For seven years the FDA has ignored requirements of law to update pet food ingredient definitions and update pet food labels. FDA has ignored requirements of law written specifically because of thousands of pets died in the 2007 pet food recall. Enough already.
In March of 2007 the world learned about what would become the deadliest pet food recall in history. Melamine tainted pet food ingredients imported from China destroyed the kidneys of thousands of cats and dogs. In two months time, the FDA had received reports of more than 8,000 sick or dead pets; sadly what was reported to FDA was only a small percentage of the actual number of illness and death. With human illnesses reported to FDA, it is estimated that actual human illness is at least 7 times the number reported; with pet food we can guess it is even higher. This would mean the actual pet illnesses and deaths that occurred in 2007 was more like 56,000.
Six months after the 2007 pet food recall was announced, the U.S. Congress took action to protect our pets. Congress approved – by unanimous vote in the House and the Senate – the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act (FDAAA). Among many drug and food regulatory updates in FDAAA, the Act included some very specific language to update pet food/to protect pets. The goal of FDAAA (the pet food portion) was to prevent another deadly recall. FDAAA was signed into law on September 27, 2007.
With pet food, FDAAA required the following…
SEC. 1002. ENSURING THE SAFETY OF PET FOOD.
(a) Processing and Ingredient Standards.
Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services (referred to in this title as the “Secretary”), in consultation with the Association of American Feed Control Officials and other relevant stakeholder groups, including veterinary medical associations, animal health organizations, and pet food manufacturers, shall by regulation establish–
(1) ingredient standards and definitions with respect to pet food;
(2) processing standards for pet food; and
(3) updated standards for the labeling of pet food that include nutritional and ingredient information.
A little explanation of the above law…
“Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act” – the deadline this work was required to be completed was September 28, 2009.
The “Secretary of Health and Human Services” means the division of government over the FDA, sort of the FDA’s boss.
“Ingredient Standards” means a level of quality in pet food ingredients. As example, in the 2007 pet food recall, melamine was added to the commonly used pet food ingredient wheat gluten. In 2007 there was no legal ‘standard’ or level of quality for wheat gluten (legally preventing the addition of melamine to the ingredient). Thus the laws of FDAAA – wanting to prevent another disaster – required FDA to establish a legal ‘standard’/a legal level of quality for each pet food ingredient; what each ingredient can or cannot consist of.
“Processing standards” would be similar to ingredient standards. FDAAA required FDA to establish a legal standard of quality for the manufacturing of pet food (what manufacturers can or cannot do in the manufacture of pet food).
Lastly the law required FDA to update the labels of pet food, providing consumers with nutrition and ingredient information.
FDAAA also required FDA to establish an early warning and surveillance system for pet food (and human food) recalls (Section 1002 b), deadline September 28, 2008. The FDA announced this task was completed on May 24, 2010 (1 1/2 years past deadline).
But, what has FDA done about the legal requirements for pet food ingredient definitions and standards, pet food manufacturing standards and updated pet food labels that FDAAA required to be completed by September 28, 2009?
Early on we saw progress.
In April of 2008 (7 months after FDAAA became law), FDA announced the agency would survey consumers “to establish baseline information about consumer use and understanding of pet food labels.” The agency also stated the survey would be repeated “after the new pet food label regulations are implemented to estimate changes in consumer beliefs and behavior about pet food labels.”
The questions the agency asked in the 2008 survey were minimal (at best) and did not “establish baseline information.” (Click Here to read the 2008 survey questions – section K)
(To my knowledge, no follow up survey has ever been done, because pet food labels have never been updated.)
In May of 2008, the FDA held a day long public meeting discussing what FDAAA required of the agency with pet food. Three FDA representatives stood before the audience and discussed what FDA requirements were with FDAAA with pet food. To read the transcript of the public meeting Click Here, and please read the speech from the one consumer advocate that attended (Mike Floyd).
It is significant to note that both in April and May of 2008, FDA publicly acknowledged they had work to do because of FDAAA. But that was about the last time FDA made such an acknowledgement.
In 2008 pet food consumers had hope, but 2009 dashed all hopes of change. The deadline of FDAAA – September 28, 2009 – came and went with no further information or action by FDA (on section 1002 a quoted above). It wasn’t until March of 2015 (5 ½ years past the deadline) did we hear another mention of FDAAA (pet food). FDA made an announcement the agency finally had a “strategy to establish ingredient definitions and standards”. The FDA’s strategy: review AAFCO’s existing animal food definitions. And use these existing animal food definitions as ingredient standard and or existing ingredients would be cleared through the GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) process.
