‘Voluntary’ Pet Food Recalls are NOT Voluntary

/

A Brief History of Deadly Pet Food Recalls

Many pet owners, retailers and veterinarians believe that ‘voluntary’ pet food recalls show that pet food companies have caught problems as a result of quality and safety checks. However, this is mostly false. In fact, some of the largest and most dangerous pet food recalls were not caught by the pet food manufacturer – and instead a regulatory authority. So why are these recalls labeled as ‘voluntary’?

Meriam Webster’s definition of Voluntary is as follows:

Voluntary (adj.):

 1: proceeding from the will or from one’s own choice or consent 

 2: unconstrained by interference

The Truth About Voluntary Pet Food Recalls

When it comes to pet food; however, many pet food recalls are not a result of the manufacturer finding a problem (e.g. mis-formulation, toxicant, etc.) like most people believe. In fact, some of the largest ‘voluntary’ recalls were not in fact voluntary even though that word is often used with FDA announcements and manufacturer press releases. 

The truth is that most ‘voluntary’ pet food recalls are indeed forced, usually by a state department of agriculture and/or the FDA. In order to determine if a recall was truly voluntary you have to read the FDA announcement as well as put a few pieces of the puzzle together. The problem is that most consumers, retailers and even veterinary professionals are completely unaware that most of these recalls are not voluntary. What is worse is that many seem to believe that if a company issues a ‘voluntary’ recall it somehow absolves them of any wrongdoing – even if the problem was truly their fault. In short, voluntary recalls DO NOT mean that the manufacturer caught the problem – it usually means that some other regulatory agency (state department of agriculture, FDA and/or CDC) was made aware of an adulteration or illness and is forcing the manufacturers hand. Usually if a manufacturer fails or refuses to cooperate then involuntary recalls or FDA advisories and press releases are issued, but they are rare. An example of such an incident would be the Answers Pet food recall involving Salmonella detected in their straight beef formula. In this case the FDA issued an advisory because Answers (Lystn, LLC) recalled the affected lot in Nebraska, but did not implement a nationwide recall.

So how do you do know where to look to determine if a recall was really voluntary? And how do you know where to look? 

Let’s look at some examples in recent pet food history:

Diamond Pet Food ‘Voluntary’ Recall (Salmonella): 

April 6, 2012 was the initial announcement of a ‘voluntary’ Diamond Pet Food recall due to detection of Salmonella. This is because the pathogen was detected by the Michigan Department of Agriculture & Rural Development on April 2nd, 2012. While the FDA announcement and media outlets labeled this as ‘voluntary’ it surely was not. Ultimately a CDC investigation, in collaboration with other agencies, used DNA fingerprinting of a Salmonella strain infecting humans to ultimately trace it back to a specific Diamond Pet Food manufacturing facility. In other words, Diamond did not detect the Salmonella pathogen on their own simply because they were not adequately testing inbound ingredients and outbound products. Additionally, Diamond was not keeping adequate records regarding ingredient tracing, manufacturing schedules, cleaning schedules or retaining properly labeled samples of products manufactured. In other words, this could have been prevented if they followed proper procedure. As a result 49 human infections of Salmonella Infantis and over 50 pets sicked and at least 6 pet deaths.

This recall expanded to numerous expansions of brands made by Diamond including Diamond Naturals, Taste of the Wild, Kirkland, Solid Gold, Wellness, Natural Balance, Canidae just to name a few. However, foods manufactured but sold under different brand names were not recalled until after the CDC reported the outbreak of human illnesses which also were reported in Canada. Which should have been a lesson for other manufacturers to do their due diligence.

 Evanger’s Pet Food ‘Voluntary’ Recall (Pentobarbitol):

February 3, 2017 was the initial ‘voluntary’ recall of what would be multiple Evanger’s canned pet food products due to adulteration with pentobarbital – a euthanasia drug. Initial reports of ill dogs surfaced at the end of 2016, although it took over a month for the ‘voluntary’ recall being issued. Expansion of the recall was announced on March 2, of 2017 that included all ‘chunk’ beef canned products made by the company. Another problem being that Evanger’s is a co-manufacturer – meaning they made canned pet food for other brands leading to this incident and previous incident possibly effecting other brands. This recall was also not ‘voluntary’ as Evanger’s did not detect the pentobarbital, and it’s also important to note they delayed recalling additional product. It doesn’t stop there though, because the ‘adulterated’ product actually turned out to be horse meat and not beef.

