|
The purpose of this section of the site is to collect and document lab analysis results contracted by private parties. As a result of the virtual FDA stand down on conducting a meaningful, scientific investigation, many pet owners are hiring lab reports on suspect pet food at their own expense. Of special interest in this section is tests done on food related to a pet's illness or death between November and January. If you have verifiable test information to contribute to this section, please use the contact link above to discuss adding your information here. The first test is back for the pfpsa.org project. A composite of unopened pouches of Special Kitty, which a pet owner had saved from the pre-recall period, tested positive for acetaminophen and melamine. This food nearly killed both the pet owner's cats. To my knowledge, this is the first time acetaminophen has been detected in the presence of melamine and adds significantly to the body of evidence that melamine has been used by the pet food companies as a red herring to cover up the actual toxin that killed an estimated quarter million pets. The report is available here. A pet food sample believed to be a composite of Canidae All Life Stages Dry Dog Food - best by date RM 6/7/07, use by 6/7/08, and Canidae (All Life Stages) Lamb and Rice Formula Dry Dog Food - best by date RM 6/6/07, use by 6/6/08 tests positive for acetaminophen. A big thank you to everyone who has been willing to come forward to help make test results available to others. I don't think there is any way to express how critical this infomation may be in getting down to the root causes of the poison pet food epidemic. It is my understanding this food was purchased within the last month and has never been recalled. July 2, 2007: As it was mentioned in the LA Times article, I'm adding the Bodycote test results I ordered in March. No sodium nitrate, sodium nitrite, ethoxyquin, mercury or cadmium were detected. Phosphorus was detected at 294mg/100g. Chromium was detected at 2mcg/100g. Aflatoxin was less than 20 parts per billion. From what I can tell, the last three are within acceptable limits. As most labs don't have the unknown toxin scan capabilities of ExperTox, it was necessary to make up a short list of substances to check for, out of the tests that were available. ExperTox, a fully accredited lab, confirmed the presence of acetamionphen in Pet Pride "Turkey and Giblets Dinner" lot number APR 24 09 at .2 ug. per gram. In a 5.5 ounce can of cat food, or 154 grams, Chuckles received at least a 30 microgram dose of acetaminophen, courtesy of the pet murdering criminals at Menu Foods, with each can of food until she became too sick to eat. In Pet Pride "Mixed Grill" lot lot number SEP07 09, Expertox found cyanuric acid at 90.72 ug. per gram. This works out to 14 milligrams of cyanuric acid per can of food. In a phone conversation, UC Davis claimed to be unable to identify cyanuric acid in cans of pet food from this lot. As of June 18, 2007, I have not received a hard copy of the UC Davis results. Both acetaminophen and cyanuric acid are nearly insoluble in water, which could potentially affect the distribution of the substances throughout a given lot. In other words, instead of an even distribution, the substances would tend to form concentrated clumps, like lumps in gravy. Neither of these samples tested positive for melamine and no gluten is listed as an ingredient in either variety. Neither of these lots have been recalled by Menu Foods. As noted in the misc. section on the home page, nitrogen rich substances, such as cyanuric acid, are believed to have a substantial affect on the toxicity of a wide variety of bio toxins. UPDATE June 30, 2007: I received a hard copy of the UC Davis results. Nothing new of interest except the 1 PPM sensitivity claimed for acetaminophen in the phone call, mysteriously changed to 0.1 PPM on the hard copy. A moot point considering this was from the lot ExperTox did not find to be acetaminophen positive. Cyanuric acid was tested at 10 PPM, which would miss anything except big chunks. UPDATE June 18, 2007: In an apparent conflict of interest, UC Davis is the beneficiary of a half million dollar grant from Hill's. The page to the previoulsy linked UCD press release on said half mil mysteriously disappeared shortly after it was posted here. Do you suppose they are having computer problems? Or did they just become a bit shy about disclosing which side their pet food is buttered on? Some notes on my experience in working with various labs over the past several months have been added to the bottom of this section. Chuckles' lab tests indicate anemia and kidney failure. I've added color coding and definitions for abbreviations to aid in translating the results. Ironically, considering ASPCA and cohort's position on acetaminophen poisoning, this PDF file put out by the ASPCA reads as follows: "Acetaminophen is primarily eliminated by two major pathways: glucuronidation and sulfation. When these pathways are saturated or deficient, an alternative pathway breaks down the acetaminophen to a toxic metabolite called NAPQI a free radical that damages hemoglobin, red blood cells (RBCs), and, occasionally, kidney cells. Cats are deficient in glucuronidation and sulfation abilities and, therefore, more susceptible to acetaminophen toxicosis than dogs. Cats have been shown to produce signs of acetaminophen toxicosis at a dose as low as 10 mg/kg. NAPQI can bind to the hepatic cell membrane and damage the lipid layer, causing hepatocyte injury and death. It also causes severe oxidative stress to RBCs. The oxidant damage to heme molecules results in methemoglobin. Oxidation of