This 5 ½ year late ‘strategy’ was nothing any different than how things were in 2007. FDA’s delayed strategy was absolutely nothing new, as FDAAA law required.
And it should be noted that FDA’s 2015 ‘strategy’ gives consumers no information about ingredient definitions. AAFCO (Association of American Feed Control Officials – a private corporation) owns the copyright protected pet food/animal feed ingredient definitions. To have access to the definitions of pet food ingredients, a consumer would be required to pay AAFCO $100 a year.
Nothing has changed.
Because a reckless industry was working within a poorly regulated system, thousands upon thousands of beloved pets died in 2007. The 2007 pet food recall was so horrific that Congress even realized the current system of pet food regulation was broken; by unanimous vote, laws were written in hopes to prevent another national pet food disaster.
But those laws have been blatantly ignored by FDA. They gave us a few glimmers of hope within the first year, but that was all. The agency did not meet the deadline of September 28, 2009 for any part of FDAAA Ensuring the Safety of Pet Food Section 1002 (a). Today, pet food consumers have no pet food ingredient definitions or standards, and no updates to pet food labeling. With the issues addressed by FDAAA, we are EXACTLY where we were in 2007.
Beloved family pets died – gave their lives in order for this change in pet food (law) to finally happen. Grieving pet owners were promised things would change. Grieving pet owners were lied to. It was – and is – business as usual with FDA. The agency continues to do as they want, when they want – with no accountability to pet food consumers.
This has to stop. It’s up to us.
The FDAAA laws were written to protect our pets, and we must demand protection is provided. Even if you don’t purchase commercial pet food, please speak for those that do. Please speak for the thousands of pets that died from the 2007 pet food recall.
Every member of Congress in 2007 (the 110th United States Congress) voted unanimously to implement FDAAA. Each of those individuals hold responsibility to assure the law they wrote and voted to approve is enforced. Click Here to view a list of the names of the 110th United States Congress. By the way, our current President Barack Obama and Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton were in the Senate in 2007 and voted to approve FDAAA. Email them as well.
To contact the White House, and find your existing members of Congress, Click Here.
Example letter:
Dear __________,
In 2007, thousands of pets died due to inferior oversight of pet food and pet food ingredients. The 110th United States Congress acted swiftly and included law to protect pets in FDAAA (section 1002 a). Unfortunately, FDA has ignored the deadline Congress required. In fact, we are approaching the seven year anniversary of the deadline.
Pet food consumers have not been provided with Section 1002 (a) (1) ingredient standards and definitions with respect to pet food, Section 1002 (a) (2) processing standards for pet food; and/or Section 1002 (a) (3) updated standards for the labeling of pet food that include nutritional and ingredient information.
The FDA has not completed any part of FDAAA Section 1002 (a).
Current pet food ingredient definitions are copyright protected, owned by AAFCO. You or I would be charged $100 a year to read the definitions. No ingredient definitions are specific to pet food and none have been updated as FDAAA required, they are the very same definitions as were in 2007 (before FDAAA). No pet food ingredient standards exist. No updates to pet food labels. Nothing.
This is unacceptable. Thousands of pets died – gave their life in order for these legal requirements of change in pet food to occur. Those lost lives have been ignored. I ask you as my [fill in your choice: President, Representative in Congress, Presidential Candidate, Representative of Congress that voted to approve FDAAA] to demand FDA fulfill their duties of FDAAA with pet food. Seven years is far too long to wait for pet food safety.
Sincerely,
And (please) we need letters sent to the FDA Ombudsman. The FDA website states: “Ombudsman is a Scandinavian term that describes a special kind of grievance-handling official who investigates citizen’s complaints against administrative agencies.”
Under When and How to Contact the Ombudsman: “For general complaints or comments on current CVM science-based programs, policies and procedures and guidance documents and for suggestions on how they can be improved.”
Mail: Marcia K. Larkins, D.V.M.
