Howl911 Threatened with Lawsuit from Blue Buffalo
UPDATED 4/7: The original author of the Blue Buffalo menadione concern wrote us today to let us know of other information supporting their position: A response from Blue Buffalo on when they would remove menadione.
ORIGINAL: Blue Buffalo just sent the editor of Howl911 a threatening email asking them to remove the post to Blue Buffalo’s inclusion of menadione - a substance that’s banned in the UK. Instead of explaining why this substance would be good for our kids, they threatened to silence the grassroots blogs because it happens to appear on a page that has recall news. It’s not known if the original poster on The Dog Food Project has also been legally threatened. We expected more from a company like Blue Buffalo. We demand an apology!
Reading Mr. MacLean’s logic, it’s clear that Itchmo can post this news since we cover much more than the recalls. Shall we temp the law?
Full email from Blue Buffalo’s legal counsel after the jump.
Dear Web Master,
I am General Counsel for Blue Buffalo Company, Ltd, the manufacturer of BLUE brand cat and dog foods. I am writing concerning the piece that appears on your web site (http://www.howl911.com/), under the headline “THE DOG FOOD PROJECT: MENADIONE IN BLUE BUFFALO FOODS” dated 4-2-07.
Virtually your entire web page is devoted to news, information and links about the recent pet food recalls, except for the article about Blue Buffalo. While your work regarding the recalls is commendable, the placement of the Blue Buffalo article in this context is irresponsible, and leaves the the reader with the impression that the BLUE products are under recall. The explanation “Unrelated to the Menu Foods recall” appearing in much smaller font below the headline does little to reduce the clear association of BLUE products with the Menu Foods recall, or some other recall, or, at the very least, a dangerous health issue.
No BLUE products have been implicated in any of the recent recalls, and there is no reliable scientific evidence that even remotely suggests that BLUE products are anything but safe and healthy for pets. For you to suggest otherwise on your web site is defamatory, particularly in light of the current consumer concerns about pet safety.
That your piece consists almost entirely of quotes from another site does not shield you from responsibility or liability for this defamation. Any cursory inquiry by you into the allegations of the author would reveal that the claims are factually and scientifically inaccurate, and unsupportable.
This piece does not deserve coverage on any site, but it certainly does not belong on a site that attempting to provide valuable information about the recalls to pet parents who are truly, and deservedly alarmed about the foods that have been recalled.
My client demands that you immediately remove the BLUE article from your web site, and refrain from any references to BLUE products on any page of your site that references the recent recalls. If this is not done within 24 hours, we will assume that you are intentionally creating an association of BLUE products with the recent recalls, and we will take immediate action accordingly.
Respectfully,
Richard E. MacLean
General Counsel
Blue Buffalo Company, Ltd
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:21 pm
Oh, this is just atrocious. A dog food company threatening to sue for the sole reason that we are all trying to educate ourselves about *exactly* what is in the dog food that we buy, and why. Shame on them. This letter is going to be reproduced far, and wide. I will see to that. Let all of us concerned pet owners see the extremes that this industry, be it a large or a small company, is willing to go to perpetuate their profits, their secrecy and their bottom line. All at the expense of our four legged friends. Too bad Blue wasn’t part of the recall, at least that was a wrong without intent. This is an INTENTIONAL wrong being done to all of us. If I may so in-eloquently say to Blue Buffalo, its CEO and especially its general counsel, “screw you.”
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Predatory Capitalism. Profits before people.
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:31 pm
I just crossed Blue Buffalo off my list of pet foods to consider. Sorry to be so blunt.
Good luck
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:40 pm
F em
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:52 pm
Actually I believe Mr. Maclean might misrepresenting himself.
Richard E. MacLean
General Counsel
Blue Buffalo Company, Ltd
http://www.gandb.com/attorneys.htm#maclean
If I’m wrong my apology Rich. Wouldn’t want you to have a credibility crisis.
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:56 pm
And Rich. Don’t you understand that Americans are hurting? Doesn’t that mean anything to you?
Please. Enlighten us.
