A new lawsuit has been filed in pet food…actually 6 new lawsuits. The reason for the lawsuits? Lack of enforcement of law. Lawyers have become the unofficial regulatory system of pet food.
FDA and the State Department of Agriculture members of AAFCO are great at making regulations/law, but they fail tremendously with enforcement. Enforcement fail after enforcement fail, consumers do have a group of individuals that are taking up the fight for us. That group is lawyers.
The latest lack of enforcement issue being addressed by lawyers is misleading images on pet food labels. Wysong Pet Food has filed six lawsuits against competitive brands of pet food; Purina, Mars, Big Heart, Hill’s, Ainsworth and Walmart. The reason? Misleading packaging/advertising.
All of the suits are fairly similar, all with the same complaint. Below is a quote from each of the 6 lawsuit complaints…
In short, the premium meats, fish and vegetables portrayed on [Mars’s, Purina’s, Big Heart’s, Hill’s, Ainsworth, and Walmart’s] pet foods do not fairly represent the actual ingredients of the packages. The portrayals are literally false and thus by their very nature have the capacity to deceive consumers.
In order to compete against a company that uses such deceptive photographs and lower cost ingredients to gain advantage in the market, Wysong Corporation (Wysong) has only two options. It can even the playing field by engaging in the same deceptive conduct, or it can bring this action. Some competing companies have chosen the first option. Wysong chooses the second.
This lawsuit is absolutely correct. The images on pet food labels – and there are more companies doing this than the ones listed above – do not fairly represent the actual ingredients in the pet food, they are certainly false and they certainly deceive consumers. Wysong is right, many companies have joined the misleading image bandwagon over the past few years. Kudos to Wysong for not following suit. Kudos to Wysong for filing suit!
Again, similar in all of the lawsuits (the follow excerpt from the Wysong v. Walmart complaint):
Most pet food consumers place a higher value on pet food that they perceive as having ingredients like those they would purchase and cook for their families. They believe that such foods are better than other foods that do not have that appearance.
On every occasion where one of the photographs in the exhibits is placed on a package, that package actually contains a lower cost product than the one depicted. The actual ingredients used bear no resemblance to the premium cuts depicted.
The following are typical of the cost savings enjoyed by Walmart:
– Chicken breasts like those pictured have a wholesale cost in the range of $1.50 per pound, but the lower grade chicken Walmart actually puts in the packages costs approximately $.12 per pound.
– Cuts of beef like those pictured have a wholesale cost in the range of $4.00 per pound, but the lower grade beef placed in the packages costs approximately $.14 per pound.
– Cuts of lamb like those pictured have a wholesale cost in the range of $6.50 per pound, but the lower grade lamb placed in the packages costs approximately $.43 a pound.
– Salmon filets like those pictured have a wholesale cost in the range of $3.50 per pound, but the lower grade salmon placed in the packages cost approximately of $.13 a pound.
As a proximate result of Defendant’s willful systematic fraud, consumers are deceived. This damage to consumers and Wysong will continue like a cancer until Walmart ceases to use false and misleading images in connection with its products.
Wysong is right. Consumers are deceived and this has been growing completely out of control for years. All because FDA and each State Department of Agriculture can’t be bothered with enforcement of law (laws that they themselves developed). On numerous occasions over the past 4 years (beginning in July 2012) I have sent evidence to FDA and each State Department of Agriculture (all 50 states) of misleading pet food labels. All were ignored – each and every time.
Wysong is suing Purina, Mars, Big Heart, Hill’s, Ainsworth and Walmart for false advertising under the Lanham Act. The Lanham Act is a means for businesses to sue businesses for “false descriptions” such as in marketing of pet food.
The regulations that should have been enforced by FDA and by each State Department of Agriculture which would have prevented these lawsuits are:
Federal law – Food Drug and Cosmetic Act Section 343
Misbranded food
A food shall be deemed to be misbranded-
(a) False or misleading label
If (1) its labeling is false or misleading in any particular, or (2) in the case of a food to which section 350 of this title applies, its advertising is false or misleading in a material respect or its labeling is in violation of section 350(b)(2) of this title.
And state regulation from AAFCO (quoting the AAFCO 2016 Official Publication)
PF2.c “A vignette, graphic, or pictorial representation on a pet food or specialty pet food label shall not misrepresent the contents of the package.
Below are images from the 6 Wysong complaints. What is your opinion…does anyone believe these types of meats are in any of these pet foods? Do you believe they violate either of the laws above?
Because FDA – for years – did not enforce misbranded food law, pet food companies have made billions in profits misleading consumers. And because each State Department of Agriculture did not enforce pet food labeling laws – for years – pet food companies have made billions in profits misleading consumers.
In other words, because government agencies supported by tax dollars did not do their job – lawyers have to step in to protect consumers and protect the businesses that abide by law.
Below are the 6 lawsuit complaints. Click on the link to open in a new window.
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 4000 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. www.PetsumerReport.com
The 2016 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
Gdoggie
June 1, 2016 at 6:07 pm
Outstanding. Hip hip for the lawyers, I’d support them
Ellie
June 1, 2016 at 6:39 pm
When I was given the care of an anorexic small breed puppy that refused any commercial pet food I found myself doing research on pet food. Do you know that pet food company websites and packaging give 0 information about where their ingredients are sourced or how they are processed? Oh, if you look further and deeper you can find more info but typical pet food companies are not going to give you any of that information. Most information comes from former industry workers and people like Susan who have studied the industry inside and out.
Good luck to Wysong getting information about where these garbage processors get their ingredients. If the public knew the truth the industry would lose half of their customers.
