FDA pulled the Rug Out From Under Pet Food Consumers

Appreciate all you do for our pets. I am happy to help with whatever is necessary.
Thanks

Have you heard of the Change.org site – I seem to get a lot of pet related emails from them..Would a post on that website raise the awareness of the public enough to require the FDA to be responsible for their actions? I have no idea how effective that site is, if it all. Just throwing it out there.

Maybe a huge outcry from people who care about their pet’s food content will be an answer. The FDA obviously doesn’t care and my guess is that they are swayed by big companies with big money. Those companies may become less powerful when eventually their food doesn’t sell. This cannot be allowed to slide by.

Question: a company using human grade ingredients may not be able to put it on the label but if asked, could they verify to a consumer that they purchase ingredients certified for human consumption to make their food directly to the consumer? I really hope that companies who are using great ingredients now won’t decide to use lesser ingredient.

This is simply sickening. Why have an FDA if they continue to not really do their job of protecting consumers? They don’t do a great job with humans either.

Laura

My first thoughts are on the millions of pet owners who are completely in the dark about he FDA’s sneeky closed door decision that could mean life or death to millions of pets. It seems to me our most effective tool is the media. Isn’t there any news outlet or journalist that would find this action by the FDA a worthy news story? The FDA needs to be bublicly shamed on a massive scale.

This is why I switched my girl to a species appropriate, balanced raw diet. I know what’s going into her and it sure as heck ain’t 80% fillers with a bit of meat-flavor.

I wrote Fromm about their food being human grade and this was their reply.

The term “human grade” is not recognized by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) or The Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO). Terms that are recognized are “edible” and “inedible” and these terms only apply to the human food safety system. The terms “edible” and “inedible” do not relate to the quality of a specific ingredient, instead the terms designate a specific ingredient’s safety as it pertains to human safety and consumption. At Fromm we are dedicated to sourcing quality ingredients and making the best product possible. Our meats and fish come from USDA-inspected human food processing plants and we choose them based on quality, as we do with all of our ingredients. Our fruits and vegetables are farm fresh and we even use real Wisconsin cheese. All of these ingredients are prepared in small controlled batches in our own facility before they are shipped out to stores.

first – Susan — I know how bad this hurts – must have been like a kick in the stomach after all the hard work you have put into trying to get this mess fixed.
secondly — I feel so bad for HONEST KITCHEN – they worked, like you, so hard to get their label approved – no matter the ‘wording’ USDA Inspected / Approved for Human Consumption I will continue to use their products, as well as purchasing the majority of our FOOD from my butcher and Green Grocers;

I think the idea of going public with CHANGE.org might be a way to at least reach the ‘uninformed’ – many say that ‘bulk’ petitions do not sway lawmakers, but that may not be exactly true when ENOUGH people get involved — don’t know if ‘we’ could actually make a difference – but if we don’t ‘try’ we sure won’t get anywhere.

It’s simply a matter of not wanting/being able to manage the number of inspections required -there’s not enough money on a national or state level to really do the inspections/verifications.

Why is the FDA helping big pet food this way and what are they trying to achieve? What would follow if there really was truth in pet food ingredients and labelling? What would happen to the processed food industry if many, many pet owners began to make their own pet meals or only bought human grade pet foods?

Well, processed foods have actually decreased by 10-30% in real dollars over the last number of years. Big pet food and large human food processors have long worked hand in glove. They are now under one umbrella, because owning the pet food arm allows them to make more money from their waste. Where I think the FDA governmental aims dovetail is the environmental and economic impact of food waste. Composting organic waste costs money for the food processor. This would increase their costs and processed food prices would increase, which would drive up the consumer price index, and damage the economy through inflation. People would pay substantially more for food, and have less money for shelter and consumer goods. Processed food prices would increase, possibly dramatically, because the waste would not be worth as much, and would possibly become a liability to the processor instead of a commodity from which further value can be derived. So, while the decrease in demand for traditional waste-quality pet food would positively impact the cost of feed for industrial agriculture animals, it would increase the cost of food for people (if you count processed food as “food”).

