use their substantial resources to disprove that it was their food that caused all this?
(BTW: my vet - you know, someone with a DVM, not an ambulance chaser - contacted Nutro to talk to a peer and was rebuffed. So, please, don't repeat Nutro's statement that no complaints have been filed. You are smarter than that - I hope.)
However, we are not looking at the confirmation of another Supreme Court justice, we are looking at anecdotal reports about sick and dead dogs and cats that their owners somehow attribute to Nutro products.
A legalistic approach ignores the issue of the sick and dead dogs and cats.
The conspiracy theory that seems to make the rounds (it is just a handful of ambulance chasers who are posting under fake names helped by Nutro's competitors) seems to be as true as the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.
The people who filed their complaints at Consumer Affairs - many of them after contacting Nutro first - also left contact information on that site. Nobody, including Consumer Affairs, has to my knowledge done a follow-up.
That is a unfortunate because I think that some people are now ready for legal action in this case. (My wife was hoping that some ambulance chaser would contact her and offer to go after Nutro. Has not happened yet...)
It seems to me that Nutro - if it were acting in good faith - could have easily avoided the current firestorm by responding to their customers, contacting the vets and collecting whatever data was available. Their retreat into Fortress Mars / Nutro, putting their fingers in their ears and singing silly songs, does not really prove or strengthen their case.
Again, from a legalistic perspective, all this means little to prove that Nutro is involved in pet food poisoning or to disapprove that they are. We just do not know.
On the other hand, the loss of customers and reputation will cost Nutro in the Court of Public Opinion.
While you are honing your rhetorical skills, animals are still getting sick, some die, and their owners do not understand why.
Seeing that you want to keep vets up-to-date with information for them to share with their clients, I have a question: why is it that the AVMA, your group, or anyone else, apparently has no tracking system where veterinarians can record unusual events, such as unexplained zinc and enzyme levels, enlarged livers, recovery after switching food? That is not voodoo, it is something the Centers for Disease Control do very well.
Perhaps if somebody were to go after Nutro and win whatever money is left after lawyers' fees could be used to set up such a system?
What are you doing to help veterinarians track events like food poisoning so they can better respond to it if it really happens? Sounds like an exciting direction to take your activities into...
Frans
PS
If you have friends at Nutro, you should send them an invoice. They are looking for ways to bury the message by discrediting the messenger. I have already received emails from my pet store owners that seem to quote directly from your article...
F.
PPS
Oops! I think I have just inadvertently discredited you the way you discredited the grieving pet owners who posted at Consumer Affairs.
How does that feel?
F
Post a Comment