Taking a trip down memory lane, Evanger’s has had significant and widespread sanitary and food handling problems at their facility dating back to 2006. This was evidenced in citations and a lawsuit filed by the Village of Wheeling which resulted in restitution payments. Further, other significant problems were regularly in the news from 2008-2017 surrounding both Evanger’s products and illegal business activity. These issues included Fair Labor Standards Act violations, utility theft, theft and money laundering. On the product front further citations, FDA inspections, permit suspensions, warning letters for sanitary conditions, adulterated products, misbranded products and contaminant recalls. This long chain of issues was rounded out by the 2017 pentobarbital contamination incident. 

Hill’s Pet Nutrition (Science Diet) ‘Voluntary’ Recall (Excess Vitamin D) –  

January 31, 2019 Hill’s ‘voluntarily’ recalled numerous lots of canned pet food due to toxic levels of vitamin D. Ultimately two additional recall expansions were also released on March 20th, 2019 and again on May 20th, 2019. This recall turned into one of the largest pet food recalls worldwide with over 22 million cans of pet food involved, and likely a large number of pets that became sick or died. The incident involving Hill’s was also not ‘voluntary’ because they did not detect the problem themselves, and in fact the FDA found Hill’s failed to follow their own safety and quality control procedures even though Hill’s attempted to place the blame on the ingredient supplier. The FDA issued a warning letter to Hill’s with highlights as followed:

  • Pet food contained vitamin D at levels in excess of 33 times the recommended safe upper limit, which classifies the food as adulterated
  • Hill’s failed to follow their own procedures to ensure that inbound ingredients such as Vitamin D were safe, and at proper levels for their formulation considering Vitamin D excess is a reasonably foreseeable hazard.
  • The FDA noted that Hill’s proposed ‘corrective actions’ because most were already preexisting procedures that they failed to follow in the first place resulting in the recall. 

In short – even though Hill’s Pet Nutrition is touted to be ‘one of the best pet food companies’ by organizations such as the American Veterinary Medical Association and other vet groups because of their research and development into pet nutrition, publication of peer reviewed papers and for employing veterinary and PhD nutritionist – those ‘attributes’ can’t save them if they don’t follow their own food safety, quality and formulation procedures!

Sunshine Mill’s ‘Voluntary’ Recall (Aflatoxin) –  

On September 2, 2020 Sunshine Mills, manufacturer of several brands of pet food issued the first wave of recalls due to dangerously high levels of aflatoxin. On October 8th, the second announcement expanded the 

recall to 18 brands that Sunshine Mills produced. Again, this recall was not ‘voluntary’ and was initiated after the Louisiana Department of Agriculture found elevated levels of the contaminant during routine testing. The department then issued a stop sale order on the product in the state of Louisiana, which then triggered the ‘voluntary’ recall by Sunshine Mills.  This again is another example of a company either not testing inbound ingredients and/or outbound product for safety and adequacy. This is yet another example of a large recall that also could have been prevented!

Midwestern Pet Foods ‘Voluntary’ Recall (Aflatoxin)

Most recently on December 30, 2020 Midwestern Pet Foods ‘Voluntarily’ recalled several SportMix dog and cat foods due to dangerously high levels of aflatoxin. Note that this date is not too long after the Sunshine Mills recall, which should have been a clue to pet food manufacturers to ensure they were adequately testing their products and ingredients for safety and adequacy. In addition, Neogen releases contaminant reports for agricultural crops each week and because of these reports the industry was well aware of aflatoxins present from corn crops in various regions of the country. Aflatoxin, along with other common agriculture contaminants were present due to various conditions tied to the growing season. Given the Sunshine Mills recall likely from the same 2020 corn crop, Midwestern Pet Foods should have been even more aggressive in testing inbound ingredients (as should other companies using corn).

It’s likely that Midwestern Pet Foods was not inbound testing their ingredients for aflatoxin and/or outbound testing their final products. The larger problem is that Midwestern Pet Foods has indicated in the past that they do perform these types of early 2 weeks later on January 11, the recall was expanded to include well over one-thousand (1,000) lots of pet food, and additional brands. To date over 70 dogs have been reported dead and over 80 ill – which is likely to expand. Again – another deadly event that was completely preventable!

 

Summary: 

At this point you’ve probably realized a common theme – all companies were either not following their own established food safety procedures, or any quality control checks at all. You also likely noticed that none of the above companies caught their own issue – they were all discovered by outside agencies. This means that companies had released product into the marketplace without adequate food safety checks which resulted in numerous pet deaths and illnesses, and some even resulting in human illnesses. In addition, all companies issued expanded recalls, which further solidifies the point that these companies did not have or were not following sufficient quality control measures to ensure safety of their products nor knew the impact of the adulterated products in the marketplace.

