TheCatSite.com › Forums › Our Feline Companions › Cat Nutrition › Consumer Paid-For Nutro Testing Results
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Consumer Paid-For Nutro Testing Results - Page 2  

post #31 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auntie Crazy View Post
June 20, 2009: A concerned pet owner provided pfpsa.org with funds and a variety of unrecalled dry cat food samples, which we received in ziplock bags, to have tested through the Washington Animal Disease Diagnostic Lab. Toxicology testing is done through WADDL by the Analytical Sciences Laboratory University of Idaho. We tested 5 samples believed to be three each of Nutro, one Wellness and one Purina. The tests show two of the three Nutro samples contained zinc at levels that would be illegal for sale in the European Union, at 270 ppm and 380 ppm. The third Nutro sample came in at 230 ppm. Purina and Wellness both came in at 190 ppm, which is still 40 ppm higher than the European Union’s recommended maximum of 150 ppm. The huge variation in Nutro results suggests very poor consistency and quality control. From one bag to the next, it’s about like playing Russian Roulette. It’s important to keep in mind pet food is typically the only thing our pets eat, day in and day out, month after month, year after year. Chronic exposure to over supplemented food, especially metals, hasn’t been studied enough to justify over supplementation as an industry standard.

pfpsa.org/testresults

Washington Animal Disease Diagnostic Lab

In addition, there is yet another instance of a cat dead of zinc poisoning, as reported here on Pet Connection's blog. See post #191. The cat's zinc levels were twice normal.

I can't for the life of me understand why anyone is still denying that there's a problem.
The link you and the pfpsa provide to WADDL states that zinc testing can only be done on serum, plasma, liver, kidney, or pancreas tissue samples. Using a test designed for tissue samples on dry food is not the appropriate way to measure metal contents in a food sample. I have emailed WADDL about this form of testing, and am interested to hear what they have to say.

Please provide evidence that elevated zinc levels in cats causes fatality - the available information and research suggests the opposite, and if you are claiming death from zinc poisoning, I assume you have actual data to support this, and are not just trying to stir up a panic among consumers.
post #32 of 42
I am beginning to understand, at least in part, why the pets I had on the farm lived such long and healthy lives. The majority of their diet consisted of table scraps and what they could catch to eat. All of my pets as a child lived to ripe old ages with no health concerns. Of course I am sure at least in part it was also due to all the exercise running around outside and the clean air.
post #33 of 42
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Februa View Post
...Please provide evidence that elevated zinc levels in cats causes fatality - the available information and research suggests the opposite, and if you are claiming death from zinc poisoning, I assume you have actual data to support this, and are not just trying to stir up a panic among consumers.
*I* didn't claim anything, as the post clearly states, the vet who cared for the now dead cat ran the necessary tests to determine the (doubled) zinc levels. Anyone who reads the actual blog will see this.

As for what particular zinc levels are needed to produce a dead cat - why should I do that research for you? There's a whole slew of folks over on the Itchmo forums who are tackling that issue, feel free to pop in and see what's going on.

My intent here is to alert cat-owners to testing that's been done outside the Pet Food Institute's umbrella, and let THEM make their own decisions as to what to do with the info.

I am NOT here to argue with folks who want to continue feeding a particular food; you want to feed it, feed it! Since I don't serve commercial, it'd be pretty hard for me to convince you one brand is better than another.

Not to mention, some folks have very little choice in what they can put down in front of their kitties. Their feline friends refuse other foods or they've got financial concerns or maybe geographical constraints.... there are as many reasons people feed their cats a particular food as there are people who own cats. It'd be a waste of resources to try to convince them all that one can of food is better than another!!!

I'm simply here to disseminate info so that caring pet-owners, like you and everyone else on this board, can take that info into consideration the next time you're standing in the middle of the pet-food aisle.

And insulting me is only going to encourage me.
post #34 of 42
You are right - we can all quote things we read on the internet, but we must also be very careful not to "assume" it is all 100% correct.

As with anything in life, do your own research and make your own decisions. I've never been a big fan of scientific testing anyway - they can skew the results in any direction they want -depending on where their research monies are coming from.
post #35 of 42
I don't have any experience with the testing. I do know that I added a bag of the Nutro Natural Adult to my cat's usual Nutro Natural weight control it was about 2 weeks before the recall. Jordan stopped eating. Jordan has had many problems, so his system is very sensitive to this type of thing. I took Jordan to the vet all blood work was normal, we was constpated, but an enima did not help. He still would not eat the dry food. I have no proof that I had a recalled bag, since I had already thrown the bag out, but since I switched to TOTW his appitite returned. It is possible Jordan was just having a sensitive tummy problem, but it just seems Odd to me. That was all the motivation I needed to switch foods.
post #36 of 42
You know, some of this might carry more weight for people if any citations were made outside the "Itchmo/Richard Earl-Alliance/Pet Connection/consumeraffairs.com" circle. Right now it's just watching the same people wind themselves up, quoting from the same small pool of supposed data, without providing one iota of verifiable information.