April 3rd, 2007 at 8:58 pm
This is just disgusting. Thank you for reporting this. Another pet food company gets a “never to be fed to my pets” grade from me. I wish these companies would use their energy, talent and money to produce a healthy, safe product instead of wasting my time with corporate PR and attorney spins. Make a good product, be honest when mistakes occur and no one would have the need to write the drivel that we have just been subjected to by Mr. MacLean.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:04 pm
Steve - thanks, that site had a great little email link. I also found this link useful for general spewing
http://www.bluebuff.com/blueyou/comments.shtml
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:05 pm
Forget Blue Buffalo if this their idea of integrity forget it. I’ll never touch this product. And I’m going to tell my entire extended family also.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:05 pm
Another sale for Blue Buffalo lost here, too. Nasty manners Blue Buffalo, and and hey, how about the great PR this just created for your products?
This is buffoonery at its best.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:06 pm
If Blue Buffalo objects to comments about their ingredients, they should simply log on and offer an explanation.
To hire a lawyer over such a trifle indicates that their profits are much too high. Maybe Blue should consider reducing the price of their foods.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:28 pm
I -WAS -considering a switch to Blue but this incident has made it clear that another pet food company can do without my money. I have a big mouth and broadband and several of the blogs where Blue has been mentioned will be hearing about this, I doubt that this will result in good results for Blue.
DO YOU HEAR ME PET FOOD COMPANIES??
Do the right thing, do it without being pressured and maybe, big MAYBE, you will get customers back. I promise that threatening lawsuits to sites like this is gonna cost you a lot of money. I am off to start cutting into YOUR bottom line!
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:43 pm
Blue Cheese???
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:45 pm
We won’t be silenced anymore our pets lives are at stake!Maybe Mr Blue ought to sue these people too for posting what they thought of their dog food.
http://www.rateitall.com/i-714.....;pagenum=2
According to your own website
Blue (our large breed Airedale), is the one who inspired us to start this company and one of the best pals who ever put on a collar. Blue just turned 10 in June and despite three cancer operations, he still sprints down the hill every morning to see if any deer are hanging around in the woods.
An Airdale with cancer? They are not even on the list of breeds where cancer is common in the breed.
Maybe it is that menadione in your food.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:45 pm
We are not stupid and we can read. Blue Buffalo has been heartily and clearly recommended by folks on several blog sites as an ALTERNATIVE to the recalled Menu foods. I really thought BB were “good guys”. This email from attorney MacLean is just so inappropriate and wrong headed at a time when we are all scared and simply trying to educate ourselves and keep our adored pets alive and healthy in the best manner we can. My “Fluffy” just tonite finished our last can of BlueB and since he liked it in several flavors I was planning to pick up more at the store tomorrow. Not now. No. There are other organic brands out there to patronize. Shame on Blue Buffalo for making a mountain out of a molehill.
April 3rd, 2007 at 9:56 pm
For a long time I have been feeding one meal raw and one meal kibble, since this all raw. But if I ever go back to a kibble I will ask the company many questions and expect answers. This is way over the top. Why didn’t they just give their version and ask that it be published?
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:04 pm
If a pet food company feels the need to “hide” something…then they will not get my money for their products.
April 3rd, 2007 at 10:16 pm
No one trusts the Pet Food Industry right now.
If these outfits think they have guaranteed market share they are going to be in for a BIG SHOCK.
What are they going to do. Force people to buy their stuff?
Good Luck on that
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:06 pm
It was problably the worst thing they could have done. My wife is an Attorney and she is laughing her ass off.
From what we have seen there wasn’t anything that wasn’t a fact. I would feel better if this company would just take out of their ingredients.
So are you “pet people” or what?
Customers/consumers dictate the market not you, keep this in mind or go back to economics class or get out.
Don’t send your corporate attorneys after us.
Good job on Damage control and welcome to the internet age!
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:07 pm
Can’t anyone admit to anything anymore with out the whole smoke and mirrors game.
Threaten us all you want I could care!
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:17 pm
Hey fell free to check his bar records too,
http://www.martindale.com/xp/M.....&cnt=1
Keep it up buddy.
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:20 pm
Kill that last post, he isn’t even in the Bar.
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:29 pm
This ill advised letter has gone viral and folks are laughing their butts off!
The company is now called Blue Buffoon in several blogs and groups and I am thrilled to report that many people who MIGHT have considered feeding BlueBuffoon have reconsidered.
But thanks for the entertainment, Ritchie.
