Skip to main content

Pentobarbital Found in Gravy Train Dog Food

Related News

Comment47

  1. Pet Owner

    Here’s what the buyers of “Gravy Train” PF are going to do, and I quote: “Gosh, how can I exchange the cans I have?”

    Until PF consumers take a stand against this criminal activity, there’s not much hope for enforcement and consequences. Unless somebody’s dog dies, these reports barely make news. But I give this ABC Station (in D.C. no less) credit for being brave enough to investigate. Now we need some deeper, sustained investigative journalism to track down the real problem.

  2. Peter

    There are almost no words. Yes you are correct it is sickening. The modern-day version of “regulatory capture.”

    In the mid-1930s a growing consumer movement began to emerge, through criticism of the perceived inadequacy of the FDA to protect the public from being victimized by increasingly aggressive professional promotional campaigns for dubious “wonder drugs,” untested cosmetics, and mis-labeled or adulterated foodstuffs.

    There were a number of “muckraking” press articles and books, the most notable being 1933’s “100,000,000 Guinea Pigs: Dangers in Everyday Foods, Drugs, and Cosmetics” (Arthur Kallet and F.J Schlink) that postured that the FDA was held in “regulatory capture”: created as a state regulatory agency to act in the public interest, but instead advancing commercial or special interests that dominated the industries it was charged with regulating.

    It still goes on today, frankly, it seems as it is the theme of TAPF. As a “failure of government,” regulatory capture ultimately encourages a business model wherein large firms impart negative economic and moral social costs on consumers (the third party in the relationship). How many families need to be destroyed for the public to have influence on the FDA and force it to do its job?

    1. Reader

      You write regarding the 30’s. People can barely remember the late 60’s, but people were distrusting of the government. Turns out a few issues were indeed being kept from the public. A dysfunctional system doesn’t mean we shouldn’t keep trying to reform, but lets face it, the government can’t be trusted. Look at the headlines. (And NOBODY write to me about “politics”).

      The point being made here, is REGARDING PET FOOD, as in there’s no accountability for ensuring the safety to which we’re all entitled. People (average consumers) have just given up. Those who care, feed homemade or raw.

      Susan’s been writing on this subject for TEN years! A dog died in 2017! What more needs to be demonstrated? Yet PF buyers are still worried about refunds and the inconvenience of exchanging products.

      To Diane’s point, nobody should have lose their job. But if it happened to this Reporter, maybe it would make her angrier enough to dig deeper Like way deeper. Certainly a dismissal would demonstrate the power of industry over individuals, much less animals

  3. Dianne & Pets

    Any bets that PFI’s response will be to pressure the tv station to fire her? Look at what happened to the reporters who investigated bovine growth hormone. Maybe a preemptive boycott of Smucker’s products?

  4. landsharkinnc

    FDA’s response should a CHILD consume an adulterated product ? Prosecute the parents for child endangerment as these cans/bags are clearly marked ‘not for human consumption’ –and yes, I’m being facetious, sort of … .

  5. Jan

    Tragic beyond comprehension. Complete negligence and apparent no care for pet health and safety. But Susan’s question does present a possible reality: “I guess it will take a child dying before FDA enforces law with pet food.” That does pose a real risk when I think of how we as young children in the 50s used to nibble on our dog food, thinking it was fun and great. (NOT) Our parents didn’t know. Back then it may not have been such a problem but today in view of what is in pet food and the numerous incidents of poisoning it does present a potential real threat and should concern the FDA–greatly. I don’t wish to be an alarmist or scare anyone but the reality is, kids do things like that when mom or dad isn’t paying attention. I shudder to think and can only hope and pray that someone at the FDA will realize that this potential possibility and begin to take action. 🙁

    1. Jan

      Oops… so sorry. I did not see Susan’s following sentence. Must be delirious from the flu. Sincere apologies.

    2. paponypal

      Jan, wow your comment brought me back to my youth when I was a child, there was a dog treat that had different shapes to represent flavors milk, cheese, meat and I can’t remember the fourth flavor. But one night during a sleepover, us gals tried all four cookies and came to the conclusion they all tasted the same. Kids DO eat things they shouldn’t.

