Pet Supply Verified Weblog

Soon after Menu Foods announced the beginnings of the petfood recall in March 2007, lawsuits were filed against them alleging that they knew about the problem the previous month and that many pets were harmed in the interim. There were 120 lawsuits filed in many different states and lawyers recently acknowledged that a settlement might be near.

It has been one year since the massive pet food recalls of spring 2007. We now know that an outbreak of pet food induced illness and death in Asia in 2004 was also caused by contamination of grains by melamine and cyanuric acid. If only this had been known prior to the 2007 outbreak, the cause certainly would have been identified sooner.

Melamine was added to grains by Chinese manufacturers to artificially raise the tested level of protein in the ingredient. This allowed the ingredient to pass specifications, although it was not truly the correct ingredient at all. The melamine alone is not toxic, but in combination with cyanuric acid, another chemical by-product that was also present in the grain, the two lead to kidney failure.

In 2004, a massive outbreak, affecting 6,000 dogs and an unknown number of cats in Asia was linked back to dog and cat foods manufactured by Mars Inc in Thailand. Researchers could not identify the cause and thought that a fungal toxin was the most likely culprit.

Fungal toxins were also on the list of possible contaminants during the spring 2007 recall, affecting more than 1,000 types of pet food here in the US. Researchers at University of Georgia and also at Mars Incorporated identified the same crystals that were found in the animals that died last spring in retained samples from the 2004 outbreak in Asia.

Greg Aldrich, a consultant with Pet Food & Ingredient Technologies, does not believe that this knowledge would have prevented the recall last spring since the ingredients were sourced from Thailand in the 2004 Asia outbreak. However, it seems likely that scientists might have known to look for this compound earlier in the situation if a previous outbreak had been recorded.

It seems that the past few weeks have been full of recalls or alarming announcements from the human food industry, mainly on meat products for bacterial contamination. The largest hamburger patty recall in history has led to the closing of Topps, the country’s largest producer of these patties. Approximately 21 million pounds of patties were recalled for E. coli contamination. This contamination and its link to illnesses, primarily in the northeast, are still being investigated by the FDA. Now in the news is the shut down of a ConAgra plant in Missouri because of possible Salmonella contamination in pot pies. Proper handling and cooking should destroy the bacteria and the product is not being recalled, pending an investigation.

It is good not to hear any new recall or product concern announcements from the pet food industry for more than one or two days. This break gives manufacturers time to focus on their products, future projects, and future plans for quality and safety assurance programs. We’ll discuss some pet health issues until something else arises in the news that impacts the pet food industry.

Thanks again to David Primrose, for another contribution to our Pet Supply Verified weblog.

As highlighted in another blog entry, taurine is an essential amino acid in cat nutrition. Without it “Tigger”, “Max” “Smokey” and friends would suffer from cardiac failure and blindness.

However, the role of amino acids in pet food is much wider than this. They play crucial roles in the development of flavor and color. Flavor systems are a key part of the palatability and acceptance of prepared pet foods and color plays an important role in customer acceptance.

An example of this is the generation of “meaty” flavours and golden / brown colors by the Maillard reactions that take place between amino acids and reducing sugars, for example glycine and xylose.

Without amino acids, pet food producers would need to look at alternatives to help make their products palatable and acceptable to the customer buying the products. This all takes resources in the form of time, money and people.

Whilst working for one of the biggest global pet food producers, I worked on development and approval of amino acid suppliers in China. As is often the case, the driver was to reduce costs by buying from a region where energy, raw material and labor costs were lower.

Although I don’t know the statistics, over recent years China has grown to become a significant exporter of amino acids to all external markets around the globe where pet food is manufactured.

I was very interested therefore, to read in the latest edition of “Petfood Industry” (September 2007) that some major pet food makers are reducing their ingredient buying in China or even stopping completely. In the current climate of people questioning the safety of many different types Chinese products this might seem a logical step.

Whilst there is no evidence that Chinese amino acids are not “safe” on the basis of their country of origin, they could be caught up by the general lack of faith in the “Made in China” label.

However, unless the pet food producers have complete “faith” in Chinese amino acids, have alternatives up their sleeves, or “safe” amino acid plants can instantly be opened up outside China, there will be an on-going dependency on exports from China.

Instead of the knee-jerk reaction to stop buying from China, an alternative strategy for the pet food makers is to rebuild faith and confidence in the quality of Chinese raw materials, in their own minds and those of the regulatory authorities, retailers and customers buying their pet food products.

This is where the Pet Supply Verified (PSV) program can play a role. Based on the proven USDA verification platform and with audit systems carried out by independent auditors PSV tools can be used to help rebuild faith in a verified ingredient supply for the 21st century.

The Chinese ingredient manufacturers or their trade associations could of course help this healing process and demonstrate their commitment to rebuilding confidence in the “Made in China” label by taking on board the PSV program themselves.