Ombudsman
FDA Center for Veterinary Medicine
7519 Standish Place HFV-3
Rockville, MD 20855
Phone: (240) 402-5674
Fax: (240) 276-9060
Email: CVMOMBUDSMAN@fda.hhs.gov
Example letter to CVM Ombudsman:
In 2007, thousands of pets died due to inferior oversight of pet food and pet food ingredients. The 110th United States Congress acted swiftly and included law to protect pets in FDAAA (section 1002 a). Unfortunately, FDA has ignored the deadline Congress required. In fact, we are approaching the seven year anniversary of the deadline with little to no action from FDA.
FDAAA required FDA to establish: Section 1002 (a) (1) ingredient standards and definitions with respect to pet food, Section 1002 (a) (2) processing standards for pet food; and/or Section 1002 (a) (3) updated standards for the labeling of pet food that include nutritional and ingredient information.
To date, only a “strategy” of accepting existing AAFCO definitions has been discussed by FDA. In essence, nothing of FDAAA Section 1002 (a) has been completed by FDA. Pet food consumers have no access to pet food ingredient definitions, there are no established standards, and no changes have been made to provide consumers with quality information on pet food labels.
This is unacceptable.
As well, through FDA Compliance Policy, FDA gives the pet food/animal feed industry permission to violate federal law (Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act).
Again, unacceptable. Just as I am expected to abide by law, I expect FDA to enforce law. FDA should have no authority to pick and choose which laws they enforce, and should not have the privilege of ignoring requirements of law.
Thousands of pets died – gave their life in order for these legal requirements of change in pet food to occur. FDA has ignored those lost lives. Seven years is far too long to wait for pet food safety. FDAAA Section 1002 (a) needs to be completed. Now.
Sincerely –
I did not lose a pet in 2007, but I know many that did. I have heard heartbreaking stories that still haunt me. Just imagine how those families feel knowing FDA has done nothing on the laws their pets died for. We collectively need to stand up for those pets, for those families – and demand FDA to establish what FDAAA required of them 7 years ago. Now is the time for us to show FDA we will no longer accept this lack of action. Please write your emails.
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 4,000 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
The Other List
The List of pet foods I would not give my own pets. Click Here
Have you read Buyer Beware? Click Here
Cooking pet food made easy, Dinner PAWsible
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
Holly
August 30, 2016 at 1:13 pm
The fox watching the hen house. 🙁
David Boothman
August 30, 2016 at 1:31 pm
Its a mistake to think the FDA can solve this problem, they just don’t have anyone with the intellectual capacity necessary. It may not look difficult to you but I think you are perhaps assuming ability where there is none. If you look at the weeks of thrashing around while oats were dying you see that there science was limited to googling for answers. The answer was not accessible by computer because it was real US science documented long ago on paper. The Chinese crooks knew this science well and created the fake gluten. The answer didn’t come from the FDA or from any US scientist but from the Vet school at Guelph in Canada. Most of the US activity was in the political arena trying to protect asses and look good
Reader
August 30, 2016 at 3:23 pm
Very good point about the FDA. Love it! You’d expect the FDA could demonstrate WHY they need a bigger budget, instead of hiding behind a lack of one, as their excuse for not doing the complete job! Which only demonstrates their diluted sense of responsibility, while collecting FULL salary. But after all, the Government’s working formula is: Bureaucracy + Regulation -/- Complication and Confusion = Indefinite Conclusion!
So it’s been a long time since having read about the Melamine crisis. But it wasn’t just the Melamine (to increase the protein percentage) which wasn’t an uncommon practice. But was it accidentally mixing it with acetaminophen! True incompetence brought to us by our famously ethically challenged overseas import buddies (and you know who they are!). That’s what made the problem so unexpected, hard to figure out, and lethal. The lesson was in the absence of sampling, testing and screening imported ingredients.So the PF Reformation Act, should’ve included the requirement of iron clad import control and costly penalties, if not a permanent ban for two time offenders.
This Political Cycle has made it perfectly evident that the “truth” is never a headline! Only a good story. So there has never been a better opportunity to show why our Political Leaders need to be called out! Because if elected Officials can NOT get their hands around responsibility and fulfillment (or else suffer the consequences) then it puts everyone at risk! And while the issue of PF might seem inferior to other pressing matters in this Country, STILL a commitment was made to the Voters!
When we don’t hold real individuals accountable, then “we” are the ones to blame for this Government’s apathy!!