      1. Debbie

        Liver

  6. Laurie Raymond

    When reasonable and lengthy efforts to get government or industry to acknowledge illegal behavior, it may be time for some non-violent direct action. Anyone with a printer can make up some signs and take them to the grocery store, tape them to the shelves where Gravy Train is displayed. Just include the basics: 60% of samples of this pet feed tested positive for sodium pentobarbital (the euthanasia drug, illegal in animals sold for consumption.) include a link to Susan’s column and the FDA’s phone number. Say “feed this and risk your dog’s life.” make up a bunch of copies and leave them around the pet food aisle. I guarantee this will get action! perhaps your local supermarket will weigh in. Perhaps the local news media will highlight the campaign. Being polite and requesting response has failed. It’s time to play hard ball – it’s the only thing the government and industry understand.

    1. Pet Owner

      “I guarantee this will get action!”

      And you will too (not that I don’t agree) but stores have cameras. And you’ll never get in again.

      1. Laurie Raymond

        I’m going to do it. And here’s why I don’t think I’ll be banned from my local Kroger and Safeway: I’m the owner of a respected local small business, where I have a reputation for 0 tolerance for deceptive practices and quality adulteration in the pet food brands I sell. I have dumped many brands over the 14 years I’ve been in business – including Evangers, most recently. I also have for 5 years written a monthly newspaper column on pet topics, and I always condemn the industry as a whole and encourage people to feed fresh whole foods and to query the manufacturers of pet foods they do buy. In short, I have some credibility. I think perhaps the collusion between government and industry is not reflected by the retail sector, especially the large chains that operate in small towns who have to be sensitive to the consumers who shop there and ask questions person to person. I’ll report on what happens. I know there are other retailers with the standing in their communities to do this. The situation screams for direct action, at least by those who know and can afford to take the risk. I have friends and customers who work in those grocery stores. I don’t think I will be banned – but if I am, it would cause a bigger stir and focus attention on Gravy Train, Smuckers and the FDA.

        1. Donna Muse

          Good for you Laurie. I cook EVERY meal my dogs have. But I also learned about the calcium/phosphorus ratio needed and supplement with homemade egg shell powder. It’s not hard to make the ingredients in advance for several days and then put them together at meal time. I also create human grade dog treats for sale around my area and my feeling is if I can’t eat it it’s not human grade. Unfortunately there is a “human grade” dog food company selling online who does not appear to be paying attention to the ratio of calcium to potassium and that will be problematic for dogs and their owners down the road. Also, thanks for the info about Smuckers-they will be off my list and I like their preserves-but I gave up many things when I became vegan and I will just move to another preserve.

      2. Jane

        True. But if my dog died from contaminated food getting the chance to warn other dog parents would be worth it. I would not want to shop where that same food is sold anyway.

    2. Lisa Marie

      Excellent idea!!

    3. Pet Owner

      Thankfully Laurie, you have visibility and respect in your community. Kudos for caring and activism! Hopefully your community’s interest is better than average. Maybe other people can too, in their small community.

      Over a 10 year period, it’s interesting to see this crop of Followers being much more activity minded. In the past, letter/phone call campaigns, boycotts, sign posting, have all been discussed. But the interest is hard to sustain.

      Instead of leaving a message on the store shelf, here’s a constructive approach. It’s just a lot more work! Otherwise you’ll be seen as a nuisance interfering with their business, which is not credible action. Remember to some degree, by obtaining your information through this site, means you might also be representing it, as well.

      AT A LOCAL LEVEL

      1. First do your homework! Are you reaching out to an Independent store or a chain. It matters.
      2. Know who (or what) owns it!
      3. Contact the local store manager politely, with the ABC News report in hand. Suggest it be posted with “Recall Notices.” Most stores are responsible in this manner.
      4. To the manager, highlight how the food tested positive (people need evidence)!
      5. Copy the store’s “Owner” or Corporate Office in writing (@ Consumer Relations). Tell them you’ll be following up.
      6. Provide a few talking points (this type of incident killed a dog in November, adulterated PF is illegal, the FDA is not responding to questions).
      7. Be careful about citing “Evangers killed” specifically, as legal action may still be pending. And they can get very nasty.

      REGARDING SMUCKERS/BIG HEART

      1. In writing contact the Corporate Office (Consumer Relations)
      2. Supply the same materials.
      3. Inform them you won’t be supporting their company (until action is taken).
      4. You are acting independently and don’t represent the website (unless you’re permitted).

      In response to the comment, why doesn’t a TV Network take up “investigative action” doing so would be considered in conflict with sponsorship. However communicating an individual incident (with proof) would be considered a public service. So people should share the story with local outlets.

      What kind of responses you get with this effort (outreach) might be even be good material for a future story …. just a thought.

