The FDA has delivered another ‘hit’ to the raw pet food industry, this time right in the middle of the the longest government shutdown in history.
The FDA has taken aim at Answers Pet Food. Issued today – January 14, 2019 – the 24th day of U.S. government shutdown – “FDA Cautions Pet Owners Not to Feed One Lot of A+ Answers Straight Beef Formula for Dogs Due to Salmonella.”
Right on the FDA website is a statement regarding the limited activities of the agency due to the government shutdown; (bold added) “agency operations continue to the extent permitted by law, such as activities necessary to address imminent threats to the safety of human life.”
But…with NO reports of sick pets and NO reports of human illness linked to Answers Pet Food (in other words NO ‘imminent threat to the safety of human life’), the agency felt compelled to “caution” pet owners about the pet food. (And TruthaboutPetFood.com or anyone else cannot ask questions of FDA regarding this warning because of the government shutdown – perfect timing by FDA.)
The FDA states they issued the warning “because it (Answers Straight Beef Formula for Dogs, lot 2018 20/08 20) represents a serious threat to human and animal health and is adulterated under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.”
Adulterated? Maybe not (probably not) per the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, Section 342 Adulterated Food states (in part, bold added) “If it bears or contains any poisonous or deleterious substance which may render it injurious to health; but in case the substance is not an added substance such food shall not be considered adulterated under this clause if the quantity of such substance in such food does not ordinarily render it injurious to health.“
Salmonella is NOT “an added substance”. There is no pet food manufacturer (or human food) on the planet that “adds” Salmonella to their products. Thus, federal law provides the provision for ‘not added substances’ that they would NOT be considered adulterated “if the quantity of such substance in such food does not ordinarily render it injurious to health.”
In other words, per the legal requirements established by federal law – the Salmonella FDA states was found in Answers Pet Food would have to be in a “quantity” that would make a human or pet sick.
Answers Pet Food is a fermented pet food.
Fermentation is an ancient process used to preserve food. A human food example is sauerkraut. On open jar of sauerkraut will be safe to eat for at least six months because the fermentation process prevents pathogenic bacterial growth (such as Salmonella). There has never been a Salmonella recall for a fermented sauerkraut product.
The same bacterial growth prevention is true for any fermented product, including Answers Pet Food.
It could be true that as the FDA warning states Nebraska Department of Agriculture found Salmonella in Answers pet food. But we have no idea IF the quantity of Salmonella in the Answers fermented product is of a level that would cause harm to a pet or human. The FDA warning (issued in the middle of a government shutdown) didn’t bother to inform pet owners of this (and we have no means to ask them). So is the pet food adulterated as FDA claims? It is highly unlikely that a fermented product would allow the growth of Salmonella to a ‘injurious to health level’ as evidenced by only one recorded recall of a fermented food (Cashew Cheese in 2014) in history.
So why did FDA issue this raw pet food warning during the middle of a government shutdown when no pet owner or consumer advocate can contact the agency with questions?
Opinion: This FDA warning leaves no doubt in my mind that FDA will go to any extreme, violate any law to destroy the raw pet food category. It is almost frightening to consider.
Reminder to all reading this – the FDA openly allows all other styles of pet food to violate federal law allowing “diseased animals and animals that have died otherwise than by slaughter” to be processed into pet food with no warning or disclosure to the pet owner. A Citizen Petition was submitted to FDA in October of 2016 asking the agency stop allowing illegal pet food ingredients and at the very least to disclose these inferior and dangerous ingredients to pet owners on labels. Almost 2 1/2 years later, the agency has never responded.
While FDA allows all other styles of pet food to openly violate federal law – the raw pet food category experiences violations of law by FDA (and other regulatory authorities) against them.
Again – we are in the longest running government shutdown in history. With a limited budget specified ONLY for “imminent threats to the safety of human life” – the FDA issues a public warning with NO reports of either human or animal illness. Why?
Because the regulatory system over pet food consists of extreme biases in favor of Big Pet Feed.
How can pet owners trust that any pet food is safe with such a bias system of regulation? We can’t.
Before this madness continues even one more day – I urge every pet owner to send the FDA an email/letter. AskCVM@fda.hhs.gov Write a post on Twitter or Facebook or anywhere in social media and tag the FDA.
Tell the FDA you demand uniform regulation of pet food. Tell them you demand agency officials abide by federal law – and demand that the FDA enforce all federal laws regulating pet food. Tell the FDA to immediately stop allowing illegal ingredients (diseased animals and animals that have died otherwise than by slaughter) in pet food.