Marie
June 1, 2016 at 6:43 pm
Great news! And kudos to Wysong! If only we could each afford lawyers, we’d really kick this into gear. And no way do I believe those pictures! I saw a bag of Purina Filet Mignon (LOL!!! LOL!!!) and read down the list of ingredients and finally found it, about 15 ingredients down. Thank you, Susan, for the hope in this post!
Jude
June 1, 2016 at 6:46 pm
Thank you so much for providing this info for us. Let’s pray that the judges follow the law.
Barbara
June 1, 2016 at 7:04 pm
My company is located in Canada, we’ve been in the pet food business for 11 years. ( next week in our anniversary!) For years I’ve had people tell me that the US foods are so much better because there are regulations, and the Canadian manufacturers are not regulated. What is the point of having regulations if they are not enforced? Hooray for the lawyers taking them on!
Prior to owning my company I used to run City of Vancouver Animal Control, Canada’s first municipally funded no-kill facility. I spent hours trying to explain to our City Council and Parks Board that unless they were going to spend money on enforcing bylaws, to give them teeth, DON’T BOTHER!!!! Same with speed limits, distracted driving etc.
Jean Hofve DVM
June 1, 2016 at 7:11 pm
It’s not like they weren’t warned! Susan has done an outstanding job by continually bringing this issue up to AAFCO, to FDA, and to pet food companies at AAFCO meetings. Nobody wanted to do anything (including their JOBS), but of course, nobody cares unless it affects their PROFITS. Good for Wysong for sticking a big fat wrench in the works!!
Momtoza
June 1, 2016 at 8:12 pm
Well it’s about damn time!!
Thank You Wysong!!!!!!
Debra
June 1, 2016 at 8:14 pm
Also important is to place expectations on veterinarians who peddle this crap. Many folks will assume that these foods are more than ‘good’ when sold at a vet’s office. I applaud this action and only hope that the ADA and others regulating (supposedly) get a clue. Important to note is recent legislation which will make possible for meat to be sold in this country with NO info on the label as to source of ingredients or the where it came from. Can you say: Chinese meat?
Rose Studdard
June 1, 2016 at 9:11 pm
Many thanks Wysong, i hope you win. If my vote or signature counts then count me on your side!
Jane
June 1, 2016 at 9:33 pm
I’m so glad to learn about this lawsuit. Maybe other manufacturers of high quality foods will pursue legal actions in the future to reduce the illegal and unfair competition by crap-feed companies who put dollar signs before pet health and purposely deceive pet families. With FDA and AAFCO (or other “authorities”) being so concerned with font size on pet food labels, you’d think they would see pictures on the foods as requiring enforcement as well. I really hope Wysong is successful in this suit, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see BigPetFood use all their resources and lobbying to halt Wyson’s efforts. I really hope not! I sent an email to Wysong (wysong@wysong.net) to thank them for trying to stop the fraud and lack of enforcement. Legal battles are not cheap. I feed fresh food and kibble to my Samoyed, sometimes using Wysong in her kibble rotation or serve it as a topper. I hope at least in a small way I am supporting their effort.
Batzion
June 2, 2016 at 12:34 am
Jane, you inspired me to write Wysong as well. Here’s what I wrote:
“I just read about the six lawsuits you filed against Purina, Mars, Big Heart, Hill’s, Ainsworth and Walmart on https://truthaboutpetfood.com/lawyers-the-new-pet-food-regulatory-system/ because of misleading packaging and advertising and want to thank you for taking these corrupt corporations to task via litigation.
“May these lawsuits get a lot of press so that the ugly and deceptive side of commercial pet food receives the attention it so richly deserves.
“Best wishes,”
Thank you, Jane, and, of course, thank you, Susan.
Debbie
June 2, 2016 at 12:57 pm
Thank you so much Wysong, I have had lost 2 fur babies to cancer. I don’t buy pet food from any of those companies listed, I purchase Fresh Pet, Simply Nourish and Rachel Ray 6. I hope Wysong can stop the products from China coming into United States. The sad thing is the better foods are very costly and the lower income folks can not afford them so they buy the cheap stuff.
Thank you again.
Susan Thixton
June 2, 2016 at 1:22 pm
Debbie –
All three of the brands you listed (FreshPet, Simply Nourish and Rachael Ray) do the same thing that Wysong is suing over. All three put misleading images of grilled or roasted meats on the label when the meats are never grilled or roasted. The Rachael Ray pet food is actually in the lawsuit – as they are made by Ainsworth. And to my best recollection – FreshPet is who started this mislabeling fiasco. I asked them four years ago if the meat in their pet food is grilled (image on the label clearly shows grilled meat) and they told me no. When regulatory authorities sat back and did nothing to FreshPet, my guess is that all other brands went…Well, if they are doing it then we should too.
Unfortunately, these lawsuits have nothing to do with imports from China – so no hope there.
Terri Janson
June 3, 2016 at 1:01 pm
Bravo Wysong! Good for them!!! Something must be done about these companies and I am happy they did.
Cheryl Mallon-Bond
July 3, 2016 at 12:47 am
A big thank you to Wysong! So glad this lawsuit is happening!
It is complete deception what is allowed on pet feed bags & cans! Industry continually double-spaced! One minute they say, “no-one reads labels, consumers do not get their information from labels”, then they go & fight when consumer advocates like Susan & others state the facts, that yes! Consumers ARE duped by images of “grilled meats, fresh vegetables, etc”. This nonsense with Big Pet FEED Co’s has to end, and AAFCO & the FDA has got to STOP! aiding & abetting them in their deceitful practices!
Cheryl Mallon-Bond
July 3, 2016 at 12:49 am
Darn auto correct! NOT… “double-spaced”….”double-speaks”