If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Crane, Gaubster, PhilP
"Ann Martin" wrote in message
My question is, what are you all so frightened of that you have taken such a defensive stand? You all seemed concerned that I am making all kinds of money from my books and television radio shows. You insinuate that all information in my books are nothing more then scare tactics. Let's look at the pet food industry, an industry that makes billions per year. What is this industry doing? Lying to the pet owner's, brain washing them into believing that feeding commercial pet foods, garbage, is the only way they can have a healthy pet. In the meantime these people, the pet owner's, are incurring thousands of dollars in vet bills from feeding this garbage. Ads depict steaks, whole grains, quality vegetables and fats going into these products when in reality what is going into these pet foods is garbage that would otherwise end up in landfill or be incinerated. All these people have stated that this industry is regulated. Where is the proof? Show me one document that gives any indication that ingredients in pet foods are regulated. One idiot stated that the USDA/FSIS regulated the ingredients used in pet foods. WRONG! they have no input at all. The FDA/CVM oversees any drugs that are used in pet foods and the labeling text. NOTHING ELSE. The AAFCO sets guidelines and it is up to each state to adopt these guidlines. Very few states actually do and if they do this group, comprised of many from the pet food industry, has no input at all into the ingredients used. If you follow the AAFCO guidlelines, as I have pointed out in a previous post, the foods can contain such things as "hydrolyzed hair," dehydrated garbage," "dehydrated food waste," "dried ruminant waste," "dried swine waste," "undried processed animal waste products,". NOW WOULD YOU PLEASE PROVIDE SOME DOCUMENTATION AS TO WHO REGULATES THE INGREDIENTS THAT ARE IN COMMERCIAL FOOD. THE PET FOOD COMPANIES, THAT'S WHO REGULATES THIS INDUSTRY. You ramble on about the nutrient value of the ingredients in pet foods but you neglect to mention what these ingredients actually are. You can derive nutrients from nearly anything including garbage. To that garbage add a substantial amount of vitamins, minerals and you want us to believe that you will be feeding your pet a "complete and balanced diet." You have persisted in asking for documentation as to the information I have posted. I've provided that including the e-mail from the USDA/FSIS stating they have no input at all into the ingredients in pet food. I've quote from letter received from the FDA/CVM as to their knowledge that pets ARE used in commercial pet foods and from David Dzanis, DVM, formerly with the FDA/CVM who stated that the AAFCO ingredient definitions applied to both livestock feed and PET FOOD. Crane wrote that he had spoken to Halo, the company that makes 'Spots Stew. "I spent nearly an hour on the phone with this lady and found out she had never had the food analyzed and could not even begin to give me an answer about the calcium and phosphorus levels in the food. She kept insisting that since it was all "human grade" the levels of these minerals didn't matter." Well he must have spoken to the cleaning lady because Andi Brown, the owner of the company was out of town last week. If this is the conversation he had with the cleaning woman then she lied because Andi Brown replied that they continually have their food analyzed and are always in compliance. I suggest that you get your story straight the next time you post such inaccurate information. These three also continue to insist that the pentobarbital in pet food poses no danger. I've questioned them a number of times that if this was the case why was the investigation begun in the first place? It was because dogs were building up a resistance to this drug and it was taking more to euthanize the. If this drug ws having no effect then there should have been no change in the amounts it took to euthanize. Also, the FDA/CVM did not consider the interaction of this drug with other drugs. They did not consider the interaction with other chemicals found in pet food. They measured ONE liver enzyme then sought to find the minimal daily dose that did not elevate this enzyme. The conclusion arrived at was this drug was "probably" safe. Probably does not mean it is safe. As I have also mentioned, the FDA/CVM has admitted that if this drug, in any amount, was found in human food it would be pulled from the shelves immediately. Not so with pet foods. When anyone questions any of you and you are backed into a corner your resort to derogatory remarks and name calling, you never answer the questions that are addressed to you. As I've said before, I don't have the time to spend with people like you and won't bother wasting anymore time with your posts. Others on the list know that I am more then happy to provide any documented information they require. Ann |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|