      ** and no, I do not represent this website either

      1. Laurie Raymond

        OK – I decided to talk to local retailers before leaving signs and leaflets in their stores. I approached the store manager of Safeway and have an appointment with the Kroger manager in the morning, as retailer to retailer, giving the information and telling them what I am doing with it: sending an email blast to our customers, posting signs in our store, telling local shelter folks. I went to our PetCo and talked to the manager. PetCo does not carry Gravy Train, but she was interested to learn and promised to follow up. The Safeway manager said they no longer carry Gravy Train, having switched – but he will make sure that no GT cans are left anywhere in the store, and he appreciated the heads up. The Kroger person I spoke to was below the level to authorize action but seemed concerned and I will talk to the store manager tomorrow. I would definitely follow up with signs and leaflets if the stuff is still on the shelves after tomorrow, but I told each manager that regardless of whether FDA or Big Heart/Smuckers does the right thing, we are in a small town where our customers are our neighbors and friends. I think it’s better to enlist their cooperation and have them take it up with their suppliers and buyers, if they will. Some will, some won’t – and for the latter group, there’s always direct action.

        1. Pet Owner

          Wow! Is your community ever lucky to have you!!! Thank you for all your effort. Yes, I agree, the path you took will maintain respect. And in the end, all we can do is educate. And influence with our pocketbook.

          Thank you for reading my comment!

  7. Lisa Marie

    Outrageous, here we go again indeed…

    Two of the brands under Big Heartache Pet Feed are carried at the indy store where I work in NYC, I’ll be sure NOT to recommend them and alert customers to TAPF.

    Excellent work by Lisa Fletcher, WJLA and you Susan, this investigative journalism likely would not have happened were it not for your tireless effort and dedication, thank you!

  8. Ian

    Bravo to the news reporter (so nice to see real journalism still exists!) and THANK YOU to you Susan for publicizing ! It’s shocking. Hopefully more people pick up the story and the investigations continue.

  9. Emily

    I don’t have a pet right now; if I get one, it will be a cat. And I am going to cook for her, not buy commercial pet food. If I have chicken for dinner, she’ll have chicken too. If I have beef, she’ll have beef. I’ll make sure she gets what ever supplements/nutrients she needs, and not use seasonings that are bad for her. Commercial food is crap! They add rice, sweet potatoes, etc., for animals that are carnivores! No more.

  10. Burlene Krider

    It’s only going to get worse now that deregulation is so rampant. More pets will get sick and die. People need to remember this when they vote next time.

  11. Keith Hornbuckle

    Susan Thixton…Have you ever tried to get one of the (TV networks) “News Magazines” to do a story on the pet food industry…such as CBS’ “60 Minutes”? The above are some great questions.

  12. VitalVet

    Are there enough pet owners out there who’d be willing to boycott Smuckers, a huge brand? And make it widely publicized? If enough stepped up, that might at least get the ball rolling of awareness. Agreed: the FDA isn’t likely to change, at least quickly. Why should they?

    But, the bottom line of a huge Big Food corp? And its shareholders seeing their dividends and stock prices dipping? That might bring some action.

  13. Tina

    This makes me sick and sad that this is happening. We need regulations on all brands of dog food!! Who is doing this disgusting act of animal abuse. Cameras and inspectors need to be implemented NOW!! Also the FDA needs to enforce more regulations!!!!

  14. barbara m

    In case the readers haven’t connected the dots, Gravy Train is unlikely to be the only pet food brand to have pentobarbitol in its food. Any pet food that has meat by-products or animal by-products in their ingredients has the potential of having this toxic drug in their pet food as well. “Dead animal haulers”, who pick up animals that have been euthanized, (such as cats, dogs and horses), deliver them to rendering plants. These by-products usually end up in cheap pet food. It will be interesting to find out what other brands are contaminated.

    1. Laurie Raymond

      You are right – and this is why I have been hammering on this point for the last year: pet food manufacturers, even those that brag about the farms where (some) of their meat ingredients originate – ALL (except, as far as I know) Open Farm refuse to disclose the processing/packing/rendering facilities from which they purchase directly. Get it? Maybe a lot of the animals they purchase come from these wholesome-looking “family farms” – but they are not slaughtered there, and the trim and other carcass parts not for human consumption are not rendered there, but either rendered at another part of the slaughter facility or sold to another rendering company, where these wholesome animal parts are dumped into huge vats with all these dead animals from other sources and the resulting meals are sold directly to the pet food manufacturers. It is time for educated consumers to join with retailers like me who have been demanding precisely this information and getting universally stonewalled by the industry. There are over 450 of these processing companies in the US. Some are scrupulous and process single proteins in separate batches which are sold to their pet food making customers. But some are not. Without knowing which renderers a pet food company buys from, there is no way to find out the reputation of these suppliers for quality and basic honesty. Instead of proudly identifying them and citing their reputations, pet food makers have ALL decided to refuse to disclose. They don’t want to compete on the basis of the providers of their ingredients – but they mislead by identifying some of the better farms of origin.

