Clean food, pet or human, is not easy to get and to get it with help from those paid tax money to do so seems to be impossible these days.
The FDA is adamant, legally adamant, that safe food is not their job.
OK, congress can’t get answers, documents or anything resembling the truth from the FDA and every pet parent here knows that the FDA is useless, inept, incompetent, liars, criminally liable and socially unacceptable. The FDA still gets paychecks, media coverage and far more attention than the truth.
Kills any lingering respect I had for the media but then there was not much left. The cover up of the truth of the recall is now standard proof of the death of journalism in the US. Frankly, I thought journalism died quite few years before but there is no doubt that the recall embalmed it!

Geez, you show people the truth, which they are not getting from the media or the vets or the ad agencies and they are not even surprised anymore, liars deserving of contempt, proud moment for several professions. Most people puke when they see what the pet food industry has done, is doing. Puke. Hurl. Vomit.
Could explain why no one admits to being related to the poisoners.

They cringe, the young ones, but they won’t admit to being related. Their frienemies , however, just love the dirt. And use it.
The internet can be cruel to the spawn of poisoners.
And not too great for the kids of cowards..
And there are so many cowards with kids just itching to rebel and hate the cowards. The internet can be fun. Google your family name and get a boatload of shame.

GOOD!

It was too widespread for some of them not to have been. Never the less, one thing I’m certain of, they ALL use products regulated by the FDA.

When people aren’t willing to stand up for the rights of others, they eventually lose their own rights.

Maybe they figure losing a pet was something that happened to someone else and it’s okay to stand down. I just wonder how they’ll feel when it’s a son or daughter, a wife or husband, a parent, a friend, a child or themselves the next time it happens. What will they do when they come home from work to find their families dead around the dinner table over a bad can of soup?

Maybe then it will matter. Unfortunately, by then it’ll be too late to do anything about it.

We, and the rest of the good ole USA, fed our pets the rendered remains
of other pets, roadkill and deseased cattle and thats the best of what
went in the pet food.
The FDA assisted the PFI in covering up the truth.
To an honest media, this would be a feeding frenzy.

Bad, all of it, bad, and sickening.
The worst, though, the absolute worst part, is that they got away with it.

And they are going to get away with it the next time too.

Plenty of people who want this to go away.
The PFI.
The minions of the PFI, the FDA.
Vets who stayed silent because the money means more to them than the pets.
Even some of the internet pet sites who CLAIMED to care, the ones who “stood down” on the recall the day the FDA “stood down”-odd coincidence don’t you think?
A media that was eager to buy the lie and far less interested in the truth.
Unless the truth gets as widely spread as the lies, unless there is some
attempt at justice by the authorities, unless the entire country rises up
and says that things must change, this IS going to happen again.
The poisoning IS happening, daily, for all of us.
And it is going to go on tomorrow.

I am making my own cat food.

Stefani

the FDA is not even just a paper tiger but merely an extention of sundry private industries masqurading as a governmental agency. it’s a giant slush fund for government hacks, industry shills to secure incredibly lucrative civilian jobs as a reward for their inactivity on consumer concerns and blocking of any perceived threat to industry.

they do not have the power to enforce a recall and they NEVER had it. proving a particular food item killed or sickened a human or an animal can be a very very difficult task-in the pet food recall situation the actual culprit has either never been pin pointed scientifically and conclusively or is known and is being covered up. it’s the very proof that is the difference in any lawsuit now pending. no one has exhibited that proof and as insane as it sounds your pet’s death is simply not enough. it’s not fair. it’s not right. it just is. the food and drug act may say such and such but the truth is the FDA does not itself as a rule test anything, does not have the power to enforce recalls and is largely funded by the industries it is suppose to ‘ regulate’- surely a profound conflict of interest.

even past heads of the FDA consider it a broken corrupt entity that does not even vaguely function as any normal logical person would assume a regulatory agency should. the laws that it functions under are so vague and so largely filled with self made ‘ regulations’ (that are not technically congress passed ‘ laws’) that i would think any litigation against it would prove very difficult to pursue . it is not appropriately funded and far too exposed and beholden to the companies it is suppose to protect us from.

it needs to be put down so the clowns in the pet food industrial complex will no longer be sheilded from their well deserved comeuppance. smug bastards.

http://www.petfoodrecallfacts.com/response.doc

I don’t suppose it’s as attorny-ish as such things ought to be, but it says what I had to say about as well as I know how to say it.

The Food Drug and Cosmetic Act states: “The Administration shall;
(1) promote the public health by promptly and efficiently reviewing clinical research and taking appropriate action on the marketing of
regulated products in a timely manner; (2) with respect to such products, protect the public health by ensuring that; (A) foods are safe, wholesome, sanitary, and properly labeled”

As amazing as it may seem, the FDA does not view the above as a duty imposed upon it, but rather that it has discretion to act or not act as it sees fit. About like a fire department having discretion to respond or not respond to a 5 alarm fire.

The FDA figures a rule it made up itself voids our First Amendment right to redress of grievance. The FDA rule reads: “(2) The Commissioner shall object to judicial review of a matter if: (i) The matter is committed by law to the discretion of the Commissioner, e.g., a decision to recommend or not to recommend civil or criminal enforcement action”

For those who may not remember the redress of grievance part of the US Constitution from school, editing out the irrevelant parts, it reads like this:

“Congress shall make no law abridging the right of the people to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

In essence, the FDA figures the rules it made up abolishes the First Amendment and that it is under no obligation to investigate the source of a massive and lethal pet poisoning epidemic.