Apparently the FDA has not found any contaminants in the jerky treats that were under investigation for a possible link to illness in some pet dogs. It is still possible that something may be found, but not highly probable. It may be that there is nothing to find or could be that we don’t know what to look for. The good news is that the Bravo! recall of jerky treats is the (knock on wood) last pet related recall that is on the FDA website.

We are in a new era of food safety and really safety in general. The food that we feed to our pets is not exempt from the same risks and concerns that our foods are subject to. The pet food manufacturers are just as aware and concerned about these issues as you and I. The additional screenings, new quality programs (like Pet Supply Verified), and extreme vigilance on the part of pet owners and veterinarians will help quickly identify any future issues that may arise.

Thank you to David Primrose for this guest contribution to the PSV blog. David is a graduate food technologist based in the UK. He has 30 years of experience in the pet food industry both working for large manufacturers and in his own consulting business, Synergy Food Ingredients. David’s expertise is centered on critical areas of materials quality especially raw material risk assessment, development and factory implementation of new raw materials and supplier quality assurance. He also has global experience of developing, implementing, running supplier quality assurance programs and carrying out supplier audits in Europe and Asia.

For some people the desire to make money by any means is very powerful and motivates them to such an extent that they push up to and beyond the boundaries of acceptability on food safety and legality.

Many column inches have been devoted to the Chinese wheat gluten scandal in Spring 2007 but they graphically illustrate what happens when the boundaries of acceptability are pushed too far.

The assignable causes are the subject of on-going investigations by the US and Chinese authorities and are likely to involve many different factors. A key factor is the effect of protein content on the market price of commodities like wheat gluten, rice gluten and corn gluten. In simple terms, as protein level increases, the market price also increases.

This opens the door for unscrupulous individuals to find fraudulent and unethical opportunities to pump up the protein content and make a fast buck. In the case of the current scandal, this was achieved by the addition of nitrogen-rich melamine and subsequently cheaper melamine scrap to wheat gluten to artificially pump up the protein content.

There have been dire effects in the wake of the Chinese wheat gluten scandal from the farmer’s field to the feeding bowl. Ingredient manufacturers, Chinese authorities, traders, pet food manufacturers, retailers, through to the pets and their owners have all been affected.

Wide ranging knock-on effects include the execution of a senior Chinese food safety regulatory official, litigation against companies in the supply chain, the needless death of pets and loss of sales. The loss of revenue in the pet food industry alone currently runs to tens of millions of dollars.

The impact on China’s exports will be even greater and long term, as incidents like the wheat gluten scandal and others like the use of lead paint on toys, toxic diethylene glycol in toothpaste and cough syrup, illegal levels of antibiotics in shrimp etc have left many around the globe questioning safety associated with the “Made in China” declaration.

Arguably the greatest cost to the pet food industry, of the Chinese wheat gluten scandal, is the loss of confidence in the supply chain stretching all the way from farmers’ field to feeding bowl. The onus is now on the pet food industry to rebuild customers’ faith and confidence in the quality and food safety of the pet food they feed their cats and dogs. However, this process doesn’t start and end at the pet food manufacturer factory gates, it is essential that focus is throughout the supply chain.

As part of the Chinese and US authorities’ investigations into the assignable causes of the scandal, the supplier quality assurance process is under the microscope.

Supplier quality assurance (SQA) or vendor assurance (VA) provides pet food producers with evidence that the supplier is controlling both the quality (functionality) and food safety of the ingredients being supplied. There are many approaches to this, one of the most important being supplier audits, a process that has been around the pet food industry for over 25 years. Whilst it can’t protect against fraudulent procedures, it provides “due diligence defence” should you be called to court to explain how you make sure your pet food is “safe”.

The latest issue of “Petfood Industry” (September 2007) reports that melamine adulteration of Chinese wheat gluten has allegedly been on-going for many years and previously been undetected. In light of this and the fact that “formalised” supplier auditing (written supplier audit documents and reports) is over 25 years old, it is now time for the industry to look at how it carries out SQA and to update the approach to meet customers’ needs today.

Pet Supply Verified offers a range of customer focused solutions for building confidence in the pet food industry designed to meet the needs of the 21st century.

In terms of supplier quality assurance, one solution is the development of supplier audit systems based on the well established USDA verification platform used in the human food sector. Audits are then carried out at ingredient suppliers by independent, impartial auditors. Depending on customer needs, the audit system can be based on their own audit system or designed with the customer and Pet Supplied Verified independent Technical Advisory Team of industry experts and veterinarians.

Whilst it may take time for confidence to be fully restored, Pet Supply Verified provides tools to help rebuild faith in the quality and safety of pet food at all stages of the supply chain from ingredients suppliers to the feeding bowl.

I read an interesting article the other day about the recall and pet food safety. If you will recall, when the recall was first announced in the early spring 2007, it was initially not known what the toxin was that had gotten into the pet foods that were causing illness and death. It took a significant amount of effort by various laboratories and organizations to eventually discover the melamine in the pet food samples. Once the melamine was found, veterinary experts were still baffled. Melamine is thought to be a relatively non-toxic substance, so why was it causing so much trouble?