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:29 pm
From what I was reading Blue was trying to let ever one know that what was posted and off wysongs sight who caused all the commotion in the first place, wysong I would never buy any his foods just the way he talks about other company’s, But That is not the issue at moment, People are scared of any pet food and I don’t blame them, But I do know I have been feeding Blue since nov, and it has made a big difference in my pets, not only skin and hair but total body and energy, and I’m thankful to have been feeding it or I be like some these other Pet Parents with my pets at the Rainbow bridge. I think this should be the bottom line at moment,not destroy or bicker but get to the bottom of who and what is killing pets,and to let public know on what is tainted, and what one can feed that is safe. Oh and I don’t thank Blue is any Higher than any the other Premium Holistic foods, and some them does use corn and wheat.
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:31 pm
I can’t find him in any BAR association database. I have looked.
As far as I know he can’t even practice law.
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:34 pm
Check that,
http://www.jud2.ct.gov/Civil_Inquiry/DspAtty.asp
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:37 pm
juris number 413680
April 3rd, 2007 at 11:46 pm
I have nothing against Blue, just the threatening letter.
It would have been better to have someone who actually decided to put that into the product to write a response to clear it up.
Like having that ingredient in the product will help anyway. As far as I see the article was factual and the company should answer to that or loose customers. It is a free country last time I checked. Not like howl911 is slandering them or anything.
Thats the job of the consumer and pet.
My cat slanders IAMS..lol
slander n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. Damages (payoff for worth) for slander may be limited to actual (special) damages unless there is malicious intent, since such damages are usually difficult to specify and harder to prove. Some statements such as an untrue accusation of having committed a crime, having a loathsome disease, or being unable to perform one’s occupation are treated as slander per se since the harm and malice are obvious, and therefore usually result in general and even punitive damage recovery by the person harmed. Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much if not more than printed publications. (See: defamation, fair comment)
In no way did howl911 say that consumers should not buy this product.
April 4th, 2007 at 12:07 am
Thank you, Sharon. I feel the same way you do about BLUE BUFFALO. My cat has been thriving on it. Perhaps they panicked in the way they came to their own defense. That tells me that the Company feels strongly about their superior products. We’re all in panic mode. Our first and only concern right now is the health and well being of our precious pet. Those of you who are so angry at BLUE BUFFALO should be redirecting that anger at the companies that killed the thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of our best friends… not at a Company with excellent products.
April 4th, 2007 at 12:14 am
Wow. Perhaps Blue should be responding by pulling the offending ingredient that landed them in the middle of that article in the first place. If they are going to hide behind lawyers, that places them in the same place that Menu Foods, Proctor & Gamble, Del Monte, etc. are in. If their first step is to hire a lawyer to attack a blogger then they aren’t looking out for the best interest of our pets. They are looking out for the best interest of their bottom line. Bottom line. They’re sold in Petsmart. There are plenty of stores out that that didn’t carry ANY of the foods that were recalled. Petsmart had how many? What is safe at that store? Need any toys?
April 4th, 2007 at 8:59 am
I’m looking at a can of dog food by NATURE’S RECIPE and guess what’s in it? Yep, Menadione Bisulfite Complex.
Today, my Blue Buffalo will be returned to Petsmart along with this Nature’s Recipe.
April 4th, 2007 at 9:02 am
1. Blue is selling like CRAZY and PetsMart can’t keep in on the shelf so bare shelves make them look like part of the recall and they have to protect themselves.
2. To be looking into the guy’s Bar records is really a sign that you have WAY too much time on your hands
3. If you won’t feed Blue to your pet because of this letter than you don’t care too much about the health of your pet, Blue is one of if not the best choice in pet food before and after the recall!
4. Check your facts… most of you sound really stupid!
April 4th, 2007 at 9:08 am
Correction: I read the Nature’s Recipe wrong. The Menadione is listed as Menadione Sodium Bisulfite Complex. I’d left off the “sodium” in my first posting.
April 4th, 2007 at 10:02 am
Why anyone would come here to defend this company is beyond me. Unless of course you are an employee or paid spokesperson. The point is, if a company really did care about its food, or its customers they would explain or defend. To go on the attack, against an altuistic information website is just arrogance. Don’t you get it? Its not Blue Buffoon in panic mode - it’s Blue Buffoon throwing a temper tantrum because those damn customers are questioning THEM.
