We asked FDA to Reconsider

After waiting 1,333 days for FDA to respond to our Citizen Petition requesting the agency require feed grade ingredient disclosure on pet food labels – the FDA refused our request. The official process of petitioning the FDA allows for a Petition for Reconsideration.

We filed our Petition for Reconsideration with the FDA on 4/13/26. To read the full Petition for Reconsideration Click Here.

In our petition for FDA to reconsider, we argued multiple issues from their response to our Citizen Petition. As example, in FDA’s response the agency alluded they did not have a full understanding of feed grade; “Based on your petition, we will assume you mean ‘feed grade’ to be any amenable species (e.g., beef) not in conformance with the Federal Meat Inspection Act (FMIA) or any poultry product (e.g., chicken) not in conformance with the Poultry Products Inspection Act (PPIA).”

But…we reminded the agency they are fully aware of the legal definition of feed grade, reminding them “that FDA representatives participated in the AAFCO process to legally define Feed Grade and Human Grade.” We also reminded FDA that an agency representative (Dr. Charlotte Conway) stated in a public meeting “that human food grade is a higher standard than animal feed grade”.

An issue FDA repeated numerous times in their response to our Citizen Petition was that the agency does not believe there is a nutritional difference between (as example) feed grade condemned chicken and USDA inspected and passed chicken. The FDA also repeatedly argued against pet food label disclosure of feed grade ingredients by claiming we (Association for Truth in Pet Food) did not prove consumers are being misled by feed grade pet foods with images of roasted chicken or grilled steak on the label or by labels with claims of ‘Made with Real Chicken’.

Our reconsideration request included the following:

“We were unaware that it was needed to evidence to FDA something so blatantly obvious, consumers suffering from economic adulteration directly due to non-disclosure of feed grade ingredients. We are confident the agency has seen thousands of pet food labels that include images of human grade meat, misleading the buyer. The agency has had a choice for years to enforce labeling laws that prohibit such misleading labeling, but the agency as taken no action to protect consumers.”

“We request FDA provide the pet owning public with evidence that supports your belief that pet food consumers fully understand that animal food chicken CAN BE (allowed through FDA enforcement discretion) very different from USDA inspected and passed chicken. Should the agency fail to provide evidence that pet food consumers fully understand that condemned chicken in pet food ‘only applies to pet food’, (failure to provide evidence) will support our request for label transparency.”

Regarding FDA’s arguments that they believe there is “no difference” between condemned meat and USDA inspected and passed meat, our reconsideration request included the following:

We quoted federal law (that was also quoted in our Citizen Petition) – specific to animal food – that clearly evidences legal foundation for label disclosure of feed grade ingredients. PART 502—COMMON OR USUAL NAMES FOR NONSTANDARDIZED ANIMAL FOODS: “The common or usual name of a food, which may be a coined term, shall accurately identify or describe, in as simple and direct terms as possible, the basic nature of the food or its characterizing properties or ingredients. The name shall be uniform among all identical or similar products and may not be confusingly similar to the name of any other food that is not reasonably encompassed within the same name. Each class or subclass of food shall be given its own common or usual name that states, in clear terms, what it is in a way that distinguishes it from different foods.”

Our reconsideration request argued: “It is illogical to believe that USDA inspected and passed (as example) chicken is ‘identical or similar’ to condemned chicken or chicken that has died otherwise than by slaughter. By the simple fact another federal agency (USDA) has officially condemned this material is confirmation condemned chicken is NOT reasonably encompassed within the same name. We argue if condemned chicken is identical or similar to USDA inspected and passed chicken, then condemned chicken would be sold for human and animal consumption.”

“For the agency to make the statement in their response ‘we have no reason to think that there is such a difference’ between these two significantly different qualities of chicken is illogical, disrespectful of USDA authority, and completely unfounded. We request the agency provide US pet owners with scientific evidence to confirm ‘there is no difference’ or provide US pet owners with label transparency disclosing use of feed grade ingredients.”

Our reconsideration request also pointed out to FDA that their own lack of enforcement of federal law contributes to the problem of misleading pet food labels. Federal law specific to animal food: Title 21, Chapter I, Subpart E, Part 501.18: “Misbranding of animal food. (b) Among representations in the labeling of a food which render such food misbranded is a false or misleading representation with respect to another food or a drug, device, or cosmetic.”

We argued in the reconsideration request (specific to above law): “Due to FDA lack of enforcement of misleading labels, pet food manufacturers have for years displayed images of grilled or roasted meats alluding through images their products are of a different quality (misleading representation with respect to another food). And as we evidenced in our Petition, many pet food labels include the misleading marketing statement ‘Made with Real Chicken’ or ‘Made with Real Beef’, again a misleading representation of a feed grade ingredient to a human grade ingredient.”

“Through FDA lack of enforcement, the agency has allowed pet food manufacturers to mislead the public. Feed grade chicken sourced from diseased poultry or poultry that has died otherwise than by slaughter is absolutely an inferior imitation of USDA inspected and passed chicken. In order to prevent consumer economic adulteration the two ingredients should have different names, federal law requires it.”

We asked the agency to respond to our reconsideration request within 45 days (after all…we have already waited 1,333 days for their initial response).

Our Petition for Reconsideration is a step in the process we are due through federal regulation. After this step is complete (45 days), the only other step we have is a lawsuit. We will keep pet owners posted.

To read the initial Citizen Petition Click Here.
To read FDA’s full response to our Citizen Petition Click Here.
To read our Petition for Reconsideration Click Here.

Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food

Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here