Today’s Update on the Pet Food Recall—5/7/2007

The USDA has produced a report which concludes that the level of risk presented by food contaminated with melamine (and compounds associated with melamine which includes cyanuric acid) is very low. Here’s the part that I found interesting:

In the most extreme risk assessment scenario, when scientists assumed that all the solid food a person consumes in an entire day was contaminated with melamine at the levels observed in animals fed contaminated feed, the potential exposure was about 2,500 times lower than the dose considered safe. In other words, it was well below any level of public health concern.

I’m eager to see how the USDA reconciles the facts in this case with their finding. As best as I can tell these facts are

  • Some number of pets, probably between 2,000 and 7,000, have died as a result of eating contaminated food since roughly December 2006.
  • Some additional number of pets, probably around 40,000, have been injured by the same cause over the same period.
  • The suspected foods have been found to have been adulterated with melamine.
  • And, as the USDA tells us, melamine isn’t toxic enough to cause the deaths and injuries.

Possible explanations include

  • Cats and dogs are at higher risk from melamine than people.
  • The USDA is wrong or
  • Some contaminant other than melamine is responsible for the deaths and injuries.

That, basically, is what I’ve been saying all along.

So, rather than proclaiming “Case closed” we need an explanation that fits the observed facts.

Also, let’s not lose track of the fact that no one disagrees that melamine shouldn’t be present in human or animal food in any quantity whatever and that its presence is, at this point, highly suggestive of active fraud on the part of Chinese farmers, manufacturers, or exporters (or all three).

There are also more editorials today. The Buffalo News says that the federal government still isn’t doing enough:

Maybe the fact that the contaminate came from China will finally make it sound like the national security measure it always was, and we can finally have a food safety system that puts safety ahead of marketing.

which, I will remind you, is something I’ve been saying for well over a month now. Ah well, better late than never.

From the Allentown Morning Call:

Limiting the number of ports that accept food imports and imposing embargoes to countries that do not meet standards may help to solve this problem. Perhaps, by combining the FDA and the Agriculture Department and its 9,000 inspectors, the nation can immediately have an impact on the number of products that get examined more closely. If imports continue to skyrocket, and inspections continue to dwindle, we can expect the pet food crisis to reach far beyond our dogs and cats, into the products that reach our dinner tables every night.

It’s a nice thought but I’m afraid it’s not really sufficient. Does China really have the infrastructure (not to mention the inclination) to put such standards and the inspections the enforcement measures necessary to implement them in place?. The Pittsburg Tribune-Review is even more anti-China:

History repeats itself. After World War II, China had adulterated animal feed with urea — a compound related to the melamine suspected of contaminating the wheat gluten. What else has the Chinese government overlooked, allowed or covered up?

Shame on anyone who blindly trusts the communists who still control China.

There’s a fine line between being anti-Chinese and anti-being-swindled-by-sharp-business-practices-by-Chinese-exporters. Still, I think that the minimum reform that’s needed on our part is a country-of-origin labelling law that covers all ingredients and is enforced. Costly but worth it, IMO.,

Update

More on the melamine-cyanuric acid combo from The Washington Post. Hat tip: John Burgess

3 comments… add one
  • Laja Link

    I agree that at a minimum we need a “country-of-origin labeling law that covers all ingredients and is enforced.”

    The 2002 Farm Bill included country-of-origin labeling for meat, produce, seafood and peanuts. The bill entailed a two year period of voluntary compliance, then it was supposed to become mandatory in Sept. 2004. Congress has twice approved delays of this program, and it is currently scheduled to become mandatory in 2008.

    To be useful to the consumer the 2002 legislation needs to be revised to include all ingredients in processed foods. As I understand it, the original 2002 Farm Bill exempts labeling of products that are used in processed food items (such as peanuts in a candy bar). Thus, the 2002 legislation will not help pet owners identify the country-of-origin for, say, wheat gluten in processed pet food.

    Would pet and human food manufacturers and retailers support a mandatory country-of-origin labeling for all ingredients in manufactured products? The costs of labeling will be borne by the consumer ultimately – but my sense is that there is a growing willingness to pay a bit more for this information. In addition, such legislation may help to keep management of these companies from falling “asleep at the switch” (your comment 5/3/07).

    I am curious what measures you think would be effective in enforcing such mandatory labeling?

  • FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:

    Children’s Health Organization launches investigation into Governor Schwarzenegger’s Council On Physical Fitness and Sports

    Los Angeles (May 7, 2007) – Michael Torchia, Health and Wellness Expert says, “Governor Schwarzenegger’s Council offers no working solutions to eradicate childhood obesity and has no strategic plan, proper structuring or qualified team of experts to accomplish long term lifestyle changes for children. It’s impossible to have the epidemic of childhood obesity in California decline just offering suggestions and prizes for short term achievements.” In addition, they are sponsored by General Mills, who manufactures food products containing toxic ingredients.

    General Mills also happens to have contracts providing public schools across the nation with food products with toxic ingredients. Because of this, Mr. Torchia has launched an investigation of the Governor’s Council for consorting with manufacturers of food products containing toxic ingredients.

    “It is indefensible that anyone, least of all a Governor of the United States would consider an endorsement from a company such as this,” says Robert Scott Bell, Director of Product Development for Natural Immunogenics Corp., ” These endorsements make as much sense as having the Columbian Medellin Cartel sponsoring America’s war on drugs. Unless, of course, you consider the use of artificial colors, artificial sweeteners, preservatives, genetically modified ingredients, hydrogenated oils and refined sugars to be essential nutrients for the health of our children. Since the aforementioned food additives are embraced to varying degrees by the majority sponsor of the Governor’s Council, they are actively engaging in CREATING the many health complications, identified under the medical term Syndrome-X (obesity, diabetes, etc) that the president claims to be fighting against.”

    Products like those made by General Mills cannot be consumed in moderation unless you want “moderate” hypoglycemia and diabetes to result. This is according to clinical studies from major universities. There is nothing moderate about ingesting substances that result in chronic, degradation diseases. This is the delusion that somehow allows mass food processors like General Mills to convince nutritionally ignorant politicians that they are promoting good health.

    After Mr. Torchia offered to combine forces with the Governor’s Council, utilizing his star power and affluent clients, Ken Rogers, Executive Director for the Governor’s Council, said, “We don’t want to build alliances with any other organizations and our only goals are to run the Governor’s Challenge and give out awards for completion.” Brent Berger, Operations Specialist, with expertise in business development, business strategy and finance agrees, “It would be virtually impossible for the Governor’s Council to achieve any substantial reduction in the epidemic of obesity in California with their methods. What they need is a well-qualified team of experts and proper strategic planning to have a significant turnaround in childhood obesity.”

    In addition, when you log on to the Governor’s Council’s website to contact Jake Steinfeld, Chairman of the Governor’s Council his link goes to his website selling all his exercise gadgets that are seen on late night TV and no mention of the Governor’s Council or donations for their organization from products sold.

    For Further Information:

    Contact: OPERATION FITNESS

    Office: 800.933.8633 (U.S.A.)

    310.717.2034 (International)

    Website: http://www.operationfitness.com

Leave a Comment