For those who truly believe this, who have good hearts and good intentions, their contentions are weakened by lack of citation and refusal to supply even basic documentation, IMO. And, for those who have seen how companies with allegedly deep pockets can be targeted, simply because they appear to have cash reserves, well, you have to wonder what the agenda is for the folks involved in making non-substantiated allegations - well, we know about consumeraffairs.com, as a front for attorneys looking to file class action suits, whether they are likely to prevail or not. Some suits are filed just because they hope a company will settle with them, not because they know they actually have a good case. Those are the attorneys who give all others a bad name, IMO - and those are the attorneys who prey on emotion and irrational discourse.

Of course, when it comes down to it, it's an odd business model that includes planning to kill off your customers over a relatively short term, don't you think? As odd a business model as that which refuses to supply reasonable documentation, to my mind.
post #37 of 42
Thread Starter 
*sigh*

The Pet Connection folks are COMPLETELY unrelated to the other folks. And I dare you to tell any of the blog writers they aren't. They don't even LIKE consumers affairs! http://www.petconnection.com/blog/20...food-safe-yet/ The individual who posted about his cat that died with double the normal zinc levels did not and has not, to my knowledge, contacted any of the other sites you mentioned. That is solely a Pet Connection link.

Itchmo has HUNDREDS of members, many of whom lost pets in the 2007 poisoning. Like me, that's all the doggone motivation they need to start paying attention to what goes into the food they feed their beloved family members. They have no spooky ulterior motives. Neither they, nor I, are out to get the big bad corporation wolves, we just want safe pet food on the shelves.

Don Earl lost Chuckles in early 2007. Chuckles meant everything to him. He has spent HUNDREDS of dollars in litigation and in testing, two entirely different issues. The litigation is his response to Chuckles death; it is NOT going to make him a millionaire, in fact, it's quite likely to be the opposite, and he knows this. His reasons for continuing are on his sites; personally, I think he's a very courageous individual, fighting an enormously tough fight for all the cats and dogs who died from eating foods their owners thought were good for them.

As for the testing, Don doesn't do these tests himself, he sends the samples out to certified labs for that. What would be the profit in the technicians skewing the results? I find that to be a fairly weird accusation; I don't even know how to respond to it. And no one variety or vendor is being targeted, the tests are all across the board. Surely you realize Wellness and Nutro have nothing in common? Well, other than the public's desire to know what's in the food, of course.

If you wish to believe that these four separate entities/organizations/communities are secretly in cahoots to make a buck off the entire Pet Food Industry, there's certainly nothing I can say that will convince you otherwise. But just in case there's some truth in some of these reports and tests, why don't you ease up a bit on the acrimony? These are good people who have lost animals they love and are trying to make sure it doesn't happen to anyone else. If you can't/won't support them, at least ease off on attacking them.
post #38 of 42
It's wonderful that you and some others believe in this fellow, but until I see some information from a recognized testing lab, I won't be giving him any of my hard-earned money. This Itchmo site - is it really all that reliable? I have to admit I do not know much about it.

Honestly, as in everything, there are reliable pet food companies and then the others.

I also agree with Darlii - if that many cats were dying, I'm pretty sure someone, even a group as bad as Peta, would have made it public.
post #39 of 42
Thread Starter 
Ok, so I did some looking around on the PFPSA site to help answer some of the questions in this thread. Here's what I pulled together:

CAVEAT: This is not all-inclusive, just a quick run-through. Some of this is copied and pasted, some is re-worded to shorten the text.

PFPSA has either paid for the following tests or received copies of the results from a consumer who paid for the testing after dealing with a sick animal (cat and dog food has been tested) http://www.pfpsa.org/news.html:
2009
--Nutro - two of three samples contained zinc at 270 ppm and 380 ppm, levels that would be illegal for sale in the European Union. The third sample came in at 230 ppm.
--Wellness & Purina - Zinc came in at 190 ppm
--Nutro Max Cat - Zinc at 38 times the amount of zinc recommended by the National Research Council
2008
--Nutro Natural Choice Chicken Meal - e-coli, salmonella, and listeria, aflatoxin, all non-detected. Copper was approx 2 and 3 times higher than AAFCO recommendations. Zinc over 4 times the recommended amount
--Nutro Max Cat Gourmet Classicsr" - positive for cyanuric acid
--Fancy Feast - Ethylene glycol and DEG were not detected. Organic acids were undetected at a level of sensitivity of 1,000 ppm, with the exception of lactic acid, which was present in the food at 2,200 ppm.
--Fancy Feast - no unknown toxins and below detectable limits for peroxide and mercury
--Evangers pheasant and brown rice - Solanine and Aflatoxin tested negative. Copper levels were approximately twice the recommended level for dogs.
--Hill's Science Diet (test not requested by PSPSA) - positive for cyanuric acid and melamine
2007
--Waggin Trails Brand Chicken Jerky Dog Treats - Unknown Toxin Scan and Radiation by Geiger Counter both non-detected.
--Hills Science Diet - Acetaminophen only, non-detected
--Frisky's - No foreign objects found
--Special Kitty - positive for acetaminophen and melamine