hemoglobin may also cause Heinz body formation. Damaged RBCs may be subsequently removed from circulation, causing anemia." Are the results consistent with acetaminophen poisoning? It sure looks like it to me. It is also worth noting that kidney failure, and liver failure, display nearly identical symptoms: lethargy, vomiting, excess drinking and urination, loss of appetite and diarrhea. (See link) This sample is believed to have come from a bag of Hill's Science Diet dry cat food. The test results show acetaminophen, the generic version of Tylanol, was found in the food. The substance is fantastically deadly to cats, very dangerous to dogs, and will destroy a human's kidneys if taken often for extended periods of time. It is my understanding the folks at Hill's would prefer this information not be made public. Hopefully the folks at Hill's understand we would prefer pet food companies not murder our four footed family members. A medical dictionary will be necessary for us laymen to puzzle out the technical jargon in the pathology report on Steve’s cat Lynx. Of special interest is: "Kidneys, nephritis, nonsuppurative, multifocal... Liver, hepatopathy, multifocal... The renal crystals resemble those that have been described in the recent cases of wheat gluten toxicity... The hepatic lipidosis may have had toxic... origins" "Multifocal" on both the kidneys and liver means the damage was not confined to a single area, but was widespread. On the kidneys, "nonsuppurative" means there was no infection. "Lipids" are evidently essential fatty components of cells, and "osis" is the suffix to indicate damage. On kidney "nephritis", let’s go straight to the above dictionary’s definition of nephritis. "Nephritis: Inflammation of the kidney. Nephritis can be acute or chronic. Acute nephritis is most commonly caused by hypersensitivity (allergy) to drug therapy. Recognition of a drug-related cause is important because severe renal damage is often preventable or reversible. The most frequent drugs involved include analgesics (e.g., acetaminophen and aspirin)..." I don’t think any of us need to be rocket scientists to grasp the implications of that one! Which brings us to the mystery crystals, allegedly associated with melamine in wheat gluten. The only problem with that theory is Steve’s pet food sample tested negative for melamine. A reasonably bright person, with an inquiring mind, would quickly come to the conclusion this is a key piece of critical scientific evidence, worthy of urgent attention and further investigation. Apparently, when offered tissue samples for further study, the FDA refused to accept said samples, and blithely returned to inciting a trade war with China. According to Dr. Robert H. Poppenga of UC Davis, "Further, the cat in question had been diagnosed with acute renal failure, but there was no evidence of liver failure, which is what we see with acetaminophen poisoning.". And, Dr. Steven Hansen of the ASPCA says, "we believe any fear of acetaminophen contamination in pet food is unfounded, and pet parents should rest easy on that account.". And Gina Spadafori of Pet Connection figures that ends the debate "in absence of evidence to the contrary". If any of these folks were educated at UC Davis, do you think they can get their money back? Methinks they were cheated something awful on their book learnin’. This sample is believed to have come from a bag of Hill's Science Diet Light Adult. The test results show both acetaminophen and cyanuric acid was found in the food. At this point it might be worth making a note that none of the products listed so far have been recalled. As trendy as it is these days for pet food companies to admit using melamine from China, none of which was found in the above samples, there doesn't seem to be much conversation on acetaminophen.  NOTE: What follows is Donna's description of her efforts to find out why the unrecalled Innova dog food she was feeding her pets was making them sick, along with a small photo of the food in question. In addition to issues related to cyanuric acid and acetaminophen, her story brings to mind a previous pet food recall where pets sickened or died as a result of massive vitamin overdoses in the food. But let's let Donna tell it:In May we decided to test our dog food because we discovered black and beige chunks of unknown substance embedded in the kibble in two 33-lb. bags of Innova adult dry dog food. We contacted the pet food company and forwarded samples of the product to them for analysis. We also paid for samples to be tested at ExperTox laboratory. A week after receiving the samples, ExperTox called to advise us that the chunks yielded cyanuric acid (3.71 ug/g) and acetaminophen (trace). (test link) Natura Pet had advised us it would take 3 weeks for analysis of the samples. At the 3 week mark (June 8), we called to advise them of the laboratory’s findings and ask the results of their tests. A representative from Natura returned our call on June 13 and was unaware of any issues with their food. They discovered the sample we sent was still sitting on the desk of the person we shipped it to and had not been analyzed. They called 2 hours later with a message referencing a news article stating the FDA had “ruled out acetaminophen.” They called again on June 15 to advise the chunks were vitamin mineral premix that had “clumped” and “not been ground up completely.” We are not certain how they identified the chunks so quickly after our call. Also, if they knew it was a “vitamin mineral premix clump”, why had they not already advised us during the previous three weeks they held the samples. As of June 29, we have had no further contact from the company. Our