A Key Takeaway

The major point is that these were ALL preventable.  If they the companies were testing inbound ingredients for aflatoxin or vitamin D the ingredients would have never enter their manufacturing facility.  If they had positive release programs for pathogens like Salmonella, the foods would have never left their facility.

What all of this means is that pet food companies that do not have such measures in place are essentially playing Russian roulette with your pet’s health and safety (and sometimes your own health). It’s our responsibility as pet owners, retailers and veterinarians to contact our pet food manufacturers and ensure that they have appropriate procedures in place and that they follow them. When they do not follow the procedures and issues arise, we need to know why and what they are doing to prevent it again.  We are human, mistakes happen.  When they cannot explain or chose to ignore the questions we ask, why should we feed or sell their foods?  The days of pet food companies lacking transparency in their ingredient sourcing and quality control are over – or at least they should be if we demand it.

About the Author: Nicole Cammack

Nicci is the founder & owner of award winning NorthPoint Pets & Company, in Connecticut. She is also the Founder & CEO of Undogmatic Inc. Her undergraduate and graduate education includes biology, chemistry, business and nutrition. She has worked in the pharmaceutical industry on multiple R&D projects and has had the privilege to learn from leading international figures in the human and pet health industry. She regularly lectures at national conferences, including federal, state, and municipal K9 events. Her current research involves identifying pathogenic risk factors and transmission among raw fed pets through a comprehensive worldwide survey.

www.northpointpets.com

www.undogmaticinc.com

Recalled Pet Food: Aflatoxin

Must Read: Aflatoxin Pet Food Recalls

/

The recall of SportMix dog and cat foods may impact you even if you’re not feeding the food being recalled.

UPDATE: JANUARY 25, 2021

The FDA released an update which indicated the recall has expanded internationally. Further, based on the number of reported deaths and illnesses as of this date this is likely the largest documented aflatoxin recall within the pet industry.

UPDATE: JANUARY 11, 2021

The FDA released an update on the original recall announcement adding over 1,000 lots of pet food manufactured by Midwestern pet. Affected foods were made in their Oklahoma facility. More than seventy deaths have been reported with an additional 80+ pets ill.

This recall indicates there are some clear quality control issues within Midwestern Pet’s manufacturing operations. As foreshadowed in the original article below, it likely meant that they were not inbound testing their ingredients for safety and adequacy. Midwestern was likely not outbound testing their final product for safety and nutritional adequacy either. The recall expansion supports this and we can expect the number of reports of ill pets to increase, as well as further expansion of this recall.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: JANUARY 1, 2021

Recently a recall of SportMix dog and cat foods due to ‘potentially fatal levels of aflatoxin’ was announced by the FDA & Midwestern Pet Foods. SportMix is manufactured by Midwestern Pet Foods who also makes well-known brands Earthborn, ProPac, Venture, Wholesomes, CanineX and most recently their ancient grain food Unrefined. The first FDA update indicated 28 dogs reported dead, and at least 8 more ill, with 70+ ill and 80+ dead as of the second announcement. It’s likely the FDA announcements will result in more reported cases.

If you are feeding SportMix, you can check the most recent FDA announcement for lot and date codes to see if your food has been recalled. If your pet is ill, be sure to contact your veterinarian right away. You can learn more about filing a Pet Food Complaint with the FDA here: Report A Complaint.

The recall was prompted when the Missouri Department of Agriculture tested multiple SportMix products which contained very high levels of aflatoxin. Currently, the Missouri Department of Agriculture and the FDA are investigating the incident to determine how and why the foods contained such high levels of aflatoxin.

What Is Aflatoxin?

Aflatoxin is produced by a mold Aspergillus flavus. Aflatoxin is dangerous at high levels, although low levels exist in common foods we and pets eat. These foods include nuts and grains (including ancient grains!) such as peanuts, and corn. In pet food, the most common culprit is corn, however numerous recalls have been announced over the years for a variety of human and pet products.

The FDA states that pets are more at risk of aflatoxin poisoning because they do not eat a varied diet like humans do. In other words, the cumulative effect of eating food with already high levels of aflatoxin makes the situation worse.

What symptoms should I look for?