Anyhow, the current status of the action is I’ve filed a motion for summary judgment, which could potentially result in a court order forcing the FDA to do a proper investigation, and, the FDA has filed motions to dismiss the case. According to theory, a decision from the court should take place just about any time now - one way or the other.

I’m not under any dilusions about the odds of success on this one. The odds are too terrible to mention. I’m doing this without a speck of help from anyone, going heads up against a multi billion dollar government machine with all the attorneys our tax dollars can put into play against me. If nothing else, the outcome should show anyone who has their eyes open what sort of place we live in.

The land of the free and the home of the brave?

Or,

The land of the duped and the home of the slave?

 View All
Date: 2007-10-24
Recall realities
By Richard Sellers

Essential factors to think about in preparing for and handling a recall

Richard Sellers is vice president for feed regulation and nutrition of AFIA in Arlington, Virginia, USA.

Every industry firm, no matter what size, should plan for the daunting task of recalling products for one or more reasons: human error, supplier error, intentional/unintentional contamination, for example. Being prepared is the best way to handle a recall.

This article is intended as a guide to important factors to consider in handling those incidents. Every firm should have a procedure in place that is developed in concert with:

* Senior management;
* Plant quality personnel;
* Manufacturing personnel;
* Public relations staff; and
* Legal counsel.

Recalls can be either from one or more facilities and/or from upstream or downstream in a facility’s supply chain. Responses to different types of recalls are dependent on several variables, including the hazard, level of risk, amount of product/animals affected and how much control a firm has over its affected products.

Reasons for a recall

Several factors must be considered in determining if a recall is warranted, including the complete information about the event or incident that caused this situation. Complaints, animal deaths, reports from suppliers and customers are just a few reasons to consider a recall. Good corporate citizenship, minimizing liability exposure and avoiding government sanctions are all excellent reasons for acting as well.

If a voluntary recall is requested by a regulatory agency, firms should not ignore them. Generally, the federal and state sanctions are quite severe and may include loss of license, criminal/civil lawsuits, fines and loss of property.

There are no mandatory recalls in either federal or state feed laws. Both groups have administrative detention authority, controlling movement of products with reasonable cause of being in violation of an applicable law.

For animal foods, FDA has administrative detention authority and records review authority under the Bioterrorism Act (http://www.fda.gov/oc/bioterrorism/bioact.html), but this can only be invoked by the agency with credible evidence of serious adverse health consequences or death in man or animals. On the state side, Michigan requires reporting of contamination, and such reporting cannot be used against a firm in any action taken by the department. Florida, requires reporting of corn or other grain load refused for aflatoxin, and non-reporting is subject to a $100 fine.

Before a recall

In case a recall is needed, all firms should designate a recall coordinator and sole spokesperson for the company. Companies should also define the recall team that goes into action when called by the coordinator. A firm’s customers and suppliers may need to designate a recall contact person also, and one may be needed for each facility. Firms may require outside consultants on a recall team also, such as toxicologists, attorneys, microbiologists or others.

Initiating a recall

Once a decision has been made to initiate a recall, a firm must immediately stop distribution of all potentially implicated products, assemble the recall team and launch an inquiry into the cause and scope of the problem. It should determine who will make final decisions and impress upon all involved that the decisions must be honored.

In the area of public relations, one spokesperson should be named for the firm, and all questions directed to that person. There should be a separate team at each facility that coordinates with the corporate team. When the team meets, direction should be given to each member regarding their responsibilities and data collection to assemble and disseminate before each meeting.

Before initiating a recall, the firm must determine, among other things:
Get a load of this!!!!!!

“Firms should agree upon their objectives before dealing with media calls.There are no mandatory recalls in either federal or state feed laws.

* The amount and location of product in distribution;
* Whether the defect is obvious;
* How many reports of illness or death have been received;
* Any special risks to segments of consumers (e.g., dog and cat sensitivity to acetaminophen, etc.); and
* The seriousness of the problem and the potential for harm.”

Note bullet point 4. Why would he use this particular example? And remember, this was originally written in 2006.

this really stinks to high heaven.

“This article is a condensed version of a product recall webcast presented by the American Feed Industry Association (AFIA) in 2006. The entire webcast can be obtained from AFIA (www.afia.org).”

wouldn’t you call this interesting timing?

Why are our tax dollars paying for these idiots to PROTECT THE COMPANY AND ITS REPUTATION? Shouldnt they be trying to protect the consumers?

Sounds like the same idiots who heard the rumor about a possible attack on U.S. soil prior to the 9/11 and did nothing about it.

There have been rumors that shopping malls may be a big target this CHRISTMAS SEASON (yes, I said CHRISTMAS - not holiday). But Homeland Security said they dont think we should worry about it. It’s just a scare tactic that will only hurt our economy.

Ditto catmom5 comment:
This is simply disgusting! I hope that this is broadcast far and wide so EVERYBODY can see just what these agencies and pfi are really about. Dead or sick animals? NOPE! Dead or sick people? NOPE! Greed and higher profits? YEP! SIMPLY DISGUSTING!!!