The following labs were used for the above testing:
Washington Animal Disease Diagnostic Lab.
Analytical Sciences Laboratory University of Idaho
ExperTox Inc. Analytical Laboratory
MidWest Laboratories Inc.
Bodycote Testing Group
Silliker JR Laboratories, ULC

PFPSA is not (that I could find) involved in any group litigation, nor does it ask for anyone to join any litigation cases. It DOES say that litigation has it's place in forcing change - but that's nothing more than the truth - and mentions at least one case (I think) that someone else has or is putting together.

Here's a paragraph reference the finances:
"June 14, 2008: ..... Pfpsa.org has been helping pet owners with testing pet food suspected in a pet's illness for almost nine months now. At this time, we felt it would be appropriate to make information on donations and expenses available to persons interested in the progress of this start up phase of the effort. Through June 8, 2008, pfpsa.org has received $2454 in donations and our expenses totaled $2116. To date, pfpsa.org has been operated strictly through the efforts of volunteers. As a result, we're proud to report that 95% of all funds donated to the effort have been applied directly to the project's objectives, with the remainder going to merchant services for processing contributions."

- - - - - - - -
Itchmo is my first go-to for recall information and pet food product issues. I've been a member of the forum since early 2007 and I deeply respect the efforts those people put into delving into nitty gritty details. Are they passionate about what they're doing? You bet, but that doesn't invalidate the info they're collecting. Itchmo has enough respect that Pet Food personnel come and discuss issues with board members.

Finally, I found another site that tracks recalls (both human and animal) and conducts it's own research as well as interviews of the parties involved:http://efoodalert.blogspot.com/.

Ok, *whew*, I'm out of breath!

I think my final thought here would be - just be aware folks. Keep up with Itchmo, check out Pet Connection every now and again, get the efoodalerts sent automatically, then find your own comfort level with the information you're receiving. Don't panic, but don't buy blindly either.
post #40 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Auntie Crazy View Post


I think my final thought here would be - just be aware folks.
Don't panic, but don't buy blindly either.
This is my thinking also ... NO company or human is perfect ...
post #41 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yosemite View Post
It's wonderful that you and some others believe in this fellow, but until I see some information from a recognized testing lab, I won't be giving him any of my hard-earned money. This Itchmo site - is it really all that reliable? I have to admit I do not know much about it.

Honestly, as in everything, there are reliable pet food companies and then the others.

I also agree with Darlii - if that many cats were dying, I'm pretty sure someone, even a group as bad as Peta, would have made it public.
Agreed with the cat s dying ... though many more likely did from the 2007 recall but cannot be proven ... I love proof , in this case the company caught it though not prior to the food hitting the market ... I hope with the testing places taking in samples( some do not charge ) that AFFCO and USDA can get some maximums to go with their minimums..
Itchmo is a group of pet parents who are like us in wanting the best for their pets , many lost animals in 2007 from the recalled foods so they are very interested in Preventing another recall like that and want more oversight and accountability
post #42 of 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by sharky View Post
Itchmo is a group of pet parents who are like us in wanting the best for their pets , many lost animals in 2007 from the recalled foods so they are very interested in Preventing another recall like that and want more oversight and accountability
Thanks Jennifer. The only thing I worry about is the fact that it is made up of "regular" pet parents that may not be as educated as they would have you believe, i.e., they read "this" here, and "that" there and believe it word-for-word and then there are those who are looking for some kind of "proof" in order to sue the big companies who have all that money and why shouldn't I have some.

It takes serious proof for me to believe everything I see or hear, especially when the people/organizations are asking for my money.

I mean, seriously, Bijou has cost us $1,000 just in the last year and this new operation is going to be a minimum of $500 and if they need anaesthesia then over $600. This isn't something easy to afford but I'm not out there asking for money. I'm very wary of charities as well, I used to give to MADD until I found out that very little of the money actually went to the charity - the major portion of donations goes to "administration". I believe in the principal but not in the way the charity is run.

ETA: I'm going to close this thread as there really isn't anything new being added. The information pro and con is here for anyone to see and then make up their own mind whether this is credible or not.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Cat Nutrition
This thread is locked  
TheCatSite.com › Forums › Our Feline Companions › Cat Nutrition › Consumer Paid-For Nutro Testing Results