The FDA States:

“Pets with aflatoxin poisoning may experience symptoms such as sluggishness, loss of appetite, vomiting, jaundice (yellowish tint to the eyes, gums or skin due to liver damage), and/or diarrhea. In some cases, this toxicity can cause long-term liver issues and/or death. Some pets suffer liver damage without showing any symptoms. Pet owners whose pets have been eating the recalled products should contact their veterinarians, especially if they are showing signs of illness.”

Why this recall should concern you:

Aflatoxin at dangerously high levels in pet food is preventable from a manufacturing standpoint. If a manufacturer is testing their inbound ingredients and outbound testing their final product, dangerously high levels of aflatoxin should never make it to the marketplace. The fact that it has been found in 9 different lots of pet food is concerning and raises several questions:

Was Midwestern inbound testing their raw ingredients to ensure that they were safe? In this case, it is likely that the ingredient containing the aflatoxin was corn.
Note: The past year there were agricultural reports indicating high levels of aflatoxin in some crops, meaning that if Midwestern was purchasing from these regions they should have been testing for aflatoxin, and other contaminants more frequently.
Was Midwestern outbound testing their final products to ensure that they were safe and nutritionally adequate?
What types of quality control does Midwestern have in place to prevent problems like this from occurring?
What steps does Midwestern take to clean machinery and storage containers in an effort to prevent cross contamination to other products made in the same facility?
What other products were made in this facility during and after the recalled product was made?
Does Midwestern hold a sample of each lot of food produced so that it may be tested if issues arise such as this?

Another Lesson?

The recall of SportMix dog and cat foods is another lesson to both retailers and pet owners that it is important to ask questions of the brand of food you feed your pets. You can learn more about those questions here. I am well aware of many who think that I’m being unreasonable when asking the questions I ask, or pushing for changes in regard to food safety and nutrition adequacy testing – but the reason why I do it is because things like this are PREVENTABLE. Sure, implementing nutritional adequacy testing is inconvienent if you’re a manufacturer – but it’s worse when pets get sick or die because you didn’t implement that testing. As a retailer it’s inconvenient to have to constantly reach out to pet food companies – but it’s worse when a pet experiences a problem because I didn’t do my homework. It’s clear that many companies do not check all the boxes, but I can do my best to support companies that are doing their best to improve. I can also educate my clients and customers on who does and does not have certain safety/nutritional adequacy measures in place. I can also tell them who refuses to answer questions!

Simply said, knowing what quality control measures a manufacturer has or does not have can make a world of difference. While we don’t know if this recall will be expanded to other lots, or even brands – it is not out of the realm of possibility. For example, if Midwestern truly did have one batch of a contaminated ingredient such as corn, and does have proper quality control measures in place (e.g. proper cleaning of machinery and storage containers to prevent cross contamination) then other products may not be affected. If they do not have adequate measures in place (or failed to follow them) it is possible other products will be affected.

In either case, the question still remains: how did the contaminated food end up in the marketplace to begin with? Was it because they were not inbound testing raw ingredients, or outbound testing the final product or both? We’ll have to wait and see.

Original Recalled Products: Date accessed: 11 January 2021 https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/outbreaks-and-advisories/fda-alert-certain-lots-sportmix-pet-food-recalled-potentially-fatal-levels-aflatoxin

Second Recall (January 11, 2021) Date accessed: 11 January 2021 https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/outbreaks-and-advisories/fda-alert-certain-lots-sportmix-pet-food-recalled-potentially-fatal-levels-aflatoxin

Date code example: Date accessed 11 January 2021 https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/outbreaks-and-advisories/fda-alert-certain-lots-sportmix-pet-food-recalled-potentially-fatal-levels-aflatoxin

Recalled Pet Food: Aflatoxin

Must Read: Aflatoxin Pet Food Recalls

/

The recall of SportMix dog and cat foods may impact you even if you’re not feeding the food being recalled.

UPDATE: JANUARY 25, 2021

The FDA released an update which indicated the recall has expanded internationally. Further, based on the number of reported deaths and illnesses as of this date this is likely the largest documented aflatoxin recall within the pet industry.

UPDATE: JANUARY 11, 2021

The FDA released an update on the original recall announcement adding over 1,000 lots of pet food manufactured by Midwestern pet. Affected foods were made in their Oklahoma facility. More than seventy deaths have been reported with an additional 80+ pets ill.

This recall indicates there are some clear quality control issues within Midwestern Pet’s manufacturing operations. As foreshadowed in the original article below, it likely meant that they were not inbound testing their ingredients for safety and adequacy. Midwestern was likely not outbound testing their final product for safety and nutritional adequacy either. The recall expansion supports this and we can expect the number of reports of ill pets to increase, as well as further expansion of this recall.

