ATPF asked AAFCO to require pet food manufacturers to disclose the use of fabricated meat on the pet food label. The AAFCO Pet Food Committee told us that consumers do not need to be informed.
Our pet food consumer association (ATPF – Association for Truth in Pet Food) sent a request to AAFCO’s Pet Food Committee asking that pet food be required to disclose the use of fabricated meat (chunks – used in moist pet foods). We stated “Pet food consumers want to know and understand what they are buying for their pet. One area of pet food that consumers have no clue to what they are purchasing is with canned foods. Many canned pet foods utilize an extruded or fabricated meat. These meat ‘chunks’ have the texture of real meat (100% meat) – but they are not. Instead of 100% real meat chunks, many ‘meats’ in canned pet foods are a meat product made with some animal protein, added gums or vegetable thickeners and then this concoction is extruded to produce a meat product with similar appearance to real meat.”
ATPF suggested to AAFCO that the term “includes fabricated meat” be required to be on the pet food label.
AAFCO’s Pet Food Committee told us…(bold added for emphasis)…
“I think that forcing firms to designate where each of the ingredients is present in an overall product would be burdensome and not particularly clear or helpful to a consumer. And inconsistent with how AAFCO labeling is typically approached (ingredient based). It would not make sense to force firms to require firms to declare something like ‘fabricated meat product’ if that isn’t a defined feed term/definition.”
“My understanding is that a fabricated meat purchased from a supplier would need to be listed on the final pet food label as the sum of its ingredients. The Pet food company would be required to list it this way since the product would not meet any other definitions.”
The problem…there is no legal definition of a fabricated meat product. With no legal definition, pet food consumers are at the mercy of the pet food manufacturer. There is no regulation requiring minimum amount of animal protein the fabricated meat must contain. Some may contain 10% animal protein (example chicken or beef), others may contain 50% animal protein. And all – because there is no legal definition – will be allowed to be termed as chicken or beef on the pet food label misleading the consumer to believe they are 100% beef or chicken. Without a legal definition to fabricated meat products in pet food, pet food manufacturers have an open opportunity to use whatever process or ingredients they like. To my knowledge, there has been no investigation as to the safety or bioavailability of nutrients within fabricated meat products for cats and dogs.
Chicken has a legal definition in pet food, beef has a legal definition in pet food. Chicken meal or beef meal has a legal definition in pet food. Fabricated chicken or fabricated beef does not.
Regulatory authorities typically wait until an ingredient is popular in pet food, and then decide they need to look further into it (in other words, industry does what it wants and regulatory authorities follow their lead). Prior to fabricated meats, the perfect example of this is pea protein, pea fiber, and pea starch. These pet food ingredients were used in many pet foods for at least five years before AAFCO finally wrote legal definitions. Per regulations, no pet food manufacturer should have been allowed to use these ingredients without a legal definition. But that was not the case then, as it isn’t the case now with fabricated meats. Reverse order of how the regulatory system is supposed to work to protect our pets.
Our consumer association will continue to ask authorities to legally define fabricated meat products and require disclosure to consumers of its use. In the mean time, the only thing consumers can do is make an informed guess. If a ‘stew’ or ‘with gravy’ canned pet food (not a loaf type canned pet food) includes gums or vegetable binders (starches), the guess would be the meat is fabricated.
Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,
Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food
What’s in Your Pet’s Food?
Is your dog or cat eating risk ingredients? Chinese imports? Petsumer Report tells the ‘rest of the story’ on over 3000 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. www.PetsumerReport.com
The 2015 List
Susan’s List of trusted pet foods. Click Here
Have you read Buyer Beware? Click Here
Cooking for pets made easy, Dinner PAWsible
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
jan beardsley-blanco
October 7, 2015 at 2:01 pm
this presents a huge problem to me – cats as obligate carnivores need REAL MEAT! I have an IBD cat who is TURKEY ONLY – we find it very difficult to find appropriate canned food for her – maybe 3 varieties…..and one of those must be eliminated since it’s gone to mixing in “poultry liver”
so we feed raw turkey with appropriate added supplements……….
and we wonder why SO many animals and humans alike are now suffering from digestive issues??
we most certainly DO need to know exactly what’s in the foods we feed our pets….