Desiree
August 30, 2016 at 1:57 pm
Done, emailed my reps and Marcia K. Larkins, D.V.M. Ombudsman. Thank-you for all your hard work Susan!
Kay Henn
August 30, 2016 at 2:05 pm
No genius is required to implement existing laws and stop overseeing the use of contaminated material including euthanised pets as pet “food” ingredients. Hey, if the European Union could manage it, the US surely can.
J Regueiro
August 30, 2016 at 3:49 pm
Thank you for the great work and dedication to this cause, God Bless You!!!
I wonder if these people at the FDA have animals that they love like we love ours, and if they do, why aren’t they fighting for these animals that are family, because we have two Corgies, and we adore them like our children as I’m sure all your readers do.
Christine
August 30, 2016 at 3:55 pm
You might want to post this link: http://www.house.gov/representatives/find/ to help people find their members of congress.
Thanks for posting this – it’s high time they follow through – cheers Kay Henn for your comment
Pacific Sun
August 30, 2016 at 4:13 pm
I wrote to Barbara Boxer and Tom McClintock. Thank you Susan, for putting so much information together, for reminding us of this sad anniversary of an unkept promise, and for providing all the resources so we could send our letters!
Marisa Latora
August 30, 2016 at 4:42 pm
All we can do is pass on the information & hope we open up everybody’s eyes…I bake my dog organic chicken & he only drinks bottled water…I still see Alpo & Benefit in the supermarket & it devastates me that there are uninformed consumers who still purchase this garbage?
Mary Marseglia
August 30, 2016 at 5:17 pm
The FDA, AAFCO, will never do a thing! Don’t hold your breathe. All we can do is educate, tell the truth, and hope & pray to God that people will open up their eyes & ears and listen to the people that have done the research, that continue to do the research, who teach that ALL DRY KIBBLE is the WORSE Processed Foods you could ever feed your pets, and most canned foods are as well(there are a good dozen or so that are higher quality, grain free “as low in starches as possible including veggies as most veggies in these foods are actually “starch” veggies, and they all turn to SUGARS” The best thing you can do is feed a complete raw diet, made primarily from herbivore/ungulate animals, not poultry, pork or fish. And make your own “real meat” treats, either baked or dehydrated
Pet Owner
August 30, 2016 at 8:16 pm
A lot of research goes into these articles. They look effortless and obvious. But that’s a reason why they’re so much work. Cross referencing and validation, reviewing studies, speaking with subject experts, reading Government websites, decoding policies,. And publishing the result is not even a SALARIED job! Doing all of this so a pet owner can be convinced that pet “feed” is a bad idea. Nobody forces the Author to do this, but is a person who’s decided to use a special talent for explaining the truth to a deserving public..
In following the site for nearly 10 years, people’s opinions have evolved. From very combative and. angry about their belief system in jeopardy, to testing every argument in-between.. Now it’s mainly gratitude for having been enlightened and protected. Appreciating an Advocate who is holding people up to scrutiny.
Unfortunately the evolution of opinion is turning the audience into taking things for granted. That’s because there’s been such a history of problems that they seem insurmountable. Exactly as the comment above says, they will never change. So people rest on the idea that finding personal solutions is the only solution. Incorrect and a bad idea. Because our voice must challenge what the PFI is going to the Bank on, which is apathy.
The question is: who believes that people paid for by the Tax Payers and voted into their exceptionally high paying positions honestly deserve a cop-out? I don’t know about other people. But having worked in the private sector, if somebody was getting away with lies and intentional incompetency (impacting my work life) there would be protest! In fact it would involve a group protest. Because most everything requires a consensus of opinion to make the point stick. I also know someone working in the Federal sector, who’s faced with workers who scam the system. It deflates moral, sinks efficiency, threatens audit compliance, and totally stresses out honest workers. But discussion is never enough, unless action is taken to address it!
The Author provides a very concise opportunity to send 3 letters to Responsible Parties. It’s already written!! No cost, just SEND. Not like the days of US Mail pounding campaigns. So SHOULD we recuse ourselves just because it’s easier to think the FDA will never change? Or make it clear with as much publicity as we can make, that they’re in the wrong! A law was passed, that failed to meet any deadline at all! It means time, labor and money (so far) was wasted, all of which should impact everyone!