There are PLENTY of other good foods out there. Canidae, Natura, Solid Gold, Nature’s Balance plus many more (go to the petsit.com website) etc. They may or may not be pefect, but at least they have been reasonably upfront about providing information. What Blue Buffoon has done is not only refused to provide info, but gone on the attack for us asking for it.
Allowing this kind of behavior is allowing the industry to perpetuate in much the same way it has been - and that is why the recall took so long, and why it is still taking forever to finalize the list of food that should be recalled - becasue the industry is still trying to AVOID scrutiny. It must become transparent, or else you give them license to do it all over again. Blue Buffalo is acting irresponsibly and arrogantly, and this needs to change before they deserve anyone’s trust.
April 4th, 2007 at 10:45 am
I don’t work for Blue, But some one tell me what is wrong with Menadione Bisulfite Complex, when I googled it I got source of vitamin A, good for skin bones etc. I saw also its in a lot foods.Only other time I have heard complaints is from the sellers of Healthy Pet Net and what Dr Jane tells her multi level pyramid food sellers.and how her food is better than any one elses…..
Also, Im not changing, If it its Not Broke Dont Fix it..And as said before,If not been for me feeding Blue I would be like all these other People with sick Pets…….So For Blue Im very Grateful……..
April 4th, 2007 at 11:22 am
Do you not understand? The use of menadione is not the point - but if you really care see later in this comment) The point is, when asked for info about the use of this chemical, Blue Buffalo first lied by claiming it had been removed from the food, then outright threatened to sue to shut down any discussion of this issue having to do with Blue Buffalo food. If there’s nothing wrong with it, why not just state that, and be done? What else don’t they want us discussing?
Incidentally, the very first journal article I pulled up to read started like this:
Sentence # 1
“Menadione bisulfite is a hepatotoxicant that damages periportal regions of the lobule in perfused liver in an oxygen-dependent manner. ”
link: http://molpharm.aspetjournals......t/38/6/959
Journal of Molecular Pharmacology
Hepatotoxicant = toxic to liver
So, don’t tell me that there isn’t negative info out there. Don’t threaten to sue me for wanting to know WHY you think it’s safe when I remain unconvinced. Tell me why you think I should be convinced that this ingredient is the best choice for my pet (when NO food I feed happens to include this ingredient). So why should I trust YOU when all you want is for me to stop asking question?
I don’t shop at Petsmart, and I have PLENTY of better choices for my pet that I DO trust. And if the Buffoons at Blue want to understand why I am so angry at them, they should email me and ask. I’ll explain it to them, r-e-a-l-l-y s-l-o-w, o-k?
April 4th, 2007 at 12:15 pm
Just for the record, I’m neither an employee nor a spokesperson for Blue Buffalo. The cat products (I can only speak about the cat products) are working well for us. Of course, I agree, the Company could have/should have handled their side of the story better… with explanations, not legal threats.
April 4th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Not saying I’m coming to Blue Buffalo’s defense, but some of the statements made about Vitamin K3 represeneted showed there was toxicity in large dosages. The same can be said for most any Vitamin if taken incorrectly. The same can be said for Bayer Aspirin or even Tylenol if not taken as directed.
Sometimes we get the impression that because something is “natural” it is healthy. I realize Vitamin K3 is synthetic but it must be approved as safe in x dosage by the AAFCO, otherwise it would not be allowed in the food.
I would suggest that the AAFCO be contacted to futher clarify what the safety is of this Vitamin since it certain has positive aspects to it. And if it is allowed as a supplement in Dog and Cat food. I noticed Howl 911 stated that the FDA site did not list it for dog and cat food.
It would also be good to see the link to the EU where the Vitamin K has been banned (some official document) instead of just making a statement. Not saying it is not true…I would just like to read the document.
That being said, I believe it is good to question ingredients on our companions food so a big thank you for asking questions and sparking the dialogue that is certainly needed in this age of recalled food.
Best Regards,
Robert Davis
April 4th, 2007 at 2:16 pm
One other thing I forgot to post on this is….
Didn’t we see a post about Iams and the FDA warning them about an ingredient? Wouldn’t there be a warning to Buffalo if there is a problem with the Vitamin K? And how do we know which foods really contain or do not contain this form of Vitamin K if there is a labeling threshold for food? Some manufacturers could be honest and post on their label…others may not put it on the label because of this “controversy.” And yet, the food could still contain the ingredient!