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE: JANUARY 1, 2021

Recently a recall of SportMix dog and cat foods due to ‘potentially fatal levels of aflatoxin’ was announced by the FDA & Midwestern Pet Foods. SportMix is manufactured by Midwestern Pet Foods who also makes well-known brands Earthborn, ProPac, Venture, Wholesomes, CanineX and most recently their ancient grain food Unrefined. The first FDA update indicated 28 dogs reported dead, and at least 8 more ill, with 70+ ill and 80+ dead as of the second announcement. It’s likely the FDA announcements will result in more reported cases.

If you are feeding SportMix, you can check the most recent FDA announcement for lot and date codes to see if your food has been recalled. If your pet is ill, be sure to contact your veterinarian right away. You can learn more about filing a Pet Food Complaint with the FDA here: Report A Complaint.

The recall was prompted when the Missouri Department of Agriculture tested multiple SportMix products which contained very high levels of aflatoxin. Currently, the Missouri Department of Agriculture and the FDA are investigating the incident to determine how and why the foods contained such high levels of aflatoxin.

 

What Is Aflatoxin?

Aflatoxin is produced by a mold Aspergillus flavus. Aflatoxin is dangerous at high levels, although low levels exist in common foods we and pets eat. These foods include nuts and grains (including ancient grains!) such as peanuts, and corn. In pet food, the most common culprit is corn, however numerous recalls have been announced over the years for a variety of human and pet products.

The FDA states that pets are more at risk of aflatoxin poisoning because they do not eat a varied diet like humans do. In other words, the cumulative effect of eating food with already high levels of aflatoxin makes the situation worse.

 

What symptoms should I look for?

The FDA States:

“Pets with aflatoxin poisoning may experience symptoms such as sluggishness, loss of appetite, vomiting, jaundice (yellowish tint to the eyes, gums or skin due to liver damage), and/or diarrhea. In some cases, this toxicity can cause long-term liver issues and/or death. Some pets suffer liver damage without showing any symptoms. Pet owners whose pets have been eating the recalled products should contact their veterinarians, especially if they are showing signs of illness.”

 

Why this recall should concern you:

Aflatoxin at dangerously high levels in pet food is preventable from a manufacturing standpoint. If a manufacturer is testing their inbound ingredients and outbound testing their final product, dangerously high levels of aflatoxin should never make it to the marketplace. The fact that it has been found in 9 different lots of pet food is concerning and raises several questions:

  • Was Midwestern inbound testing their raw ingredients to ensure that they were safe? In this case, it is likely that the ingredient containing the aflatoxin was corn.
    • Note: The past year there were agricultural reports indicating high levels of aflatoxin in some crops, meaning that if Midwestern was purchasing from these regions they should have been testing for aflatoxin, and other contaminants more frequently.
  • Was Midwestern outbound testing their final products to ensure that they were safe and nutritionally adequate?
  • What types of quality control does Midwestern have in place to prevent problems like this from occurring?
  • What steps does Midwestern take to clean machinery and storage containers in an effort to prevent cross contamination to other products made in the same facility?
  • What other products were made in this facility during and after the recalled product was made?
  • Does Midwestern hold a sample of each lot of food produced so that it may be tested if issues arise such as this?

 

Another Lesson?

The recall of SportMix dog and cat foods is another lesson to both retailers and pet owners that it is important to ask questions of the brand of food you feed your pets. You can learn more about those questions here. I am well aware of many who think that I’m being unreasonable when asking the questions I ask, or pushing for changes in regard to food safety and nutrition adequacy testing – but the reason why I do it is because things like this are PREVENTABLE. Sure, implementing nutritional adequacy testing is inconvienent if you’re a manufacturer – but it’s worse when pets get sick or die because you didn’t implement that testing.  As a retailer it’s inconvenient to have to constantly reach out to pet food companies – but it’s worse when a pet experiences a problem because I didn’t do my homework. It’s clear that many companies do not check all the boxes, but I can do my best to support companies that are doing their best to improve. I can also educate my clients and customers on who does and does not have certain safety/nutritional adequacy measures in place. I can also tell them who refuses to answer questions!

Simply said, knowing what quality control measures a manufacturer has or does not have can make a world of difference. While we don’t know if this recall will be expanded to other lots, or even brands – it is not out of the realm of possibility. For example, if Midwestern truly did have one batch of a contaminated ingredient such as corn, and does have proper quality control measures in place (e.g. proper cleaning of machinery and storage containers to prevent cross contamination) then other products may not be affected. If they do not have adequate measures in place (or failed to follow them) it is possible other products will be affected.

