When someone believes a government agency has been less than truthful with the public, one option is to request from that government agency – through a Freedom of Information Act request – documents regarding the ‘less than truthful’ incident. Well…here are our Freedom of Information Act Request documents that clearly shows the FDA was less than truthful with the public regarding test results of the toxic jerky treats. The remaining question is why?
Over many years now, fellow pet food safety advocate Mollie Morrissette and I have spent many hours reading about, talking about, and trying to figure out what to do about the Chinese jerky treat problem. Pets to this day continue to get sick and die from these imported treats. In October 2013, when the FDA released a slew of information (update) on their jerky treat investigation…something didn’t look right to us.
So – we (through Association of Truth in Pet Food) made a Freedom of Information Act request – two actually. One to FDA – asking for all correspondence FDA received from NY Department of Agriculture regarding jerky treat testing during December 2012 and January 2013. The other to NY Department of Agriculture asking for all correspondence NY sent to FDA regarding jerky treat testing during the same time frame.
Our goal…
• Was to see exactly what NY sent to FDA,
• See if FDA and NY provide us with the same information,
• Compare the actual test results to the data FDA told the public in October 2013.
By federal law, a government agency is required to fulfill a Freedom of Information Act request within 20 business days. FDA acknowledged receipt of this request on November 4, 2013 (Confirmation # FDA1307738) – to date, FDA has not responded.
But the NY Department of Agriculture did respond. And remember, the documents they provided were exactly what they provided FDA. Quoting the “transmittal letter” received from NY: “This is in response to your Freedom of Information Law request for “correspondence provided to FDA regarding the NY Dep of Agriculture testing of Chinese jerky dog treats. Test results and all correspondence to FDA (fax, email, or other) relating to this testing during December 2012 and January 2013.”
So there is no way around it – this is the information that FDA was provided by NY Dept of Agriculture. Which makes the information the FDA told the public (see page 8)…less than truthful.
Why this is so significantly important is that we believe – Association for Truth in Pet Food – these sulfa drugs NY Department of Agriculture found in the treats are the cause of pet illness and death linked to the Chinese jerky treats. We provided the FDA with science to prove this one year ago (January 2013). The simple of it – just as some people are sensitive to sulfa drugs – so are some pets. With dogs, sulfa drug hypersensitivity results in kidney failure.
Per the test results of Waggin Train provided by NY Department of Agriculture…
85 treats tested – 39 marked adulterated due to illegal drugs or illegal levels of drugs – 1 of 2 treats tested were adulterated.
Per the test results of Milo’s Kitchen provided by NY Department of Agriculture…
63 treats tested – 40 found to be adulterated due to illegal drugs or illegal levels of drugs – 2 out of 3 treats tested were adulterated.
Per the test results of Cadet provided by NY Department of Agriculture…
30 treats tested – 11 found to be adulterated due to illegal drugs or illegal levels of drugs – 1 out of 3 treats tested were adulterated.
On average – half of the Chinese jerky treats tested by NY Department of Agriculture during December 2012 and January 2013 were adulterated.
Why didn’t FDA explain this to the public in October 2013? Why didn’t the FDA tell the public that 50% of the Chinese treats NY Department of Agriculture tested were found to be adulterated?
We don’t know why. All we know is that half of the treats tested were found to contain illegal sulfa drugs or illegal levels of sulfa drugs. That’s significant. And worrisome. Many more Chinese jerky treats remain on store shelves. We can safely assume many of those treats contain the very same illegal drugs or illegal levels of drugs too. And we can safely assume pets will continue to die (due to hypersensitivity to the sulfa drugs) until someone of authority stops the sale of these treats.
On a similar note – this recall notice was just posted on the FDA website – from May 2013…
Everpet Real Chicken Chicken Chips Dog Treats, packaged in flexible plastic bags, 3.5 oz. per bag, MADE IN CHINA DISTRIBUTED BY DOLGENCORP, INC. 100 MISSION RIDGE GOODLETTSVILLE, TN 37072
UPC 8 10633 01177 5
Product was shipped to the following states: AL, AR, AZ, CA, CO, DE, FL, GA, IA, IL, IN, KS, KY, LA, MD, MI, MO, MS, NC, NE, NJ, NM, NY, OH, OK, PA, SC, SD, TN, TX, UT, VA, VT, WI & WV.
Reason for recall: The New York State Department of Agriculture & Markets (NYSDAM) found trace amounts of non-approved antibiotic residue in some of the dog treat samples that they tested.
Read the fine print very closely of any treat you provide your pet. Call the manufacturer and ask country of origin of ALL ingredients. This is not something you want to learn the hard way.
