Skip to main content

Unanswerable Pet Food Questions

Related News


  1. Nina Wolf

    What is the FDA’s reason for not enforcing the laws on the books? Has any FDA official stated that funding is the problem? If so, and the funding were provided, does that mean we could then expect all laws to be enforced?

    Yup there are surely holes to fix in definitions as well. Sigh.

    1. Susan Thixton Author

      FDA has told me they “don’t believe this material is a risk”. That’s their excuse.

    2. Nancy

      I just read that the FDA has been taken over by Big Pharma. Really, what difference does it make?
      We all know what they both are about. No one holds a gun over our head saying we have to buy
      pet food. Does anyone really believe the likes of the FDA and companies like Blue Buffalo can change? My dog’s vet bill was $4000.00 plus. Ongoing for the rest of her life. What amazes me is
      everyone trying to get them to change and become concerned, caring, organizations. The sooner
      everyone realizes this, the sooner you can all get on with your life and start making your own pet food. All this back and forth trying to make a silk purse out of a pig’s ear is for naught. Stop wasting your time and take responsibility for making sure your pet’s food is safe! Yes, it’s work, but
      so is everything else in life.

  2. Tammy Baugh

    My guess is $. Could big pet food companies be paying off fda to be lax in not inforcing the laws on the books ?

  3. Laurie Raymond

    Besides the obvious link to corporate influence, it may be worth asking if the extreme distrust of government as government, and the assumption that smaller government is always better, might not be responsible for some of this. Below the very top layer, where the revolving door ensures that government watchdogs come from the industries they are supposed to be regulating, these prejudices mean that, on the one hand, bureaucrats are recruited from – let’s just say, NOT the top tier of talent applying. They are the people who are content to work for a much lower salary because they don’t give two figs about excellence, don’t want to get embroiled in conflicts that would ensue if they were zealous in their jobs, have been around the same block too many times. OR, they are young and inexperienced and quickly learn where it is acceptable to be zealous (when it furthers the interests of the industry in which they hope to find real employment some day. I think we get not only what we pay for, but what we expect when we look down on government. There are officious bureaucrats who inspect and “ding” the very best producers of goods and services because they don’t have enough knowledge to have good judgment. These are the folks who have, over the last 10 years, put the small slaughterhouses and mobile slaughter facilities out of business, with terrible costs to small ranchers and consumers’ interest in local, healthy meat, and most of all, costs to the livestock who must be shipped to giant CAFO associated slaughterhouses. When we respected inspectors, hired experienced people with good judgment and acted on their findings, we had meaningful oversight of industries. It didn’t come without costs of various kinds — but at least you didn’t have corruption expected and regarded as the new normal. Something to think about.

  4. Kathleen Pirri

    Which would you choose?

Leave a Reply