In either case, the question still remains: how did the contaminated food end up in the marketplace to begin with? Was it because they were not inbound testing raw ingredients, or outbound testing the final product or both?  We’ll have to wait and see.[vc_single_image image=”4225″ img_size=”large”]Original Recalled Products: Date accessed: 11 January 2021 https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/outbreaks-and-advisories/fda-alert-certain-lots-sportmix-pet-food-recalled-potentially-fatal-levels-aflatoxin[vc_single_image image=”4226″ img_size=”large”]Second Recall (January 11, 2021) Date accessed: 11 January 2021 https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/outbreaks-and-advisories/fda-alert-certain-lots-sportmix-pet-food-recalled-potentially-fatal-levels-aflatoxin[vc_single_image image=”4227″ img_size=”large”]Date code example: Date accessed 11 January 2021 https://www.fda.gov/animal-veterinary/outbreaks-and-advisories/fda-alert-certain-lots-sportmix-pet-food-recalled-potentially-fatal-levels-aflatoxinAbout the Author

Nicole is the founder & owner of award winning NorthPoint Pets & Company, in Connecticut. She is also the Founder & CEO of Undogmatic Inc. Her undergraduate and graduate education includes biology, chemistry, business and nutrition. She has worked in the pharmaceutical industry on multiple R&D projects and has had the privilege to learn from leading international figures in the human and pet health industry. She regularly lectures at national conferences, including federal, state, and municipal K9 events. Her current research involves identifying pathogenic risk factors and transmission among raw fed pets through a comprehensive worldwide survey.

www.northpointpets.com

 

www.undogmaticinc.com

Why You Can’t Rely on the Guaranteed Analysis of Pet Food

/

Pet owners, veterinarians and retailers often rely on the guaranteed analysis (GA) of pet foods to help determine if the food provides adequate nutrition and to assess quality. Is this a good way to evaluate foods? The GA provides percentages – but does it tell us anything about the grams of protein, fat or other amount of other nutrients like calcium?

The short answer is no. The long answer is more concerning because the percentages listed on the GA are listed in terms of minimums and maximum which really just means that the GA provides an estimate of 4 main nutrients – protein, fat, moisture and crude fiber (not total fiber) which is misleading at best. It doesn’t even tell you the amount of animal or plant-based protein. In fact, a carefully crafted GA can make some of the worst pet foods look better than they are and be used as a tool to charge a high price tag despite low quality. Some GA’s will provide more information, but those values are usually optional and equally deceptive.

So how are pet owners and others supposed to evaluate pet food if the GA doesn’t provide the whole picture? The answer is: as a consumer or pet food retailer you have to ask questions.

What does the Guaranteed Analysis Provide?

We’ve established that the GA doesn’t tell you anything about the actual content of the food, but why is that? For example, looking at the GA of ‘Kibble A’ stating 24% protein and ‘Canned Food B’ stating 8.5% protein (table 1) – which food has a higher protein per serving? If you take the time to either do the nutrition math or contact the company for answers you’ll find that kibble A has 6.64 grams of protein per 100 calories and Canned Food B has 6.78 grams of protein per 100 calories (table 2).

Are you surprised to learn that the wet food has higher protein despite the large difference in percentage in protein? So are most pet owners, retailers and even some veterinarians. This is why advice to feed foods under or over a certain fat and protein percentage is severely flawed. It becomes even more problematic if you contact the company only to determine that they are unable to provide you with a full nutrient analysis of their food which would more accurately describe protein, fat and carbohydrate levels, but also vitamins and minerals.

Guaranteed Anylasis Comparison:
Guaranteed Analysis Kibble A Canned Food B
Crude Protein % 24% Min. 8.5% Min.
Crude Fat % 14% Min. 5.5% Min.
Crude Fiber % 5% Max. 1.5% Max.
Moisture % 10% Max. 78% Max.
Calories/Cup 378 451

Table 1

Nutrients in Grams

(per 100 calories)

 Kibble A Canned Food B
Crude Protein 6.62 grams 6.78 grams
Crude Fat 3.86 grams 4.39 grams
Crude Fiber 1.38 grams 1.2 grams

Table 2

Looking at these tables you’ll see that even though the canned food has a lower percentage of protein and fat, it is higher in grams of protein and fat per 100/calories.