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 2500 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. www.PetsumerReport.com
2014 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
pugsrus
January 1, 2014 at 4:02 pm
I stopped giving jerky treats a couple years ago when the reports of illness first started. My dogs have done just fine without jerky treats! I still have 6 lbs of Waggin Train Chicken Jerky just sitting in a box on the shelf.
Pacific Sun
January 1, 2014 at 8:01 pm
Why? Take it back and demand a refund. A retailer is almost bound to accept back a pet product that is dangerous or is harming your pet. Believe it or not those returns are usually tracked, so it’s the distributor/manufacturer which takes the loss, not the store. That way, you’re acting as a continuing reminder that these products are not acceptable in the marketplace. Other customers may take note of your actions as well.
Lorie
January 3, 2014 at 7:02 pm
Take them back for sure.!! They charged a small fortune for these Jerkey.! I called this company regarding their chicken and the reason they gave me for using China for their chicken was>……China only uses dark meat so they get a huge discount for the breast meat!! !~!!! What a crock.!! Crooked Bastards!! Trying to make a buck not worried in the least about the welfare of our pets.
Tattie Bellucci
January 1, 2014 at 4:06 pm
Susan,
I cannot begin to express my depth of gratitude for all that you do for our beloved pets.
It is indeed mind blowing that, as I sit here next to my shihtzu, Livvie that he has no clue what lengths you go to protect him. Clueless, absolutely clueless.
He will thank you someday, somehow. Before then, I hope my bountiful gratitude suffices.
Susan Thixton
January 1, 2014 at 4:09 pm
Thank you! Give Livvie a hug from me.
Mollie Morrissette
January 1, 2014 at 4:27 pm
Bless your cotton pickin’ heart! I love you too!
Mollie Morrissette
January 1, 2014 at 4:26 pm
Makes you wonder, doesn’t it? People may pooh pooh the amounts as minimal and inconsequential, but anyone with an allergy can tell you these amounts are anything but. To obfuscate the truth by minimizing the number of positive test results and the residue levels found can only have been done to preserve the U.S. trade relationship with China. There simply is no other rational explanation.
Except maybe that Toonces is at the wheel or someone forget to fact check their documents.
Either way – it spells bad.
Personally, I hope the attorneys have a field day with this information, because, after all when the PF feel the pain in their wallet, perhaps then they will think twice about screwing over the American consumer.
Even if the courts award consumers a nominal amount, the shame and disgrace this brings to these companies will surely have a much greater negative financial effect than any settlement or award would ever could bring to their bottom line.
Yet, one has to wonder then what in hell are they thinking by continuing to important millions upon millions of tons of dehydrated poultry product from China – even after years of bad press?
Are they counting on the American public to have a sudden case of collective amnesia and be overcome with a feeling of warmth and forgiveness for the careless and irresponsible US corporations that continue to poison their pets?
Help me out here – because I haven’t a clue.
Tattie Bellucci
January 1, 2014 at 4:50 pm
I was reading a book not too long ago about the testing that goes into our pharmaceuticals. It explained that though there is considerable testing and much research what ultimately happens is that when the results get back, that they’ve paid millions for BTW, they simply fudge the reports so that the drugs look great in spite of the testing and research.
I feel strongly that only the rich profit from capitalism. I hate our system that allows so many to suffer in the name of a dollar.
Thanks Mollie and Susan, sooo much.
Yvonne McGehee
January 1, 2014 at 9:25 pm
Agreed.
Peter
January 2, 2014 at 11:59 am
Yes but while the amounts may be “minimal” it is the cumulative effect that can cause illness and even death. Lousy food and adulterated treats fed over the lifetime of the dog are not “inconsequential.” It is a slow poisoning, and places a burden on the immune system of the dog over its entire lifetime. And that burden may perhaps overwhelm the dogs ability to fight other illness or disease. Who knows how this many manifest? You have correctly identified the problem… and you make a good point about “bad press.” But Del Monte made a choice to go cheap. When we make the choice to go cheap, we must accept the results and the cost.
Pacific Sun
January 2, 2014 at 12:15 pm
Well said Peter. That’s the underlying problem with commercial PF. It isn’t designed to enhance our Pet’s nutritional foundation to preserve longevity. It’s formulated just to sustain the pet for an expected averaged lifespan. Because it’s built on the model of “livestock feed” which again only serves a “food producing animal” for a limited number of years. IF commercial PF is so spectacular then why aren’t these companies producing long term records and comparison studies about companion animals living super long, healthy lives? Well they probably DO have the studies … except the public would be horrified to know the truth. Purina (the original Checkerboard Square business) had been doing animal trials for decades. Hmmm, they kind of handed over their business … didn’t they. Thanks for the great comment Peter!