    2. Lisa Marie

      Evangers and Against the Grain don’t use byproducts and pentobarbital was found in their dog products.

      I wouldn’t trust any brand made under Big Heartache, even so called premium brands, Natural Balance or Nature’s Recipe.

      1. Laurie Raymond

        I at first thought it impossible, unless a deliberate product tampering case, because whole meat is not rendered. But when Evanger’s sued their supplier and published pages from the law suit, we all learned that the supplier in question was Bailey Farms. And then we could see how it happened. The whole meat in the Hunk of Beef was whole meat, alright — but from a euthanized horse! Bailey Farms operates a rendering plant and a farm carcass pick up service. This makes my point about how the names of the DIRECT suppliers is the most critical piece in the supply chain and is the one deliberately kept dark by manufacturers. Once we learned Bailey Farms was the supplier Evangers blamed, we could look them up. And then how it happened was obvious.

      2. judi Germaine

        I totally agree and will never buy any of them again – I have bought Natural Balance in the past.

  15. Dick McWay

    ” I guess it will take a child dying before FDA enforces law with pet food.” I doubt it. Children are dying all too often due to the unsafe number of vaccines given. FDA is complicit in this as is CDC and of course big pharma who cannot be sued for said deaths. Oh, did I mention our bought and paid for Congress. A truly pathetic situation in Washington DC.

  16. Pissed Parent

    I have often cooked my Rosie’s (my black lab) meals because I thought she had food allergies. If you add up the cost difference, preparing meals for your dog is cheaper and fresher. C’mon,, a bag of frozen vegetables are less than $2.00, and a tray of chicken breast, $5.00-$6.00 tops. That’s $8.00 for ~10 meals. =1 week of meals.

    Out of nothing less than laziness and convenience, I have paid $2.00 a tub for beneful meals. ( If you didn’t know they have had recalls as well). I have been noticing that same thing that I thought was food allergies slowly returning, causing Rosie to become lethargic and not feeling very good.

    I have decided that the dog food companies are not as caring as they pretend to be on their commercials with the sad music to reach inside all of us pet parents to undermine and manipulate us into thinking they are part of our family too. Liars!!!!!!!

    They are poisoning our pets for money. Not anymore! I will not buy another bit of dog food, from any company. Let them feed it to their families. Chow Down on that!

    1. Dianne & Pets

      Here in Canada, where I live, a package of 8 or so chicken breast cost 27 to 30 dollars, roughly at Costco.

  17. judi Germaine

    Labeling is not the answer. It has to be made unlawful to include euthanized animals in pet foods period. Period inspections of the pet food manufacturers that reveal any violations should be met with consumers notified AND a huge fine. If this is done, you will see how fast this will stop!

    1. Laurie Raymond

      It is already unlawful! Despite acknowledging this, FDA gives manufacturers a pass. And because the source of illegal ingredients is well concealed in the supply chain, it would take a huge investigation into – potentially – hundreds of direct purveyors of meat ingredients and audits of the purchasing pet food companies to begin to sort it out. And we’re living through a political firestorm of deregulation in all industries. Guess who benefits? People, we can’t take a narrow view of the pet food industry. You can’t with any consistency or integrity adopt a “roll back all regulations so industries can thrive” stance and then complain when that happens and negatively affects health and safety of those you care about! Ultimately, as citizens, we have to think about these things and then take action, even when it seems we’re outnumbered and out gunned. It’s the ONLY way things will change.

      1. judi Germaine

        For those pet food companies whose pet food tested positive for this toxin phenobarbital drug it should be fairly easy for the FDA to determine exactly the source of their “meat” products. There must be ways to trace receipts and deliveries. I remember when we had the melamine disaster, it was determined by eye witnesses that some pet food manufacturers where seen picking up bins of euthanized animals from shelters! This needs to be dealt with! They even found pet collars in the rendering plants – horrible.

