Purina law suit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

Just double checked what I feed. No Propylene Glycol.

---

You better check your people food too Terry....Proplyene Glycol is in allot of the food WE eat...why ..because the FDA has deemed it safe

Quote:

---

Propylene glycol is metabolized by animals and can be used as a carbohydrate source. Propylene glycol can be ingested over long periods of time and in substantial quantities (up to 5 percent of the total food intake) without causing frank toxic effects. Propylene glycol monostearate is readily hydrolysed in vivo and the propylene glycol and fatty acid moieties enter their respective metabolic pathways. At lethal or near lethal doses (6 g per kg or more), however, it has been reported to cause kidney damage in several species and toe deformities in chicks. These doses contrast with the few mg per kg per day estimated in Section III of this report to be the human daily dietary intake of propylene glycol. The Select Committee has weighed the available information and concludes that: There is no evidence in the available information on propylene glycol and propylene glycol monostearate that demonstrates, or suggests reason to suspect, a hazard to the public when they are used at levels that are now current or that might reasonably be expected in future.

http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/script...listing&id=262

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by last5oh_302

Latest update from the FDA in regards to jerky treats.

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/.../ucm434865.htm

---

let's not gloss over that..as of last year after 3 yrs of 'extensive' studies the FDA has said:

Quote:

---

To date, testing for contaminants in jerky pet treats has not revealed a cause for the illnesses. Since 2011, in concert with Vet-LIRN, we have collected approximately 360 jerky treat samples relating to more than 165 consumer-related complaints, plus more than 240 retail samples (unopened bags obtained from a store or shipment), and performed more than 1000 tests on these samples. We also ran more than 240 tests on historical samples (those received in 2007-2011).

While we do not subject every sample to the entire battery of testing, due to limited resources and in some cases a lack of enough material to test, we target our testing based on the product and the symptoms displayed by the pet. Testing may include one or more of the following analyses:

• Salmonella
• Metals or Elements (such as arsenic, cadmium and lead, etc.)
• Markers of irradiation level (such as acyclobutanones).
• Pesticides
• Antibiotics (including both approved and unapproved sulfanomides and tetracyclines)
• Antivirals (amantadine, rimantadine, oseltamivir and others)
• Mold and mycotoxins (toxins from mold)
• Rodenticides
• Nephrotoxins (such as aristolochic acid, maleic acid, paraquat, ethylene glycol, diethylene glycol, toxic hydrocarbons, melamine, and related triazines)
• Other chemicals and poisonous compounds (such as endotoxins).

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/.../ucm371465.htm

---

This lawsuit will likely never go to court...just the fact that he had 3 dogs, different breeds all get sick all at the same time means that they were probably poisoned..yes...but the fact that he lives in an area in the country that probably sells a couple hundred thousand bags of Beneful in a week and no news organization has jump on any story of massive dogs death due to poisoning, it would likely not end up not being the dog food.

There would have to be more than one case within a lot of food to become suspicious of the product. His lawyers would have to get a good portion of the entire lot and have it tested to prove the food was the source. So far I haven't seen any other coverage than the media hype about the lawsuit and 300 people jumping on the 'class action' bandwagon.

I like to keep an open mind and nothing in Purina's history would stop me from using their products and the fact that that they are still, and remain the main sponsor the most prestigious Dog show (Westminster) means the dog community also stands behind their products.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

You better check your people food too Terry....Proplyene Glycol is in allot of the food WE eat...why ..because the FDA has deemed it safe