Peter
January 3, 2014 at 12:14 am
The gruesome nutrition “studies” that Iams conducted years ago were exposed and P&G was embarrassed and vigorously denied and attempted to cover-up. Look into the parameters for dog food development and testing and the wondrous AAFCO seal of “approval.” The “truth” is that long-term testing of these products has NEVER been done: it is the dog guardian himself who conducts “lifetime” testing with his own pet. These foods don’t even “sustain” our dogs. These so-called “convenience foods” are a recent phenomenon: dry foods materialized only in the last few decades. During that time, the average lifespan of dogs has declined by 18%; and the cellular lifespan (how long cells live and reproduce/replace themselves) of dogs is nearly double the actual average lifespan. If modern dog foods are as nutritious as advertisements claim they are, why do dogs die so young?
Mollie Morrissette
January 3, 2014 at 10:21 am
Not only that, but it is believed that the diseases of the musculoskeletal system in dogs are linked to malnutrition; malnutrition resulting from decades of highly processed, grain-based commercial pet food diets.
Susan sent me a fascinating article about a book that has concluded that, despite 30 years of research into the genetic cause of hip dysplasia in dogs (CHD), no genetic correlation was found, but in fact only began to occur widely in many species of dogs around the time of the Depression when cheap pet food became widely available. The problem is thought to be caused by a lifetime of inadequate nutrition (malnutrition), especially during the early years of a dog’s life when the formation of bones occurs.
The book written on the topic, “The Thirty Years’ War 1966-1996”, has been suppressed by two European kennel clubs and Waltham. Incredibly, the article says that “the Bundestierärztekammer (BTK) (Federal German Veterinary Authority), the VDH (German Kennel Club) and the Waltham/Effem company boycotted the book on the basis of cartel agreements and suppressed reviews and reports in the veterinary literature, the societies and the media.” They somehow managed to convince a judge the book should be banned.
What were they so afraid of?
The authors believe that breeding programs and industrially produced dog food in its present form cannot hope to bring about any fundamental improvements in the incidence of canine hip dysplasia because CHD is not heritable and because existing dog food does not prevent, but is in fact the original cause of CHD. In these authors’ view, canine hip dysplasia is induced solely by malnutrition.
Read the article here: http://www.naturalcanines.com/gpage1.html. It’s a fascinating read, more of which I am sure Susan will educate us about.
Mollie Morrissette
January 3, 2014 at 7:57 am
Ditto! Well said Peter.
Regina
January 5, 2014 at 8:28 pm
That was an excellent article on Hip Dysplasia! Thanks for sharing it, Mollie!
Regina
January 1, 2014 at 7:33 pm
First of all, Susan and Mollie, Thank you for everything you do for our furbabies. We can never thank you enough.
I cannot believe this Chinese Jerky story is STILL dragging on.
I can’t believe how many people still buy treats from China. Anything (food, toys, etc.) that goes in my furbabies’ mouths is from the USA. There have been too many stories about problems with stuff from China.
I was talking to a fellow customer in a pet store not too long ago. He mentioned that he could not find his dog’s favorite treats any more. I told him that that brand had been pulled from the shelves because of the Chinese jerky being contaminated. I told him I find it easiest to only buy things from the USA, and to avoid anything from China, because I don’t want to take any chances with my pets. Well, I’ll be danged, he picked up a bag of treats, didn’t look to see where they were made, and took his dog more treats from China, good old “Dogswell” brand.
I will never buy anything from Dogswell. Some of their treats have the flag on the front, proudly claiming to be from the USA, while the rest of their treats still have “made in china” in small print on the back. I’m sure there are people out there who assume that since some of their stuff is from USA, that it all is.
Just for kicks, I just went to the Dogswell website, and here’s what I found after clicking on the button “jerky pet treat notice”
(this is just the first paragraph)
The FDA Jerky Pet Treat Ongoing Investigation – What You Should Know
You may have heard that the FDA has been conducting an ongoing investigation over the past few years into claims that certain jerky treats may have caused injury to pets. During that time, they have tested over 1,200 samples and have not discovered anything that they believe would cause a pet harm. On October 22nd, 2013, the FDA posted an update on this matter and requested help from veterinarians who encountered dogs that had health issues that might somehow have been connected to jerky treats. Numerous news outlets ran stories related to this recent FDA posting despite the fact that the investigation has been going on for years without any conclusion.
here’s the url: http://www.dogswell.com/qualityassurance
I hope there’s a good supply of water for when their pants eventually burst into flames.