Concerning all the comments in defense of the FDA employees, etc., I have to ask the question, what are the backgrounds of the individuals serving on the FDA’s governing body? Do they have “Big Pet Feed” connections via former jobs with those companies? Are there any top of the chain FDA paid officials with “Big Pet Feed” connections as in former jobs with the conglomerates that owned/now own the Purinas and Diamonds and Naturas of the world?

Personally I believe there should be animal food product options. They should be certified, controlled and monitored.

However …… looking a the big picture ….IF (which is a big one) we were to give credit to the FDA and AAFCO for thinking a potential strategy through, my guess is that both agencies don’t want to blur the line between animal feed (related to livestock feeding) and animal food (related to feeding people.)

Obviously “we” get it very clearly, meaning what is the difference, and what is the SIGNIFICANCE of the difference, and the benefit to our pets!! But if PF companies are not already manufacturing their products carefully, accurately, quality testing, nor are they marketing their products truthfully, then imagine how much worse if would be if the concept of animal food was also introduced into the PFI? Then they would have to defend the reasoning (reality) of feed versus food. As a legal classification (which is a actually a permission) then “we” would “assume” the classification would be very clearly defined, and therefore very clearly regulated!

But the FDA can’t regulate what they already have on the books. We know that PF companies mix DNA species ingredients without labeling. We know that advertising is deceptive. We know they take liberties with wording of “natural” and “organic” and “balanced.” We know that Compliance Policies undermine the intention of the Food and Drug Act (which is intended to protect consumers). So if the concept of “Animal Food” (meaning truly human edible) was also introduced and companies were permitted this enhanced definition of ingredients, then then think how they would abuse the opportunity! And if they couldn’t completely comply (or wanted to take shortcuts) then they would begin to use euphemisms to communicate something just as good as the real deal.

And if they FDA can’t adequately monitor and enforce current PF regulations, then they never would be able to oversee human food processing standards and enforce those regulations either!

Now this is all fine and curious, except that permitting the idea of “human edible” ANIMAL food suggests to a naive consumer that the product is the same as truly human edible food (or worse, could be interchangeable!). We’ve already heard stories of very indigent people eating “cat food” instead of “canned tuna.” As far fetched as it would seem to us, if people started getting hold of (what they perceive to be) human edible animal food then they could be eating cans of dog food too, thinking it’s as good as beef hash or spam! The problem is, the only mission that really survives the test of the FDA’s purpose is the safety of food sources and the health of consumers. Because we already KNOW how animal feed is processed, how ingredients are sourced (they are NEVER first quality) how they are stored, what falls into those great vats, etc. then if people started getting ill from eating human edible pet food, guess what agency would have a big problem on their hands? It’s the same reason why they object to RAW feeding (they don’t care about the reasoning or the benefit to the pets) but they fear the accidental misuse and exposure of the product (and yes, I know all the arguments)) within a household. Like you forget to pickup yesterday’s raw food meal in a dish, and the toddler crawls over and picks up a handful. (Ick!) It’s about contamination by careless exposure and ignorance. The FDA does not want this problem on their hands!

Last point. We “know” the owners of THK, how they’re doing everything right! But what if there came a day when THK was sold to foreign investors or a corporate business. Then who is going to continue to track their due diligence. THK has been built on their very unique reputation, and would survive quite awhile on the same (thinking of Natural Balance’s namesake founder) but it could eventually drift from the original integrity and consumers would never realize until exposed. It’s just another problem the FDA doesn’t want to have to chase down. Or a whole knew program of certification that they would want to develop and manage.

Why do we still pay for an FDA? They do nothing in their job descriptions.
We see many class action suits (Nutro being the most recent) for ingredients not matching what the package says; what’s new??? FDA has never bothered to make sure that claims and ads were truthful. “Right now pet feeds are using images of real food on their labels to mislead consumers – not one regulatory authority is enforcing existing regulations to protect consumers against these misleading food images.”
THIS IS WHY I NO LONGER BUY “PET FOOD”. We eat human food only here.
Now, there is no longer verification; so what’s new? Nothing.
So, if a pet food manufacturer claims that their food is made with “human grade ingredients” I would email them (to have a paper trail) and ask them to confirm that their human grade product is safe for me and my children to eat…right? That’s what “human grade food” is.