We deserve the opportunity to purchase safe pet food. Unfortunately, we must demand FDA abide by law and enforce existing laws to have that opportunity of safe pet food.
Please send FDA your message. Pet owners CAN force this change when we speak up. With an estimated 84 million homes in the US with pets, here’s hoping the FDA comes back to work after the shutdown to millions of emails demanding safe pet food.
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
Become a member of our pet food consumer Association. Association for Truth in Pet Food is a a stakeholder organization representing the voice of pet food consumers at AAFCO and with FDA. Your membership helps representatives attend meetings and voice consumer concerns with regulatory authorities. Click Here to learn more.
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 5,000 cat foods, dog foods,
and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. Click Here to preview Petsumer Report. www.PetsumerReport.com
The 2019 List
Susan’s List of trusted pet foods. Click Here to learn more.
Have you read Buyer Beware? Click Here
Cooking pet food made easy, Dinner PAWsible
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
Lynn Utecht
January 14, 2019 at 6:27 pm
The FDA probably already had this recall planned out before the shutdown. And since there is no one there to stop the made up story— it was released as planned…,
Susan Thixton
January 14, 2019 at 6:35 pm
This isn’t a recall. It is a warning. But you could be right with the no one there to stop the story. I hope we discover who at FDA decided to do this during the shutdown.
Jeff
January 15, 2019 at 12:01 am
Excellent point. I need to post this point to our Yorkie groups ( around 50,000 + members, many of which are raw feeders, including us) The first thing I heard from a friend today was “Did you hear about the Answers recall”, so again, this is a great peice of info to share! Thank you!
Pet ~Owner~
January 14, 2019 at 7:25 pm
Is the FDA not doing its job when it comes to non-raw PF, yes. Is there significant risk (not just pathogens) in non-raw PF, yes. Because the bottom line is, it’s all about sourcing. And sourcing affects every single PF product out there. Salmonella is the most common risk. However (and not in defense of the FDA) they probably had started this report a while ago.And if they knew about a problem (which only Answers PF knows for sure) then they’d be remiss for not informing the public. Should the FDA have a method for answering questions, of course. But am not sure if the fermentation process is a 100% protection against all pathogens (like E-Coli?).Even so, the method of feeding food that’s cured with fermentation, most closely mimics the wild prey model.
Again the FDA is concerned about the “average” pet owner’s limited experience with raw PF. Folks who think about raw meat, assume it’s as pristine as what the local butcher wraps up in white paper, and hands over to the consumer in the store. Raw PF is only as good as its sourcing, processing, curing, storage, delivery and maintenance. Anything can go wrong within that chain of custody. In fact, dehydrated and freeze-dried “raw” food is probably a safer alternative for the inexperienced. Pet owners who’re not paying attention, tend to leave “Fido’s” feed bowl on the floor for hours, even overnight. Maybe rinse the dish out quickly and dump it into the dishwasher where they assume it will be “sterilized.” Aww, yuck! Raw PF goes through a dog’s system (I believe) in half the time it takes to digest dry kibble. So it will be eliminated more quickly. And left in a more “raw” state than will processed kibble. And yes, if somebody tramps through it (stupid, I know) I wouldn’t want them tracking it into my house either, where kids are playing on floor.
Raw PF is not the best decision for every household, but every form of PF safe is imperative. One problem doesn’t negate the importance of the other. Or the FDA’s responsibility to be fair and transparent. The government’s partial “shutdown” is yet another excuse for the FDA to select and promote their own agenda. While we know the real issue, we also need to recognize that easily assumed bias is an annoying function of “incompetence. Frankly I think they’re just too dumb to even be capable of targeting the raw PF industry … intentionally.. It’s just a more effective “button” for pushing the alarm! Making it <look like they’re doing their job!!
Peg
January 14, 2019 at 7:50 pm
Too bad the FDA doesn’t permanently “shut down”!
Cheryl Bond
January 15, 2019 at 5:20 am
You’ve got that right! Infact, how about ALL the “Alphabet Agency’s” follow suit right after, since every single one of them is completely CORRUPT! I hold Z-E-R-O faith in any of their “junk science” & seedy alliances with Big Corporations.
Pet ~Owner~
January 15, 2019 at 3:19 pm
Would you say there’s no validity in the Romaine Lettuce recall?
The real problem is, they lack enlightenment about the Pet Food Industry. Nobody wants to go in there and be the “White Knight” saving the day! They don’t have the resources for delving into it. And what can kill humans is a much higher priority. However any agency of the government is political by nature. It can’t exist otherwise. High ranking officials don’t keep their career jobs (and retirement status) through the wave of a magic wand.