        1. Laurie Raymond

          I do not know of any pet food manufacturers that own and operate their own rendering operation. Although, Bailey Farms, the culprit in the Evangers case, is a renderer that also makes and sells pet food out of its local facility. The video of pet bodies being picked up from shelters and vets were picked up by renderers, not pet food companies. The supply chain goes like this: livestock on farm > feedlot > slaughter > trim, bones, > pet food company OR carcasses from varied sources (shelters, vets, road kill, restaurant waste > renderers > (products are bone meal, meat meal, animal plasma, blood meal > fertilizer manufacturers, petfood manufacturers, garden products manufacturers, other final use manufacturers. As you can see, pet food companies buy from renderers, and big pet food companies may place orders with many rendering companies for different products. These various meals may all end up in the same batch of kibble, and from there it is impossible to determine the source of contamination. Each load from each renderer/processor SHOULD be tested on arrival at the pet food plant. But once the various meals are combined, you can’t determine where contamination originated. Bad record keeping is one problem. Another is that sodium pentobarbital, being an illegal adulterant, is not tested for. So a bag of food can be found contaminated, but it may contain ingredients from several suppliers that once they have been blended cannot be separated to find the original source. So the manufacturer has to audit its entire supply chain of ingredients for that product, and then batches from each still on hand. Of course, they may not contain the adulterant. My guess is that the manufacturers know something about each supplier’s reputation and quality and probably can make a good guess which one(s) are guilty. But this is NOT a simple process.

          1. Pet Owner

            Laurie, thank you for all that research. It’s still pretty confusing. And intentionally so, exactly so those involved can’t be accountable.

            Maybe Susan could make an infographic out of all this?

            Anyway, here’s a thought. Why not make every manufacturer test every batch according to the time frame of protein materials received?

            Then make the results available online. Actually a company used to do this ages and ages ago (I believe after the recall) and you’d be surprised which one did!

            I think it’s time for us to stop accepting excuses (too much work, expensive, sloppy paperwork)! We need to stand up for what the right thing to do, is.

          2. Laurie Raymond

            I think it would be less useful to require this of pet food manufacturers than for it to be required of ingredient suppliers. Then require pet food manufacturers to keep records on each shipment of every ingredient listing all test performed by the processors/renderers. Because of the sheer number of processors/renderers and the fact that any of them can sell anonymously to pet food companies without much chance of having their illegal adulterants discovered and trackable to them, it would change the tight, mutually protective relationship of the pet food companies to their suppliers as well as laying a foundation for those suppliers being able to and having to compete on verifiable quality and safety standards in order to supply the pet food makers. I think it might create a small fissure between the two industries that could be skilfully manipulated by consumers to their own advantage and the common interest in trustworthiness, generally. There is the question of what would be tested for. Pentobarbital ought to be included even though it is an illegal adulterant no one would expect to be included in ingredients destined for animal or human consumption – and a processor that did not obtain carcasses from random or suspect sources could forego such testing by offering proof of clean sourcing. Renderers/processors obtaining raw materials from such sources could test or be barred from selling any rendered product to any food (animal or human) maker. Testing for bacterial, fungal and other microbial contaminants, as well as antibiotics and prohibited growth hormones ought to be required of the ingredient supplier AND the food maker, as such contaminants can be difficult to detect depending on sample size and several other factors. Double testing for common hazards would have an effect on the price of commodity meats and poultry, erasing some of the advantage the most egregious animal welfare offenders in factory farms now enjoy. All food producers, of whatever size, should have to compete on the basis of wholesomeness, safety and quality.

  18. joyce dority

    there will be much to-do with this issue.many years ago there was the sale of horse meat to public,[long time ago] and some elderly can[i hope] remember. now my thoughts are ” has this been a pratice alloud for the reducetion of human population. I’M WONDERING.
    birdlady

  19. Laurie Raymond

    Well, now Gravy Train/Big Heart have recalled (though they said “withdrew”) the cans of Gravy Train and several other products, it is time to focus on the direct purveyors of meat to the pet food companies! They have for several years learned to exploit consumer concerns by “sharing” on their websites and marketing materials farms selected for their visual appeal from which they claim to buy their meat. The problem is that they may only get a tiny fraction of their meat from these farms, and in most cases, they purchase it directly from much larger purveyors: feedlot/processors for whole meats and renderers for meat meals. In those places, the wholesome meat is combined with other sourced meat and by-products. THIS is the segment of the supply chain that is carefully and deliberately concealed from us. As a retailer who has made repeated attempts, I have been completely stonewalled by every company except Open Farm. What Open Farm will do when it can no longer meet its demand with meat from that single supplier will tell the story of whether they uphold the principle of transparency throughout the food chain, or were only happy to oblige when their single supplier was above reproach. Companies do not want to have to reveal their immediate purveyors and compete on the basis of those companies’ reputations. But obviously, that is exactly what we must require them to do. Once Bailey Farms was identified as the source of the sodium pentobarbital in the whole meat Evanger’s product, we could look at it and easily discern that the meat was euthanized horse, because they advertise farm carcass pick up. If we accept pet food companies’ reassurances of the quality of their suppliers and ingredients without any possible way to verify their claims, they will continue to get away with this.