Just another piece of food for thought!
Best Regards,
Robert Davis
April 4th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
In a high end food that self proclaims “superior ingredients for superior nutrition”, I would expect that the food at the very least did not contain any ingredient the FDA would deem questionable. And no, I do not think menadione has risen to the the attention of the FDA as being questionable. That being said, this does not mean I think we should be happy that a “high end” food is not answering concerns about the choice of supplementation with this questionable chemical. Aspirin and tylenol are also chemicals, neither of which is safe (or even approved) for daily use for a lifetime so I am not quite sure what point someone was trying to make? In any case, if you would like to read a document (official from the UK) acknowledging the restriction on the use of menadione you can see one here:
http://www.food.gov.uk/consult.....2002_46_EC
Incidentally, Vit K is synthesized in the gut. It is not considered a required endogenously added nutrient. Like all vitamin supplementation, more isn’t always a good thing. (remember the fatalities associated with Vit D overdosing). If you really want a link to pet food standards for veracity here is one for fediaf that compares fediaf, NRC and AAFCO. None of which require Vit K supplementation of pet food.
http://www.fediaf.org/Pages/Nu.....202005.pdf
But again, we digress. The point of the focus should be on the legal threat made when a website representing concerned pet owners questioned the usage of what is undeniabley a controversial ingredient. And the fact that Blue Buffalo, instead of being forthcoming, issued a legal cease and desist request to stifle the conversation. And that, more than any one ingredient is the real issue. Accountability to the consumer is what is needed.
April 4th, 2007 at 3:18 pm
OMG, I am sooo confused… I switched to Blue Buffalo because they don’t use corn, wheat, soy…so they seemed like a safe alternative.
Vitamin K is the last ingredient listed on the package of dry dog food. Is it natural vitamin k or the synthetic version? I emailed them, asking if they use MENADIONE, I am waiting for a reply. I’m so stressed out by all of this I’m losing sleep and weight. The weights ok, but NOT the sleep.
April 4th, 2007 at 4:12 pm
Vitamin K IS requied in cat food if 25% (on a dry matter basis) of the food is fish, according to fediaf, NRC and AAFCO. Vitamin K should be included in cat food if fish is present in any amount. Menadione is approved by AAFCO.
April 4th, 2007 at 4:44 pm
Joyce…first, the National Research Council has not been able to determine a dietary requirement for vit K in dogs. As for cats, whether or not vit K is required as a supplement in cats is not the point. The point is WHICH form of vit K is used. Vits K1 and K2 are naturally occuring forms (plant and microbial, respectively). Vit K3, aka menadione, is synthetic and it is THIS form of Vit K (which technically isn’t even a vitamin, but a precurser) that is being questioned, due to its reportedly high toxicity. So why would a pet food manufacturer choose a synthetic, potentially toxic form of Vit. K over a natural form? One reason: Cost. Menadione is used because it is CHEAPER than natural vit K1 or K2. Also, there are plenty of dietary sources for natural vit K, such as fish meals, liver and green plant supplements (e.g. alfalfa, kelp and other seaweed, nettle leaf, blue-green algae, spirulina) … so why not use a natural source instead of a synthetic supplement which was banned by the FDA for human use. Again, the FDA has only approved use of menadione in chicken, turkey and swine feed. And regarding AAFCO’s manual, I received this email from a veterinarian today:
“The AAFCO book lists three forms of menandione. The one mentioned above refers only to Reg. 573.620 which you cited, and which is very specific on the allowable uses. This substance is NOT listed as GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe, 21 CFR 170-186) so it is not approved for other uses.
The other two forms of menandione are listed for chicken, turkey,
poultry, and swine feeds only.
I will double check with some of my contacts, but this appears to be an
illegal ingredient for pet food–a situation that is identical to Iams’
use of chromium tripicolinate in its Eukanuba weight loss diets.”
April 4th, 2007 at 6:11 pm
Nikki, you have my attention! Thanks for such complete information. Both Kumpi and Blue Buff, in their dry cat food, use Menadione Dimethylpyrimidinol Bisulfate as a source of Vit K activity. I’m sure there are other foods out there as well that use this ingredient. I have calls into two vets to try to garner additional info. Any advice on what to feed the babies?