Mark Morton
October 7, 2015 at 2:18 pm
Typical government bureaucracy ARROGANCE!!!
jan beardsley-blanco
October 7, 2015 at 2:45 pm
absolutely total arrogance!
and while I’m at it, don’t let me up on my soapbox about GMO’s!
Sally Roberts
October 7, 2015 at 10:21 pm
I totally agree ! They do not care and I guess they feel we should not. Well many of us do !! Not only for the animals but human food too !! Most all of it is crap I think. Sad that our government is NOT worried about us, that is for sure , and less worried about our pets. I don’t know when, where or why this started but it is wrong !! It is all about money to both the companies and the political people representing us !!
Beth
October 27, 2015 at 1:12 pm
There are still companies that are meticulous about SAFE and healthy nutrition and people that care!
It is so repulsive the garbage that they put into people and pet food; even scarier that people don’t care and have allowed it to get to this point.
sharom
October 7, 2015 at 3:06 pm
All you need to do is rinse the gravy off and let it sit for a bit. you can sure tell if is meat or not.
Jude Gagner
October 7, 2015 at 3:08 pm
I think it is time to make sure the public in an entirety is given the opportunity to have this information. Our government is becoming more of an evil big brother than that of the people.
The petition site CARE helps to inform people about changes that NEED to be brought to the attention of the public and it can every successful. You don’t need to start such a petition, but one of your subscribers surely can. I’m completely fed up with our government that is owned by big business.
Please consider a petition.
Cheryl Mallon-Bond
October 7, 2015 at 5:39 pm
Jude, Your comment is so on point! I have been saying this for a while about a petition, not just for the “fake meat”, but for DEMANDING! Carrageenan be omitted from ALL pet food & feed! Even top $$$ pet foods are STILL! using it! It is making our pets SICK!!!! I wish I had the time to this myself..but I am inundated daily w/ my cat rescue work. Can someone please! who has more spare time, take the “bull by the horns” & start some petiton?
It is completely MADDENING! to say the least! That AAFCO say’s it’s OK to put the “feed product” out on the market for consumers/our pets, & THEN regulate the legal terminology! For AAFCO to say, we the consumer DOESN’T NEED TO KNOW! is just, well, UNBELIEVABLE! YES! AAFCO! YES! We DO NEED TO KNOW! & furthermore we DEMAND!!!!the right to know. It won’t be confusing to anyone with half a brain, who cares about our pets health & wellbeing! STOP!!!! treating.us like simple-minded nimcompoops!!! Who cannot think for ourselves! AAFCO you really are showing your allegiance to BIG PET “FEED”, & NOT the pets & consumers that you are SUPPOSED TO PROTECT! SHAME! SHAME! SHAME! On YOU!!!!!
Barbara Fellnermayr
October 7, 2015 at 4:10 pm
With all the substandard ingredients they put in canned food and kibble, I’m not sure why anyone would but it! People need to start voting with their wallets. STOP buying these substandard products. Remember, you get what you pay for. Buy better quality products with real ingredients, they cost more but they are worth it! Pay for good food or pay the vet, your choice.
Barbara Fellnermayr
October 7, 2015 at 4:15 pm
Sorry, it should have said buy, not but! If people stop buying this garbage the pet food companies would realize soon enough through the lack of sales. If they are not selling it, they’d stop making it.
Debi Cohen
October 7, 2015 at 6:23 pm
So so true, money talks, so does no money.
Marsha
October 7, 2015 at 6:40 pm
Are we able to write to them and bombard them with letters from us? I think we need to do that.
I for one am sick and tired of the government telling us what is good for us or our animals and what is not.
I would love to write to them.
Jude Gagner
October 7, 2015 at 9:27 pm
Petitions are more effective. Please trust me on that.
Pat P.
October 7, 2015 at 6:47 pm
Barbara Fellnermayr: Although I agree with you about the public stopping the purchase of substandard products, I, often, don’t have enough faith in the average pet owner to do the right thing.
A lot of people don’t know how lousy the pet foods are, but I have spoken to so many, including vets, who, even if they do, just accept the fact or don’t want to spend the extra money. A lot of people’s pets are not considered worth it, although not always openly admitted as such.
