The Purina Beneful debacle

[Tina B and crew]

I'm curious if you would be willing to give your input on this Traci. Do you think there is anything to this? With all the pet food recalls in recent years it does make me take pause.

[Traci]

My opinion is that the man and his attorney who filed the suit against Purina have no case - they have confused propylene glycol with ethylene glycol - the former is used in thousands of products for human use, and is an FDA-GRAS (generally regarded as safe in certain amounts) - that said, it is banned for use in cat food (but not dog food) since cats cannot metabolize hundreds of compounds. My understanding is that pet food manufacturers are allowed to use it, as one example, in bags, to help preserve freshness.

This isn't the first time someone or a group of people have filed such a suit against Purina, and most have been tossed out of court for lack of evidence similar to this case. Purina is not the only manufacturer who has been targeted - very specific tests were done by private labs, the FDA and so on, and claims made were without evidence.

Correlation does not equal causation. Any time there is a complaint or lawsuit filed, it seems that suddenly, hundreds jump on the bandwagon and suddenly there's a class action but no evidence to support their claims (I am not referring to the multiple recalls during 2007+). If a study were to be done, chances are, many of those claims would determine several different health issues other than feeding a particular food. Can the food be culprit? Absolutely. No pet food manufacturer is immune to problems at some point. However, there are methods to determine if a food is culprit, and those methods must be utilized in order to move through the courts.

We're getting closer to a better system to monitor and resolve safety issues in food production for pets - it's not perfect and it's much too slow, but at least more effort is put into resolving issues. One of the toughest roadblocks is the FDA is underfunded and understaffed, and politics usually always get in the way of progress.

If toxicity tests and other methods find something in Purina's food, then it will be a different story. But, for now, this case looks like another ambulance chasing attorney who has little to no experience with how food production works, what is required to make and prove claims etc - I certainly feel bad for the owner and other owners who never had an explanation or closure for whatever reasons, but I sincerely do not believe half the claims out there - particularly when owners never had necropsies, toxin testing, etc etc. I also believe that reputable pet food manufacturers take their work seriously and do not want to risk their reputation and businesses by producing bad products (there are several however that I fully believe don't give one iota but their bottom line-that's a different story).

If I had even just one piece of advice, it would be read labels to ensure the products are manufactured only in the US, especially treats. The label should state "MADE IN USA", or "PRODUCT OF USA" or similar, but NOT "Distributed" in the USA - such terms usually mean it could have been manufactured in another country and shipped/distributed/sold in the US thereafter. We now know that several various foods and treats ingredients were sourced in China and perhaps elsewhere, but printing was microscopic on the labels so consumers had little idea - in a couple cases of the treats recalls, the courts required larger labeling on packaging if the product was not solely manufactured in the USA. This also helps consumers when they have valid complaints because if sourced in China, the FDA and other investigators are sometimes prohibited or roadblocked from inspecting facilities in other countries (as we've learned from the first jerky treats problems).

[Tina B and crew]

Thanks for your imput. I've seen arguments pop up over this! I did some searches to see if I could find any solid evidence to back this up and couldn't. I found tons of negative reviews for the food (often with descriptions of dogs developing vomiting and diarrhea and/or kidney liver failure after switching to Beneful) with very few positive reviews interspersed. Those who said their pet developed cancer really seems to be a stretch. Some of these complaints dated back to 2007. I wondered if Purina had ever addressed this.

I also found that the FDA just cited one of the Purina factories that produces low-acid canned food for significant violations that could lead to pets becoming ill. But that had nothing to do with the Beneful. Hopefully Purina has addressed that.

I can see where pet owners would be concerned, but I also don't think jumping into a lawsuit is fruitful. I mean I'm fairly suspicious that it was the IAMS food (the big recall in 2007) that sent Frodo into her final kidney failure but I have no proof and would never consider taking legal action with out that. I don't think it is helpful at all.

[Traci]

I guess the question is, what, if anything, is Purina supposed to address? The two other suits filed over the years, Purina took steps to address - they tested numerous batches, they inspected the suspect facilities/plants, even the retailers' shelves and tested THOSE products, they evaluated ingredients etc - a third party lab did toxin testing. Nothing was found then. I'm willing to bet Purina is taking it upon themselves, at their own expense, to address the current suit as well - by saying "we intend to vigorously defend ourselves" - part of that means they take responsibility to prove their product is safe. The onus is upon the claimant and his attorney to come up with indisputable evidence, but Purina has in the past gone further and done their own job.

As for sudden development of diarrhea and vomiting, this can occur with any pet switched to a different food, it's a typical response. As for renal disease in some cases, we don't know any more than the media reporting it.

As for the low-acid canned foods, yes, they are addressing it - they had an "FDA-Letter" and are expected to comply - most of it had to do with facility equipment, but no update has been posted on the FDA site, I'm not sure it's even required to post compliance once it's completed and satisfied.

Just to be clear, I am not exonerating Purina or any other manufacturer, I am simply of the mindset that there must be proof - of course caution prevails and we should all exercise caution - unfortunately, we don't have control unless or until those who have the control are made to correct the problems!

[Tina B and crew]

Upon doing more reading I did wonder if some of the issues that cropped up for dogs (specifically the vomiting and diarrhea) were a result of an ingredient intolerance causing gastritis.

[Traci]

It's possible, of course. As much as anything is possible.

I haven't read too many comments on the news or blog sources regarding this suit, but I have seen some commenters saying they've fed Beneful to their dogs for years and no problems whatsoever. Those people are few and far between however, it just seems like those who yell the loudest (with baseless arguments) crowd out anyone with a different opinion.

I have to wonder sometimes if owners go the extra steps to rule out other things in the pets' environment, particularly the outdoors environment since most dogs are outdoors a great deal of their time. Even the "natural" or "organic" lawn treatments are no safer than other fertilizers and treatments. I think danger lurks nearly everywhere, both inside and outside the home, it doesn't seem likely that pet food can be the culprit in a majority of pet owner complaints.

That said, testing for toxins isn't perfected either, since not every lab can test for every toxin or perceived potential toxin. Even the FDA claims they have utilized nearly every test imaginable regarding the pet treats problem, but when you don't know what you're looking for, it can be an extremely daunting task. One problem is that a particular manufacturer might be buying a "pack" of ingredients or vitamin mixture, but that batch will differ from another batch almost every time, and if sourced in China or other country, no way of knowing what else is included whether knowingly or not. The "big" pet food manufacturers use a quality assurance and control system, and even though not fail-proof, can't say the same for a lot of other manufacturers. It really is too bad there isn't more regulation, but with that comes more politics, more money (at the consumer's expense), and more angst with govt. control. Sometimes it seems we're even going backwards in the human food safety issues!