---

Hey, the FDA allows the sale of nicotine too. I avoid it personally. And the dog community will stand behind whoever gives them funding. No other corporations can duplicate Nestlé's marketing power. Millions of dogs live on very low quality foods and live long lives. Some/many live on table scraps. I'm not saying everything Purina makes is bad, they wouldn't have become a global pet food power if it was, what I see is ingredients I choose to avoid. I feed a quality "Canadian" made product and have no reason or feel any obligations to change.
Large corporations have risk teams that evaluate corporate exposure to law suits. What they do is factor a return on investment for a product. If the net profit after potential litigation costs is positive then often they will go to market. Large Pharma and even Automotive do this. Seeing corporate banners at most dog events just tells me they are excellent marketers. In a case like this no 2 bit lawyer will prevail over Nestlé's corporate legal resources, not going to happen. Dogs that become ill are within the margin of risk.
I also have a problem with the whole "all the top trial dogs use it" thing. I have no doubt they all use it, it's the major sponsor. But if all competitors use it how can you use it as a benchmark of performance? In fact it pretty well removes nutrition as a variable. Performance then goes to training, breeding and conditioning. If the level of nutrition for that food were to drop or improve all dogs would experience the same levels of performance, good or bad so food can't be used as much of a benchmark. If you have used the same food for 30 years how can you be certain there isn't a better one, you haven't tried it. There are automobile race circuits where all competitors drive identical Hondas for example. Doesn't mean the car is the best one just the sponsor stepping up and allowing people to pursue their chosen hobby.
I'm not a breeder, I'm not a dog food industry rep. I couldn't care less what people feed their dogs.

krakadawn,

"I actually welcome some valid discussion about dog foods, factual data welcome."

I feed my dog raw and he is as healthy as a horse.There is no big learning curve.Raw chicken carcass in the morning and a big chunk of raw meat in the evening.Whats in the raw meat,dont really know,muscle,liver,heart,bit of lung.Throw in a raw egg once a week,cut grate some raw carrots,cut up some raw kale,a little fish oil.Its not rocket science.

Its also not rocker science to do some research on the net and find hundreds of reports of recalls and dogs getting sick from commercial food.Save on vet bills and feed raw.

Hey Gilroy, sounds like it works for you. You're fortunate to have a source of chicken and raw meat.

Here's a bunch of data if you feel inclined to go through it all. The lawsuit is partially being based on this study:

Association for Truth in Pet Food announces the publication of The Pet Food Test Results. This history making project is all thanks to some very determined pet food consumers. What we found is truly shocking and sad.
There is nothing much to say – the results speak for themselves. But – and this is significant – the test results are ONLY the first step. The next very significant step is to write your state and federal representatives and ask them to investigate the condition of pet food. No petitions (please) – representatives in government need to receive hundreds of thousands of personal messages directly from pet food consumers demanding change. Information is provided below the results on how to contact your Representatives in Washington, D.C. Your state government website will provide information on how to contact your particular State Representatives. After you read the results – please take the time to email all of your federal and state government representatives.
The Pet Food Test results are provided 3 ways…

1. An infographic easy to share in social media overview of the results;
2. A two page easy to print overview of the results;
3. The full Pet Food Test Results.

http://associationfortruthinpetfood....-test-results/

This is the actual lab testing in PDF:

http://associationfortruthinpetfood....tFoodTest1.pdf

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by krakadawn

Well I guess from all this expertise I should be switching away from Purina................ Did folks really read whose behind this lawsuit....my heavens!

Everyone is welcome to feed their choice.

Almost all the Professional Trainers I know feed Purina Performance......imagine how well they could do if they switched, I'm going to tell them I learned this on the OODF.

---

Thanks krakadawn, It's put me at ease to know allot of professionals have confidence in the product that my dog has always ate.
Freaked me out when I read the OP. I'll be keeping an eye on it though. Thanks for the heads up Terrym

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by last5oh_302

Here's a bunch of data if you feel inclined to go through it all. The lawsuit is partially being based on this study: http://associationfortruthinpetfood....-test-results/

---

Not sure how old those links are....but the FDA, as of Sept 2014...found no link to the deaths/ilnesses of the dogs and Mycotoxins

Quote:

---

To date, testing for contaminants in jerky pet treats has not revealed a cause for the illnesses. Since 2011, in concert with Vet-LIRN, we have collected approximately 360 jerky treat samples relating to more than 165 consumer-related complaints, plus more than 240 retail samples (unopened bags obtained from a store or shipment), and performed more than 1000 tests on these samples. We also ran more than 240 tests on historical samples

---

http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/.../ucm371465.htm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MikePal

Not sure how old those links are....but the FDA, as of Sept 2014...found no link to the deaths/ilnesses of the dogs and Mycotoxins



http://www.fda.gov/AnimalVeterinary/.../ucm371465.htm

---

According to the site the test results were release January of this year:

http://associationfortruthinpetfood....ns-weve-taken/