dogs were both sick with sporadic gastric-related problems beginning in January through May. Symptoms: gastric upset, vomiting, eating grass, refusal to eat kibble, increased water intake. Most significant was our female developed extreme incontinence almost overnight. We began calling the pet food company in January asking about formula changes or supplier/ingredient changes and were told “absolutely no changes.” We continued feeding this food as (1) it was not on the recall list; (2) our symptoms were totally different from the reported acute renal failure; and (3) the company insisted their food was safe and they had begun new expanded testing protocols. On June 1 when we received the analysis results, we stopped feeding all purchased dog food and began home cooking for our dogs. The gastric problems cleared up and the incontinence disappeared within two days and has not returned. We have a laboratory report specifying toxins in the dog food. We have a pet food company who stated the chunks were vitamin mineral premix; however, they have yet to advise us of their analysis results. The only conclusion we can draw at this point is while our dogs ate this food they suffered sporadic gastric illness and incontinence and when we stopped feeding this product all symptoms disappeared. As many of us know, the FDA’s response to this mess has been to withhold as much information as possible from the American people, in order to protect its corporate sponsors. We may never know how many families lost their four footed friends as a result of the clandestine treatment of mission critical information by this tax payer funded, $2 billion a year agency, the sole purpose of which is to prevent this sort of thing from happening. The FDA’s initial announcement declared a clueless state as to the identity of the toxins involved. Upon receiving a return call from the FDA, some days after leaving a message on the FDA hotline, I all but begged the person I spoke with to accept samples I had in my possession for testing. To my dismay, the offer was refused. It was at that point I knew no answers would be forthcoming except as a result of my own efforts to find those answers. I began making calls in an effort to find an independent lab able to test the food. I found several labs with facilities to test food, the kicker being it was up to me to specify the substances for which I wished the food to be tested. What would be a rather tall order for a degreed specialist, was a nearly impossible request to make of a layman. Never the less, thanks to the Internet, at the end of a week I had a list of substances known to cause kidney damage, which I submitted to a lab along with several cans of cat food. At that, the lab did not have protocols for half a dozen items on my list, including melamine and aminopterin. On this first effort, the results were negative or within expected limits. I continued looking for labs with facilities to do more in depth testing, with the result being either they did not have protocols for all the items on my list, or they would not do business with private parties. Eventually I stumbled across a reference to AccuTrace, the primary contractor for ExperTox, on an Internet message board. Not only did they have protocols for everything on my list, they also offered a scan for unknown substances as part of the package. One might reasonably raise the question as to why ExperTox is the only lab in the country finding acetaminophen in pet food. The short answer is ExperTox is quite possibly the only lab in the country possessing both the technical expertise to positively identify unknown substances, and the willingness to offer that expertise to the general public. I have also sent samples to UC Davis for testing as part of an effort to see the ExperTox results duplicated. The contrast in approach between the two facilities has been rather stark. As amazing as it may seem, the folks at UC Davis told me there couldn’t be any acetaminophen in the food, BEFORE I put the samples in the mail. The story of the hick who adamantly proclaimed, "Thar ain't no such critter!", upon seeing a giraffe at the zoo comes to mind. There are times one can’t help but wonder if our public universities have become a repository for those who are unemployable in the private sector. Isn't the essence of scientific research to assume nothing, question everything, and base findings on an open minded examination of the evidence? It's a safe bet the Wright Brothers did not consult the folks at UC Davis on their flying machine. One final comment I would make is the confidentiality requirement of independent laboratories such as ExperTox. Their role is much like that of physicians, with a professional and ethical duty to protect privileged client information. In many instances, these labs are in fact dealing with confidential medical information. I believe some confusion has arisen in recent media reports on this point. While the FDA is an investigative body, in theory serving the public trust, with a duty to warn the public of a clear and present danger, private labs do not, and can not, function in that capacity. They are not at liberty to disclose one client’s information to the benefit or detriment of another’s, regardless of the circumstances. In the course of having samples tested, the genuine concern shown by the folks on the cutting edge of the acetaminophen findings is beyond doubt. That they have made it possible for private citizens to test the same food the pet food companies are testing is to their credit. Without the professionalism and integrity of these people, the hard evidence in this section of the site would not be possible. |