So wouldn’t it be a sweet miracle if Legislature Representatives got a letter from every State? Maybe even two from each. And for the FDA to get a copy of all those letters. That would be 100 more complaints than they had yesterday. Like when they were feeling pretty darn confident about hog-washing their Constituents! But guess what. We’re not all that dumb. And t’s time to wake up Americans to that fact. We’re paying attention AND it does matter!!
Disclaimer: I am not affiliated with the website in anyway. Nor am I ever encouraged or prompted to express any
opinions.
Peter
August 30, 2016 at 8:09 pm
For decades the FDA has been described as held in “regulatory capture.” That is, created as a state regulatory agency to act in the public interest, but instead advancing commercial or special interests that dominate the industries it was charged with regulating (such as pet food production). As a “failure of government,” regulatory capture ultimately encourages a business model wherein the large agribusiness conglomerates (who have bought up the pet food companies as a way to dispose of their garbage) impart negative economic and moral social costs on the consumer, who is the 3rd party in the relationship.
Fla Gal
August 31, 2016 at 1:27 am
You know, Susan, since I have read your emails and website for several years, I have learned a wealth of knowledge of what is good and bad about pet food.
Although we may be at the same juncture with the FDA, I have, with your guidance, learned to research, read the labels and buy the better, more holistic foods, small batch manufacturing, from two specialty stores in my area. The big box stores don’t carry some of these foods, but a couple of smaller holistic pet food stores have popped up in my area, and that is where I go.
I am lucky enough to have a vet who is really into holistic foods and says, as you do, that good safe food is the basis of the pet’s health. I pay more for these foods, but I will pay it in vet bills or in food, and I would rather do the good food.
In addition, for my two cats, I get the low-sodium deli turkey ( vet says its ok in small quantities ), the occasional sardine snack and in my case, no dry food for the cats ( one is diabetic and since we went to only canned foods, he is back to normal sugar )
I think that if we continue to educate ourselves on all this, and make different choices for our pet food, we will hit the Big Pet Food companies where it hurts, the wallet, they will start paying attention.
I think that people who really understand the whole pet food thing is a smaller group, relatively speaking, but we are growing daily and in the end, we will win, as we all turn away from the big box pet food over time.
Please keep up the good fight. We are all behind you and I will definitely write to my politicians as you have recommended. But the most important thing is, to me, to avoid buying this crappy food from the big pet food companies. I know its a challenge financially for many of us, myself included, but at least we have to look at the options and act as best as we can.
Holly
August 31, 2016 at 10:32 am
This morning (Aug. 31, 2016) on the TV show, “Dr. Oz”, someone from Consumer Reports was talking about misleading labeling of processed foods (for people), the use of “natural” and “certified humane” language on labels. Susan, would you be the person to be a guest on “Dr. OZ” to talk about dog food?
Sonia
September 1, 2016 at 10:56 am
Any chance this information can be forwarded on to the news media?? Surely this is information that should be broadcast to every pet owner in the United States.
Interested, still
September 3, 2016 at 3:46 pm
The title of this article should’ve been, “Thousands of Pets died but People haven’t changed!”
I’m sorry but the Country is in the state that it’s in because there’s no mechanism for holding people accountable! The public has an attention span of 10 minutes. True, pets may not be the biggest priority among issues. But the Politicians who do nothing about everything anyway, are getting away with it. Yet people vote Parties because they mistrust the opposing side. They’re busy choosing the lesser of two evils. And then they walk away from it. Figuring it doesn’t matter anyway. Instead of demanding responsibility from people they’ve supported! Otherwise, why even vote??
Only 15 comments. I thought all kinds of people would be writing a letter about this subject. If anything, JUST so politicians know there actually IS an Advocacy Group out there! One letter or 20 letters won’t do anything. That’s right, people probably give up thinking that way. But in the days when we’d campaign for an animal rights issue in our State, we networked among all kinds of groups, and generated hundreds of letters! There was visibility and loud voice! People cared. And you know what? Local Politicians noticed and decided they didn’t want to lose their Voter backing, because they could SEE the opposition! Publicity is the secret.
So change isn’t going to happen immediately. But we can. We can change our attitude. To realize that momentum is what counts. Otherwise, how discouraging for the Author to put so much effort into a subject, and action plan, and show concern – only to see this much apathy.
Very sad, because the pets who have no voice, are the ones suffering.