    1. Pet Owner

      I’m always with you, Laurie. You’re researching a niche subject (renderers and suppliers) which is the heart of the matter, but a problem to resolve, even if we did know their identity.

      On another thread I had over-reacted to “Carol Stuart’s” comment https://truthaboutpetfood.com/pentobarbital-found-in-gravy-train-dog-food/
      mostly because it was shaded by unnecessary inclusions. In retrospect I apologize. But forgot to answer my own question posed in my rebuttal. Which is, not the EPA, but the FDA’s Compliance Policies http://truthaboutpetfood.com/disturbing-and-illegal-fda-compliance-policies/ which contradicts their stance on what constitutes adulterated food (for humans or pets).

      The curious question becomes, who is (or should be) held liable? The sellers or the buyers? The obvious answer is “both” of course. Because companies should know, due to any discount in cost. The problem is, PF companies will (and do) claim they were duped in their transactions (i.e., BB regarding by-products, and Evangers regarding horsemeat) by denying prior knowledge. And when the renderer hides behind a third party broker, then both will escape guilt, because materials will be co-mingled. So in the end, if we wanted to nail enforcement, it has to be the PF company, being the buyer who is most responsible for testing (and documentation) of all ingredients received. Every time. Yes it’ll be more expensive, but is the only path to safety. And accountability.

      We may not like the inclusion of non-human grade ingredients (much less, horsemeat, which wasn’t unknown in the 60’s). But there’s a vast different between undesirable ingredients and poisoned material! The enforcement of truth in labeling should be the absolute standard, giving buyers both legal recourse, and the choice between “human grade” or not, for whatever way they do want to feed their pet.

      But then again, there are those pesky “Compliance Policies” interfering. So how in the world do we attack the real problem.

  20. Ellie Cassio

    My question is this. Are the veterinarians selling our pet, who had to be put down,
    to dog food companies?

  21. Eric Richardson

    My dog died from it what kind of help is out there for me for this

    1. Laurie Raymond

      The first question is, how did you determine your dog died from this? Did a veterinarian make a judgment call? Was any lab testing done? Did your vet notify the food manufacturer and/or FDA? Did you keep the package or can of food you determined was contaminated? There has to be more than “my dog ate this and subsequently died” to get attention. You should do as many of these things as you can to begin to document your assertion. Your dog’s previous state of health would probably be given undue weight, if he was ill. But testing residue from the can (spoilage of the product shouldn’t make it impossible to detect sodium pentobarbital) and a timeline: purchase, feeding, illness and death should be constructed as soon as possible. But you will need at least some evidence and preferably a veterinarian to back you up.

    2. Pet Owner

      Hello Eric.

      My condolences on the death of your beloved companion. No matter how, every loss hurts very much. Thank you for your comment here, because if a little more is known, might help someone else, and because other people search on a brand name, in order to connect with problems. Which often directs them here TAPF).

      Please let others know (here) what you fed. In the meantime, this link http://truthaboutpetfood.com/fda-and-aafco-have-allowed-illegal-pet-food-for-twenty-years/ shows other problem foods! Keep in mind, they’re problems because of testing (proof) not just because they might be “cheaper” … although there is a relationship. The ingredients (Meat/Beef and Bone Meal, Animal Fat and Animal Digest) are known to be a problem in any PF, no matter the cost or advertising!! Also, protein (which is not USDA approved and Passed) can be a risk. For other readers, you must contact your PF company with this question, and get the answer in writing. If they don’t know, or refuse … move on, to another brand. Many bands can be found in the Petsumer Report here.

      Please report a Pet Food complaint (incident) using this link. https://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/ReportaProblem/ucm182403.htm I know it seems like a lot, but report as much as you can. Manufacturers MUST be reported and accountable. Unless it’s online (except for Chewy owned by Petsmart) go back to the retailer and let them know as well. It would be good to prevent another tragedy, if possible.

Leave a Reply