For crude fiber, this is percentage is not representative of the total fiber within the diet. In fact, this is a small portion of the total dietary fiber. Don’t believe me? A 2019 FDA report shows that Total Dietary Fiber (TDF) can be as much as 3-4 times higher than the crude fiber listed on the GA. So is crude fiber on the GA misleading? You bet!

What about the minimums (min.) and maximums (max.) listed on food labels?

Even more confusing is that you’ll often see ‘min’ or ‘max’ following protein, fat, fiber or moisture – meaning that the value could be higher or lower than the number you actually see. This number could actually vary quite a bit, which also means that the calorie content of said food could also vary widely from what is listed on the label. This also means that our example above is also a guestimate – at best. This is why asking for the ‘typical nutrient analysis’ is so important!

 

Understanding Moisture’s Role in Pet Food

To put this into context, you may have heard that protein should be below a certain percent value for growing puppies, for pets with kidney disease or for some dogs with behavioral issues. Or, you may have been told to find a food with a low percentage of fat for pets with pancreatitis or liver disease. The fact is that the percentage of protein or fat tells you nothing about the actual grams of protein that is within the food.

Remember when I said that a canned food with 8.5% protein can have more protein than a dry food with 24%? This is simply because the water content makes canned foods appear lower in protein, fat or other nutrients because water makes up a greater proportion of the food. Canned foods can be comprised of 70-80% moisture where dry foods typically sit around 10%. Said differently, if you adjust the moisture level of any pet food you can shift the percentages of protein, fat and fiber significantly while the grams of those nutrients stay the same.

 

A Bit About Protein

The percentage of protein or the grams of protein still does not tell you if the protein is able to be used by your pet. There are two distinct types of protein: plant, and animal. Proteins are made up of amino acids, think of these as building blocks. Amino acids are used for countless processes within the body and are necessary for life. They can be broken down into two main categories: essential and non-essential.

The body is able to make non-essential amino acids itself, but it MUST obtain essential amino acids from the diet. Plant-based foods typically lack or have inadequate levels of essential amino acids and therefore simply replacing animal protein with plant-based protein is not an even trade. Given the cost of animal protein, pet food companies will commonly formulate foods with higher plant-based levels of protein and supplement essential amino acids either with complementary animal sources or with the addition of a supplement.

This is one of the reasons why poorly formulated plant-based diets (especially with a lack of testing) for cats and dogs could be so detrimental. Therefore, if a pet food doesn’t have adequate levels of essential amino acids then it can lead to deficiencies and serious health problems. Additionally, some non-essential amino acids may become conditionally-essential in the case of certain diseases – an example would be taurine in dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).

Label Update

What the above example shows is that the nutrition label is in need of a serious update. We now see that the GA based on percentages is a flawed model leading to a lot of misconceptions which are arguably detrimental to the pet. The GA also allows pet food companies to engage in deceptive marketing practices. A better option would be to present nutrition information in grams and milligrams for easy comparison – similar to the format of Table 2. Better yet, if companies made a full nutrition analysis (such as amino acids, fatty acids, vitamins and minerals) of their food readily available (e.g. on the company website) for consumers and veterinarians then the public would be better able to make educated decisions for their pet’s needs.

Owners, veterinarians and retailers need to ask all manufacturers for detailed information regarding the nutrient content of their formulas as well as the digestibility of the nutrients contained within it. Without evaluating these two factors there is no true way to know what the quality of the food is, regardless of how pretty the packaging is, how good the claims sound or what the company tells you. Proprietary is not an excuse for not providing these numbers either since anyone can send out a food for nutrient analysis and digestibility testing.

While these conversations take time for all parties, they are necessary in order to improve the pet industry. Pets are ultimately paying the price of untested pet food we we’ve seen in the Hill’s Vitamin D recalls, aflatoxin recalls and the DCM scare. The point is that if companies were doing their due diligence, testing these foods appropriately, each of these incidents could have been prevented.

Summary

In summary, the GA only provides scant information at best, as it supplies the estimated percentage (proportion of the food) of protein, fat, moisture and insoluble fiber. And as we learned above – it does not quantify the grams of protein, fat or carbohydrates in the food – or provide insight into the levels of vitamins or minerals. Pet food companies should be conducting full nutrient analysis of all of their formulas in order to ensure their food meets minimum nutrient requirements for the pet, but also to provide you with detailed to nutritional information so that you can make educated decisions based on your pet’s individual needs. 