Peter
September 3, 2016 at 10:27 pm
I disagree that the situation is engulfed in “apathy,” and I also disagree that “people haven’t changed,” the pet food market is slowly changing, grain-free foods are gaining market share and that is a tangible expression of consumer awareness regarding the 2007 “melamine crisis.”
Holly
September 4, 2016 at 10:58 am
Grain free foods, in my opinion, have nothing to do with the melamine problem from 2007. The reason there are more grain free foods is because TV commercials are comparing dogs to wolves and people now want to feed their dogs like wolves The problem is,. if you’ve noticed, many of the grain free foods take out the grains but add a tons of starches in their place. Hill’s Ideal Balance, grain free is a perfect example.
Peter
September 4, 2016 at 9:08 pm
Well, that’s just not true. The consumer market has changed substantially since 2007, owing to advancing consumer awareness. Not a national shift from a TV commercial. It is the ad that is in response to consumer awareness. The market shift has produced some winners, and growth in premium foods. It also represents a major threat to the entrenched players that rely on consumer ignorance. Industry trade papers focus on these issues often.
Jan
September 25, 2016 at 7:18 am
Susan, as a pet parent of three rescued dogs, I am so appreciative of the research you conduct, the meetings you attend, and your persistence in demanding accountability of regulators when it comes to ensuring safe pet food. I will use the templates you graciously provided to send letters. Given that I have worked for federal agencies for more than 20 years, I believe that there are many hurdles in this situation, but none of which should prevent FDA’s having missed deadlines and following up on their initiatives. Based on my observations from working in federal agencies, some of the problems may include (1) if the head of FDA does not have a personal interest in pushing these efforts, these efforts will likely stagnate and be replaced by other items on their “to do” list; (2) if FDA cannot even assure consumers that their “human” food is safe, they will likely not be concerned about pet food; (3) if the FDA is currently cutting the number of inspectors of human food plants and cutting the number of onsite safety inspections due to budget constraints, they likely don’t give a hoot about pet food; and (4) corporate interests (like everything else in DC such as big oil, chemical companies, etc.) seem to always get regulators’ attention and backing. It also seems that not enough consumers are educated about pet food and/or cannot even afford to purchase pet food that would be safer even if they knew the scoop. Some pet owners can barely afford what is available at Walmart and probably don’t even take their pets to the vet, which is probably how large companies like Purina continue to make so much money. My guess is that consumers at Walmart and the Dollar Store are not looking at the labels on pet treats to see if they are made in China–it’s just not something they even think about. Remember the Blackfish video wherein information about Seaworld was disseminated widely and repeatedly on TV (just about everyone watches TV) and Seaworld experienced a drop in their attendance and market shares? This approach may be the only way that the issue with pet food will take a true front seat in the court of public opinion. Again, thank you for being the champion for all pets and pet parents. I will continue to do my part in signing petitions and sending letters in the hopes that maybe someone in DC will have a light bulb moment and decide to do the right thing. Many kudos to you.
Pacific Sun
September 25, 2016 at 8:42 am
This is an excellent summation of the obstacles facing pet food advocacy work! If you’re new to TAPF then you’ll be surprised to learn Susan has been plugging away on this issue for nearly 10 years! I believe (unless corrected) she has been a very unique advocate for pet owners (until relatively recently!) So when meetings occur, it is vital that many pet food consumers speak up!
“Blackfish” was indeed a novel and a very well needed expose on captive animal exploitation. I applaud those Producers for their diligence and responsibility, because they really did make a difference!
By contrast, television Media is reluctant to touch the negative aspects of pet food manufacturing because it conflicts with sponsorship. Just recently, The Dr. Oz Show had a very lightly offered piece, at least asking the question, “Do you know what’s in your pet’s food?” To begin a discussion was a milestone although we were disappointed it was so superficial. It would also seem that Blue Buffalo and Purina’s public battle over the issue of By-Products has presented a questionable ingredient to the general public. But nobody is actually explaining “why” (except here on the TAPF).
As you mentioned about this issue, there are 3 kinds of pet owners. Those who honestly treat pets like family. Those who believe they are conscientious but are still too uninformed. And those who don’t care and/or are in denial due to the power of advertising.
For now, Social Media is an access point. And the TAPF continues to be shared, especially when subjects are particularly controversial. Exposure must continue.
Pingback: Why I Chose Grain Free Food For My Dog - Happy Rescue Tails