Consumer activism and petfood

Comment

Comment by Debbie Phillips-Donaldson on July 10, 2009 at 8:33am

Thanks to both Frans and Jean for your comments. I'm truly sorry if my original post came across as talking down to involved pet owners, because I actually believe activism and involvement are good things and, as I mentioned in my post, can serve a valuable role of accountability. I also agree with you both that openness and transparency are good and necessary; in their absence, I believe, a lot of speculation and misinformation get spread. I hope some professionals from the petfood industry will join this comment thread and provide some perspective from within the industry.

Comment by Jean Hofve, DVM on July 9, 2009 at 1:10pm

I consider myself just that kind of activist. I am also a small animal veterinarian, and served for a time as a liaison to AAFCO, going to meetings and getting to know the players. At my first AAFCO meeting, I was shocked to discover that the people who work in the pet food industry, as well as the regulatory folks, are terrific people--dedicated, intelligent, and extremely knowledgeable--not to mention a lot of fun to hang out with! I still keep in touch with some of the wonderful friends I made at those meetings, and they are still willing to answer any questions that arise.

However, the faceless, corporate "pet food industry" suffers from many problems, and I still feel compelled to call the public's attention to "bad behavior" by the industry in general and certain companies in particular. It's very clear, for instance, that the top priority for most pet food makers is profit, and the well-being of pets is in a very distance second place. I take issue with a great deal of advertising that I believe to be misleading. The industry's continued promotion of dry food as good for dental health, when this "myth" has been proven over and over to be false, is just one example.

If any pet food manufacturer were truly interested in making foods that are good for pets, they would not be making dry cat food at all (since it's a major contributor to obesity, feline diabetes and a long list of other nutrition-related disorders--helpfully listed in a veterinary nutrition textbook produced by Hill's), or food containing questionable or outright harmful ingredients (fluoride is the current kerfuffle; but fish and poultry by-products--associated with feline hyperthyroidism; as well as meat and bone meal and animal fat--the ingredients proven by the FDA as likely to contain pentobarbital--certainly fit the description). They would not substitute cheap plant proteins for the meat needed by our carnivorous friends.

Much of what we know about pet nutrition has come through tragic experience when pets suffer and die. Remember how we found out about minimum levels of nutrients like taurine and potassium--in pets who were being fed "complete and balanced" foods while they were dying because of those foods? What else don't we know that we will find out the hard way? As cheaper ingredients and even cheaper sources are found that will increase profits, I'm afraid we're about to discover a whole lot more about what pets need, and pets will pay the price of that knowledge.

So to those working in the pet food industry, I respect you as individuals and in many cases consider you friends; but as long as your companies continue to put out poor quality products and misleading advertising, you can bet that I'll be there putting out the truth to consumers.

Comment by Frans Hoffman on July 7, 2009 at 3:47pm

As a pet owner, I find myself enjoying the sight of more and more brands of pet food disappearing from he shelves of pet stores in California.

I love competition, don't get me wrong. But I love my pets more than I love the pet food industry. Unfortunately, the pet food industry has shown itself unable to have both competition and safety standards. Self-regulation does not work, overseers are sleeping at the wheel. Animals continue to die...

Fortunately, especially thanks to social media, consumers are in a stronger position to swiftly punish those producers who - blinded by corporate greed - continue to add harmful ingredients to their products, be it melamine, zinc or whatever. After driving the puppy mills out of the pet stores, consumers are now increasingly holding all pet food producers accountable.

From a business perspective, getting rid of the 'bad apples' should be a desirable development. The net result will be a smaller, but much more effective industry that truly understands that customer loyalty ends if their products becomes harmful to the health of pets. When and if our pet food standards begin to approach the higher standards of the European Union, the pet food industry might even begin to rebuild consumer trust and confidence. Only on the basis of trust can the pet food industry get back to a profitable relationship between producers and consumers. Until then the current antagonism will continue to sharpen...

Personally, I have been buying a particular brand (that recently started a recall) since the mid 90s. It used to be premium pet food. In 2007 this brand escaped the impact of the melamine poisoning of pet food. I was a happy customer. I had made the right choice of pet food for my animals. Or so I thought...

Unfortunately, while the melamine poisoning erupted, a huge conglomerate bought up the company whose brand I was purchasing. Apparently, problems surfaced almost immediately and from 2007 onward the number of complaints about this company have grown.

Once again, unhappy customers are posting their experiences online.
Once again, veterinarians do not seem to be able to get straight answers from corporate headquarters.

Today the reputation of this company's brand has - quite rightly - been destroyed. And with it went my trust and loyalty.

Along with thousands of others I have switched to another brand and thankfully the symptoms were reversed with the help of excellent veterinary care and supplements etc. Along with many others I have talked with the local pet store employees. In the last couple of months a dozen or so brands have been removed from the shelves. They did NOT have a recall. They just do not meet the consumer's standards.

So, please, do not talk down at us and call us 'activists' - we are the consumers that finance your industry, including this web site.

One important step forward the pet food industry should take today is to 'open the books': publish your research and open it up for scientific scrutiny by independent scientists and labs. If you did your due diligence, surely, you have nothing to be afraid of.

The pet food industry and its mouthpieces such as Petfood-Connection will only make progress and serve the interests of both the consumers and the producers if it discusses the real problems honestly and openly and empowers consumers to see all the research.

Remember, at the end of the day market forces will prevail.
If consumers do not buy, you, the pet food industry, won't sell...