[Photo by wiseacre photo]Being an animal lover and the owner of 2 dogs and a rabbit, I was naturally concerned when I heard about the extensive pet food recall that was announced over the weekend. Thankfully, none of the foods I feed my dogs were on the list, but my heart went out to those pet owners who are affected. The manufacturer of the pet foods noted that they were not definitively sure as to the cause of the potentially poisonous food, but speculated that it may be related to a new supplier of gluten.
I assumed that the company would conduct tests on the food to determine what may be causing illness, but never did I imagine that they would
test it by feeding it to healthy animals and observing the effects. I thought I had surely misread the title of this news article, "
FDA: Tests of suspect pet food killed 7 animals," but unfortunately I hadn't.
During those tests, the company fed its product to 40 to 50 dogs and cats and some seven animals — the mix of species was not immediately known — died, Sundlof said. The contamination appeared more deadly to cats than to dogs, he said.
DUH! What are they thinking? "We suspect that this food kills animals, so let's torture some innocent animals for the hell of it?" I can't rationalize this. Aren't there better ways to test for the noxious ingredient? Especially when they have a very good idea of where the source of the problem lies? Is this how pet food companies test new concepts for food?
When the spinach e-coli breakout occurred, did we feed it to otherwise healthy humans to confirm the problem? To determine which brands really were lethal? It was probably fed to some poor lab animals just to confirm what was already known. I just don't get it; maybe I am just too naive.