Robin
January 15, 2019 at 10:12 pm
I feed my dog and cat the answers fish stock and it’s life-saving because it’s so nutrient-dense I add that into their Primal raw food and is the FDA stupid naturally animals have some percentage of salmonella in their gut microbiome anyways and they have a different hydrochloric acid so they don’t get sick that’s the beauty of their created perfection the FDA needs to go back and go to medical school and do their homework and not be so ignorant
Coonsoutdoors
January 20, 2019 at 4:44 pm
Some of your information is misleading and comes across like you are out to find something wrong no matter what. Who regulates you?!?!
Susan Thixton
January 20, 2019 at 7:33 pm
Are you speaking to me? Susan Thixton? Exactly what information is misleading – please explain.
Jason
January 21, 2019 at 1:14 am
Your video on tax payer money. The points you try to show about Purdue university. It’s misleading the way you present the material.
If Honda makes a car and the firestone tires on it Have a recall who’s at fault? Honda or Firestone? One has nothing to d with the other. Same thing with Purdue so what if a woman from Hills pet food runs the vet classes. Nothing to do with aafco.
Susan Thixton
January 21, 2019 at 6:23 am
I appreciate your opinion, but I disagree. Regulatory authorities should not be bias, their vote bought by industry.
Pet ~Owner~
January 21, 2019 at 10:46 am
In this article, couldn’t find a reference to “Purdue” or “tax payer money” (that was annoying; when citing something, should be providing the link.” However in looking over past articles the real point is that with the power these agencies and organizations have, they should be campaigning for the quality of ingredients. Its such a waste of their research, nutrition formulation, and visibility, when they fail to admit that any PF product is only as good as the source. And when you read back over a decade of TAPF articles, they all point to the same thing. Or, to use your analogy, what good would it be to purchase a Honda, if Honda knowingly (and that’s the key) used any kind of tire with a reputation for failure. Who/what “regulates” Susan? The knowledge/experience that if she gets it wrong, she invites serious (and inconvenient) consequences. Her safety as been at risk more times than you could imagine. It’s about the “power of the beast.”
Tawn
January 29, 2019 at 12:00 pm
If Honda put tires on a their cars with out checking the quality of the tire, then it is Honda. Firestone should also be on top of the quality they are representing. If the tire is made with a low quality rubber and and does not tell Honda and Honda is not making sure the tire is made with a high quality rubber before selling the cars then Honda is responsible. Honda gets a piece of paper that says ” yes” high quality rubber is used from Firestone, but Honda did not send his guy over to make sure the rubber was the quality and take Firestones words for it and your family gets into an accident weeks later….Did you make sure? or take their words for it? We have been told whats going in these foods for years and no ones ever been able to confirm. Later we find dog foods with lethal chems in it but no one has fault. Our dogs are our Family and This Woman has lost her little family members because of lies. To you, Sir, Your family members with fur may not mean as much to you to spend your whole life informing others that pets are at risk due to no regs on pet food. Heck, Big Pharma cant stop its lies. You trust the fda? A government that lets people continue to smoke cigs knowing they kill you is not one I trust with my fur family or really, my own life.
Jason
January 30, 2019 at 1:16 pm
If you trust the fda to do its job with human food and medications humans consume, then trust them to do their job with pet food.Orherwise you are being hypocritical and picking and choosing which parts of government regulation are ok for you to follow. There is no conspiracy, sometimes, yes, these big name manufacturers don’t abide by the rules in place.
You asked if I trust the fda then say a government that lets people smoke is not one you trust. Smoking is a choice, No person needs the government to tell them to smoke or not.
I could think of better reasons not to blindly follow everything in the government how bout Monsanto and gmo food? If the ingredients used in pet food are Monsanto gmos your pets are harmed anyway no matter how much of any guideline was followed. If you want the best for your pet then feed them a raw diet and control exactly what goes into it. My original post was pointing out that some of the information that is put out by this group is misleading.
Purdue university has a purina pavillion. Does that mean they are being bought off by the government to pass bad pet food? No it doesn’t, they also receive money from Eli Lily, Purdue is a university they just happen to house the state chemist office doesn’t mean one has anything to do with the other.
Susan Thixton
January 30, 2019 at 1:27 pm
This group? Do you mean TruthaboutPetFood.com? Misleading? I disagree. Your statement that Purdue (or UK or Texas A&M) would not be influenced by Big Pet Feed donations to the school could be true – but it could equally fall the other way and they could absolutely be influenced. Neither of us know for certain do we? I wouldn’t call that misleading.