Mollie Morrissette
January 2, 2014 at 7:19 am
Thank you Regina. Don’t forget processed meat is exempt from COOL laws – so Made in the USA is largely meaningless. Not only that, there is no law requiring manufacturers to label the COO of the ingredients in their products.
Unfortunately, Dogswell and others continue to use the FDAs lack of action as an excuse for keeping them on the market. There has been a conclusion – drug hypersensitivity syndrome – the FDA tells me they need more scientific data proving it. Meanwhile, it stays on the market and pets continue to get ill and die.
Peter
January 1, 2014 at 9:10 pm
Freedom of Information statutes may vary slightly from state to state, but generally, the “respondent” (in this case, the FDA) is required to respond within 20 days and if does not provide the requested documents, state the reason(s) that it cannot or will not provide them. Since the FDA has not responded, you could file a complaint with your state’s FOI Commission, and 1) ask for the Commission to direct compliance, (they would docket and schedule a hearing) and 2) ask for civil damages. One issue you may have is that some states specify a specific filing timeframe, that is, for example, 30 days from the specified “violation.”
Peter
January 2, 2014 at 11:51 am
In the case of a federal agency, it is called an administrative appeal. I’m not clear just how long they are able to take to “respond” or claim that they need more time, but in either case, that is done in writing. There is a public liaison that can provide the information.
April
January 2, 2014 at 12:58 am
Hello Susan, Thank you for following up on this serious issue. I just read the NY Times article, “Wal-Mart Recalls Donkey Product in China After Fox Meat Scandal” and there is a statement that will baffle you further: “Yum has struggled to recover sales in China more than a year after a chicken supplier to KFC in the country was found to have used excess levels of antibiotics.” ANTIBIOTICS!!!! Does that mean the chicken meat that was rejected by Yum Brands/KFC ended up being sold to a chicken jerky treat manufacturer? Here’s the link: http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2014/01/02/business/02reuters-walmart-china.html?hp&_r=0
Mollie Morrissette
January 3, 2014 at 8:13 am
What it means is there are no rules.
The mass drugging of animals kept in captivity is an endemic problem worldwide – not just in China. Drug residues are mostly problematic in countries with poor quality control, where corruption and bribery are a part of the fabric of the culture.
But more importantly, the real reason it occurs with such abandon is animals cannot survive the horrific conditions in concentrated feeding operations – where disease, filth, malnutrition, stress, severe crowding and confinement – without massive amounts of antibiotics.
China is simply slaughtering the chickens before withdrawing the medicines. It happens here too, but to a lesser extent.
And in China they have the added problem that many of the manufacturers operate within a cottage industry, where there is little to no oversight, where they can and do almost anything they like.
It’s very sad.
Peter
January 3, 2014 at 5:19 pm
A quick and concise summary of the issues revolving around CAFOs (confined animal feeding operations), otherwise known as “factory farming” or more simply put, the ordinary business of food production. We should all be ashamed. Thank you for commenting on this!
April
January 2, 2014 at 1:03 am
Hello Susan, I looked up sulfaquinoxyline, it’s a sulfa drug added to animal feed specifically for chickens, turkeys and rabbits. It worries me on so many levels that these poultry farmers overseas are not following the prescribed dosage, may be selling chicken that was not quarantined for 10 days or possibly be feeding egg-producing chickens sulfa drugs. Below are the links. Thanks again!
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?fr=558.586
“Jerky Pet Treat Investigation Report link: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/animalveterinary/safetyhealth/productsafetyinformation/ucm371485.pdf
“FDA Progress Report on Ongoing Investigation into Jerky Pet Treats” link: http://www.fda.gov/animalveterinary/safetyhealth/productsafetyinformation/ucm371465.htm
Susan
January 2, 2014 at 4:27 am
THANK YOU for posting this – we lost a dog to what might be these AKC Treats (severe kidney failure at age 6, healthy before, three types of rat poison found in tissue biopsies) and never heard back from the FDA or AKC. I still have an unopened bag I purchased at the same time – where can I get it tested? I don’t trust the FDA. Thanks!
Pingback: Truth on Jerky Treats (China)--Document ... - Dog Health & Nutrition - Dog Forums - I-Love-Dogs.com
Pingback: What Our Government is NOT Doing About Chicken Jerky Treats | touch of home
Eileen Sedlacek
March 3, 2014 at 11:27 am
MAKE YOUR OWN JERKY. Easy….
Slice chicken breasts fairly thin….lay on foil in your oven on racks.
BAKE 250F for about 3 hours. Pit in plastic bag in fridge or freeze for a month or so. They love it and there is nothing but the chicken in it…be sure not to use imported Dyson chicken from China.
Pingback: New Lab Results Bolster Claims of Pet Poisonings | Up on the Woof