Mortality/Morbidity Stats?

I agree that all the $#@&*!! glutens (*hating* that word) must be tested now, no matter if the prior food was deemed 'safe'.

What I am wondering is....if really none of these grains were thoroughly tested before the recall started, how does anyone one what trace contaminants have been in them all along? WHen I say 'trace' I mean such minimal amounts as being nearly immeasurable (ppm?) I can only imagine what is 'allowable' when it comes to regulation, let alone what isn't even caught.

That said, in light of the most recent recalls voluntary or not, has the FDA or any group documented deaths? (after the first wave of recalls)? And of course, who can ascertain when cats/ dogs developed an illness and from which recall and which culprit ingredient?

Believe me I would rather NOT see numbers. Earlier I happened to read some of the blogged pet losses on some site, and I suddenly burst into tears.

But it does make me wonder if companies are now so paranoid they are testing every questionable ingredient, one by one (which isn't a bad thing) but of course this leads to panic and outrage at findings. And if contaminants were just 'there all along'---just...ACK!

Yes it is likely as in human food s some conminates are alway s present ... it is just mass production on a whole... Many went to smaller food companies and then we find out they share plants .... 90% of wet pet food being manufactured FOR companies by ONE is a modern version of THE JUNGLE a book about meat processing

Such an awful way to get a wake up call.

It's something I think a lot of people sort of *know* but it's not something we put in the forefront of our mind. Because if we did think about the big picture (being oh so very big) we'd be drooling in our fruit loops.

It's worrisome enough thinking about human food regulation (another thing we cant' worry about or again...the drooling, the fruit loops). We passively accept, to a degree, an 'accepted level' of contaminants. Gross to actually type that out, but it is what it is.

The room starts to spin when I think about the actual room for error regarding those accepted levels, and what is *not* caught.

Not sure if all the answers will ever be available on this one. The recalls all bleeding into one, with no clear resolution, and who is tracking pet illness and deaths?

Blech.

I just read what I typed and gave myself a headache.

so does anyone have any actual stats of the death rates this has caused (obviously there are numerous unreported/unknown cases....but what about the ones that have been reported and autopsied?)

Starry~~

Sadly I don't think that information *IS* documented. Based on some talks I have had with vets from past and present, there has been no streamlined recorded info. Of course far too many animals have been affected by the recalls. Was a entire grain processing distribution tainted naturally or tampered with? Are the new recalls a result of random testing or pet illness? Doesn't that then ask--what other foods are possibly tainted then?

Think about it; it's nearly impossible to know when symtoms truly first started, in which pets linked to which recall, if it WAS linked to that specific recall at that specific time...and for many pets being seen prior to any recall...autopsies certainly werent' normal p&p unless specifcally requested....and...

....oh dear lord I just gave myself another headache. I can't re-explain this well at all.

it's just a total maze of winding cases now. It's so convoluted that it actually makes it easier to 'hide' stats and where things actually went wrong, and continued to go wrong.

Some vets have compiled info and backtracked but it's not easy to do. ANd not every veterinary setting is obligated to do so. Many pets never even SAW a vet, no doubt (as awful as this reality is). Many animals may not even have BEEN 'pets' per se, kwim?

Every day this just blows my mind more and more.