If most vets are selling “prescription” foods in addition to feeding their in-patients and recommending grocery store products despite their lower quality, and customers believing that their vets know best, a great many people are not going to think that they are, actually, harming their pets.
I believe, sadly, that caretakers who know about substandard pet foods, who are frantically searching to feed the best to their animals and will pay the difference in cost, are not, at all, the average. I am glad that I am one of the “not-average”, but it, certainly, is an incredible challenge–especially, having 2 sick cats, little money and being chronically-ill, myself!
Like a lot of issues in our society, changing the negatives can be painstakingly/painfully slow, but each one done is, ultimately, very much worth the effort.
Jude Gagner
October 7, 2015 at 9:33 pm
If anyone is willing to write a petition to be submitted to CARE and have it reviewed by and the info corrected, if needed, and approved by Susan Thixton, I think we should proceed to with it.
An Idea!
October 7, 2015 at 9:09 pm
The TAPF Comments section exists so that we can help one another and further the impact of shocking articles. Comments are so important because new Readers discover this site all the time. They have to work harder to catch up on the history of commercial PF. So what we say (and do) can expedite their discovery.
There are only 3 kinds of pet owners. First (1) those who treat pets as animals and won’t change. They carry out 35 lb bags of PF without consulting the list of ingredients. We can’t save those folks. Secondly (2) there are pet owners who would do better if they knew better. This article is an example, because you’d never be thinking about “fabricated meat” if you didn’t know to look for it. Thirdly (3) there are pet owners who are die-hard followers of TAPF. They don’t need to be convinced anymore. They just run with new revelations!
As the ATPF we need to play hard ball! A lovely letter of request was sent, one that will continue to be ignored. And the author can only do so much. And depends upon ATPF Supporters. So let’s make a list of brands with “Fabricated Meat” and put it into a post. Maybe not so easy to determine which brands are guilty ~ except for a single disclaimer ~ which is the use of “real” meat. Let’s find the brands that can say that. Because it can’t be “real” and “fake” meat at the same time!
By making a list of of “real meat” brands we need to (yes us) drive the consumer traffic in the RIGHT direction. Nobody is going to protect our pets and least of all the government or a PFI Association. But we CAN help one another. IDENTIFY which brands are being transparent and REWARD them with good publicity and our business! One list for cat food and one for dog food. Maybe we can submit our research (if we need to talk to manufacturers) to Susan for a final comparison. Publicity is our best ally!!
Ellie
October 8, 2015 at 9:25 am
My a friend told me of a woman whose cat was having problems eating due to bad teeth. The cat was only 5 years old and had lost a tooth and had other loose teeth. She had fed her cat kibble all its life. She went out and bought a brand name can food that was actually quite pricey. When the cat tired to lap the food up it could not seem to lap up the little pieces of “meat” that were in it so she tired smashing it up with a fork. This fake “meat” could not even be crushed with a fork. It was like plastic in that it was unmovable. Imagine what it does to the insides of an animal!
It should be illegal to feed animals substances that are not even food! I don’t care what kind of a leftover waste product it is made of!
Pingback: Dog Food: Where’s the Beef? Why HFCS? | Circle of Food
KarenB
October 8, 2015 at 3:09 pm
“I think that forcing firms to designate where each of the ingredients is present in an overall product would be burdensome and not particularly clear or helpful to a consumer. .”
What is “burdensome and not particularly clear or helpful to a consumer” is spending huge amounts of time and energy trying to figure out what my dog is eating.
Thank you AAFCO for finally, after years of this obfuscation, pushing me right over the edge to home cooking for my dog.
Peter
October 11, 2015 at 8:53 am
AAFCO is just a voluntary commercial organization, with no mandate or interest in what is important or beneficial to the end-use purchaser. I regard their “endorsement” that is mentioned in every article about searching for good foods to be essentially meaningless. For example, despite the impact that carbohydrate-loaded foods hold on pet health, their official publication specifically discourages the use of the word “carbohydrate” anywhere on a pet food label, (hmmm… perhaps [14] recognizing the importance of starches in modern,profit-driven manufacturing?). AAFCO says consumers just arent’ interested in learning about pet food ingredients: AAFCO: (2003, p.178), “Carbohydrate guarantees are no longer considered as necessary or meaningful for purchaser information, therefore, their use is discouraged.”