About the Author: Nicole Cammack

Nicole is the founder & owner of award winning NorthPoint Pets & Company, in Connecticut. She is also the Founder & CEO of Undogmatic Inc. Her undergraduate and graduate education includes biology, chemistry, business and nutrition. She has worked in the pharmaceutical industry on multiple R&D projects and has had the privilege to learn from leading international figures in the human and pet health industry. She regularly lectures at national conferences, including federal, state, and municipal K9 events. Her current research involves identifying pathogenic risk factors and transmission among raw fed pets through a comprehensive worldwide survey.

www.northpointpets.com

 

www.undogmaticinc.com

Raw Feeding Veterinary Society

/

There is a dedicated team of veterinarians that advocate for the safe, responsible feeding of fresh, raw food for dogs and cats. These vets and other professionals are members of the Raw Feeding Veterinary Society (RFVS). Nicci is also a member of this organization as well and you can learn more about the RFVS here: https://rfvs.info/about-us/

Little Known fact, does your dog kiss your face?

Little Known Fact:

/

Do you let your pet kiss your face? We’re guilty! But we’ve heard some say this could be dangerous.

We were curious about where science stood on this behavior, so we consulted experts in both human and animal health to find out how bad it really is to let your pet kiss you on the mouth.

https://www.petnews.com.au/research/how-unsanitary-is-it-to-kiss-your-pet-on-the-mouth/

Cats Domesticated Themselves: Of course they did!

/

Though everyone might not agree on cats’ perfection, felines are among the most popular pets in the world today, with approximately 74 million cats living in U.S. homes.

The cat has long been important to human societies as a pest-control agent, object of symbolic value and companions. However, recent evidence from feline DNA shows they took their time domesticating themselves.

 

Article     |     Scientific Publication (Open Access)

Science of ‘Sense’ – how does your pet see the world?

/

There has always been debate about how and what dogs and cats can see. The reality? Dogs & cats don’t see as clearly as humans, and they’re lacking in the color department. However, they can see movement better than we can.

Learn Something New

One Health Initiative

/

One Health is an approach that recognizes that the health of people is closely connected to the health of animals and our shared environment. 

 

The World is changing, COVID has accelerated that change in countless ways. I believe that the unprecedented collaboration between disciplines and scientists from all over the world will be looked at as one of the most incredible feats in our modern world.  My hope is that this collaboration (and open access to scientific literature) continues and inspires other professionals to integrate their practices and their knowledge to work together to improve the lives of humans, animals and the environment. In fact, there is something called the One Health Initiative which aims to do just that.

So, what does this mean for us and our pets? What does it mean for nutrition? The reality is that there are numerous research gaps when it comes to nutrition, and even more when it comes to companion animal nutrition. The environment and how we interact with it also has a significant impact on the health of all living things. Much of the research we rely on for canine and feline supplementation, or management of disease is rooted in human research.

Many medical and nutrition professionals have recognized these significant gaps in human and animal medicine and nutrition. Livestock nutrition is arguably the most advanced of all nutrition sciences, followed by human nutrition, and it is frustrating to see the lack of knowledge sharing & collaboration between those and companion animal fields. This is a significant issue because it leaves treatment gaps for canines and felines such as cognitive dysfunction, allergies, gastrointestinal issues, diabetes, heart disease and more.

The One Health Initiative has provided individuals in many disciplines to collaborate and advance multiple fields of science to study and advance knowledge of zoonotic diseases, antimicrobial resistance, food safety and security and environmental factors. We look forward to providing updates and perspective on this initiative in the future.

The One Health Initiative provides opportunity for collaboration between veterinary and human physicians and researchers to advance both fields.

Source: https://onehealthinitiative.com/about/[vc_single_image image=”3888″ img_size=”600×427″ onclick=”custom_link” link=”https://onehealthinitiative.com/about/”]

The Big Miss: Is No-Hide® Actually Rawhide?

/

A ‘consumer advocate’ recently stirred up drama from July 2017 re-circulating an article (figure 1) claiming that Earth Animal No-Hide® treats were rawhide, again. This was on the heels of the announcement of a class-action lawsuit (figure 2) against Earth Animal Ventures (EAV) questioning the ingredients and sourcing of No-Hide® products. I didn’t think I would have to address this issue, but apparently, I do since misinformation and cherry-picked information from the original chain of events keeps circulating (if it’s on the internet it must be true, right?). Consumers and retailers alike need to see the situation for what it is, so I’ll also write this from both a retailer and consumer standpoint to provide the level of transparency I hold others to. As you read this, you’ll understand that both sides have significant issues. In fact, No-Hide® being (or not being) rawhide is hardly the issue. Instead there is a pervasive lack of transparency and misinformation from both the consumer advocate side and EAV.

Read more