One theory that exists currently is that the Chinese manufacturers that had been using the melamine in the grain protein ingredients to boost the protein content and their profit margin decided to go one step further. They began buying “melamine scrap” instead of pure melamine. Melamine scrap is the solid waste product that comes from the manufacture of plastic using melamine. There is a significant amount of waste water that is produced in the melamine industry and this polluted water must be disposed of properly. The easiest way to dispose of it is to turn it into a solid, 70% melamine and 30% other chemicals. This solid scrap was bought up by the Chinese manufacturers and blended in with ordinary wheat flour to raise the protein to a level that is acceptable for wheat gluten.

Unfortunately, one of the chemicals that made up the 30% balance in the scrap was cyanuric acid. This acid binds to melamine and forms crystals in the kidneys of dogs and cats. These crystals caused the renal failure that was so devastating to pets in the United States and elsewhere.

I suppose someone may have gotten rich from this short-lived scheme, but more likely than not they are paying the price. If these tainted ingredients had been sold only to Chinese pet food manufacturers, it is possible that we never would have heard of this problem. The fact that they tainted pet foods here in the U.S. led to a relatively rapid (depending on your perspective on this) recall and investigation.

Apparently the issue with jerky treats for dogs is ongoing. Earlier news reported that Wal-mart pulled 2 varieties of jerky treats for dogs from their shelves because of customer complaints of pet illness. Both varieties were imported from China. Now the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA), American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine (ACVIM) and the FDA are all discussing and investigating numerous dog illnesses, possibly associated with chicken jerky treats imported from China. While the FDA does not have a lot to say about the investigation as it is still pending, they have announced that they did not detect melamine (the chemical responsible for the massive recalls of the spring 2007) and that to date they have not detected any contaminants that could be responsible for the illnesses.

The dogs that have been ill have shown lethargy, vomiting, anorexia and/or diarrhea. These symptoms do not indicate a particular condition, but can be symptoms of many different diseases. Laboratory testing shows that blood electrolytes, particularly potassium, are at abnormal levels. These dogs require potassium supplementation, potentially even after the dog goes home from the hospital. The diagnosis of a kidney disease, called Fanconi syndrome, seems to go along with these illnesses. The Fanconi syndrome results from some toxic insult to the part of the kidneys called the tubules. A urinalysis should be run to look for sugar, which is present in the urine even though it is not elevated in the blood. A history of eating jerky treats several weeks prior to the onset of the illness, along with low potassium levels in the blood and a low blood pH (acidosis) and positive urinalysis results, supports the diagnosis of a food related issue.

As the FDA investigates, it will be interesting to see if a toxin turns up in the analysis of the treats. If one does not, it is impossible to know if there is truly something in these treats that has caused the illness in these dogs. One might question whether someone is deliberately adding something to treats or foods and then observing to see what the results are. Whether this was intended to reach the shelves or not will likely never be known. This is certainly a time for heightened awareness to the things that we feed our pets, but also to the things that we eat ourselves and offer to our families to eat. I find myself wondering more and more about what will happen next. A food safety revolution is on the horizon and things must change in order for us to be confident that we have a safe food supply. Who is responsible for ensuring the food is safe? The FDA, the manufacturer, the ingredient supplier? Manufacturers and importers of human foodstuffs and pet food ingredients or products need to get programs in place to ensure to their utmost ability that the foods they are delivering to the shelves are safe and free of known contaminants.

We can’t stop relying on foreign markets to provide us with the things we need, but we can certainly add protocols to ensure the safety of those things.

The FDA announced yet another pet food recall this week. This time a raw, frozen diet for dogs and cats under the brand name Bravo! was recalled for bacterial contamination with Salmonella and Listeria. This follows the investigation announced last week of various jerky treats manufactured in China that seem to be causing unusual kidney disease in dogs and there is yet to be a determination of what is in the treats that is causing the problem.

In the May edition of Pet Age magazine, a survey of 319 pet specialty retailers revealed some interesting information. A full 69% of the retailers surveyed reported that they have experienced an increase in the sales of natural and organic pet foods. Even more interesting, 35.4% of the respondents reported an increase in the sales of fresh and raw pet foods. Maybe this increase has caught the attention of the FDA who are now being more diligent in their random testing of raw diets – thus finding these bacterial contaminations that have prompted several additional recalls in the recent past.

The good news is that Salmonella and Listeria, while they do cause illness, often do not cause serious illness except in immuno-compromised individuals. It is important to understand though, that children are considered immuno-compromised because their immune systems are not fully developed. If there are young children in the house, it would be wise to seriously consider the ramifications of a Salmonella outbreak because of the raw diet that is being fed to the pets in the house.

While many key players in the pet food industry feel that things have stabilized, it seems to me that we are in for a long-term roller coaster ride. Pet Supply Verified is offering solutions to manufacturers and ingredient suppliers to help ensure the safety of the products that are on the shelves and being fed to our pets.