April 4th, 2007 at 6:12 pm
Is this the same thing as “menadione dimethylpyrimidinol bisulfite”??
I am trying to find a dog food that I can trust and really having a hard time. I thought about Evangers and today got a small sample bag. read the label and menadione dimethylpyrimidinol bisulfite was listed.
Help. Thanks!! Raven
April 4th, 2007 at 7:07 pm
Raven, my error. It is Bisulfite.
April 4th, 2007 at 7:13 pm
Dear Sue J.
You wrote, “The point of the focus should be on the legal threat made when a website representing concerned pet owners questioned the usage of what is undeniabley a controversial ingredient.”
Did they have a valid reason to write the letter? If not, then you have a point….But if they did have a valid reason then there is nothing to complain about.
It is fine to question what goes in our companions food - I do this constantly so I don’t disagree with that. But what I wanted to know was when a website states this form of Vitamin K (K3) “is directly toxic in high doses”…what evidence is there to back it up? The article was poorly written as an English document explaining this form of Vitamin K (K3) and the references were to documents in German that I personally cannot review for accuracy. I do not believe everything people post online (i.e. Wikipedia is an excellent example of that).
What would be beneficial is to have a Q/A with a Buffalo Nutritionist or even a Kumpi one ( I saw Kumpi mentioned in a post on here - I use their food and my cats and dogs have never been more healthy! ) where they can provide good information from a nutritionist point of view and validate why they use this version of Vitamin K (K3), instead of just assuming its cheaper or whatever the reason. I’ve not seen their invoices so I can’t tell you if it is cheaper or not. Has Howl911 or the Dog Food Project seen their invoices?
And to answer your comment about Aspirin and Tylenol….these pills in “high dosages” don’t have to be taken over a period of time to cause damage…. so that is why I question - what is “high dosage” compared to what is put in Buffalo Food. My giving Rymadyl to my German Shepherd over a long period of time can cause liver damage….so I monitor him with blood work - but I made that choice so he could walk (he doesn’t need it as much now that he eats Kumpi) again.
And don’t forget - just because it isn’t on the label doesn’t mean it isn’t in there - there is a threshold requirement - so if that threshold is not met, then the company does not have to list.
Thanks!
Robert Davis
April 4th, 2007 at 7:36 pm
AAFCO 2007 Manual
Pages 354,355
90.25 ADDITIONAL OFFICIALLY RECOGNIZED VITAMIN INGREDIENTS FOR ANIMAL FEED USE AT NUTRITIONAL LEVELS AND IN CONFORMITY WITH CURRENT GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES
Menadione Dimethylpyri-midinol Bisulfite
Crystalline Menadione–Di-methylpyrimidinol Bisulfite
Commerical Feed Grade
Reg 573.620
This is listed under the approved and not to be confused with:
Menadione Nicotin-amide Bisulfite
Source of Vitamin K Activity & Supplemental Niacin
Chicken and Turkey feeds a 2 g/ton Growing and Finishing Swine Feeds at 10 g/ton 21CFR 573.625
OR
the third one listed which is:
Menadione Sodium Bisulfite Complex
The Addition Product of Menadione and Sodium Bisulfite Containing not less than 30% of Menadione
Poultry 2 to 4 g/T
This is the nomenclature directly from the 2007 AAFCO Manual.
These are the three menadione sources mentioned, with their individual caveats.
April 4th, 2007 at 7:57 pm
Sounds like the AAFCO information contradicts what the Dog Food Project is stating….interesting….
April 4th, 2007 at 8:04 pm
Anyone else that has an AAFCO Manual can refer to:
pages 137,138 to the AAFCO CAT Food Nutrient Profiles Based On Dry Matter which lists required nutrients and Vitamin K is listed on page 138.
We do NOT include Vit K in the DOG food since the AAFCO Dog Food Nutrient Profiles Based On Dry Matter does not lis that nutrient as necessary for DOGS.
That profile information is on pages 132,133.
If anything, I hope this increases consumer trust in our products at Kumpi.
The TRACE of Vitamin K 0.1 parts per million.
Feel better?
Warm hugs to those people who are suffering a loss from the recall and/or have an animal who is suffering. I am so sorry for what you are having to go through.