Contaminated dry pet food manufactured at Diamond Pet Foods’ Gaston, South Carolina production plant is responsible for 22 confirmed cases of human salmonellosis – 20 in the USA and 2 in Canada, according to an update released yesterday by CDC.

Thirteen states are reporting outbreak illnesses, all of them caused by a single strain of Salmonella Infantis. The US reports come from Alabama (2), California (1), Connecticut (1), Illinois (1), Michigan (1), Missouri (3), North Carolina (3), New Jersey (1), New York (1), Ohio (2), Pennsylvania (2), South Carolina (1) and Virginia (1). Canada has confirmed two outbreak cases, one each in the provinces of Quebec and Nova Scotia.

Outbreak-related illnesses began as early as October 2011; the most recent illness onset was May 11, 2012. Infected individuals cover the entire age spectrum – from less than one year old to 82 years old. Two-thirds (68%) of the  patients are female, and at least six of the outbreak victims were hospitalized.

In addition to the human illnesses, the contaminated dry pet food has taken its toll of dogs and cats. FDA acknowledged two lab-confirmed illnesses in dogs, and numerous pet owners have reported sick and companion animals. In addition to the two illnesses acknowledged by FDA, eFoodAlert readers have reported 49 sick dogs and cats that were fed a recalled Diamond Pet Foods product. Seven animals died.

It’s time to review how we arrived at this point.

The Outbreak Investigation (from CDC investigation report)

• March 14, 2012: Michigan Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (MDARD) collects an unopened bag of Diamond Naturals Lamb Meal & Rice dry dog food to test for Salmonella as part of a routine retail test.
• April 2, 2012: MDARD detects Salmonella in the dog food sample. The pulsed field gel electrophoresis (PFGE) pattern of the Salmonella matched the genetic profile of Salmonella Infantis that was recovered from cases of human illness.
• April 12-20, 2012: FDA carries out an inspection of the Diamond Pet Foods’ manufacturing facility in Gaston, South Carolina. The inspection finds significant deficiencies in the production facility. As part of its inspection, FDA samples finished products, ingredients, and the production environment for Salmonella testing. All environment and ingredient samples are negative; a sample of Diamond Puppy Formula dry dog food tests positive for Salmonella.
• April 26, 2012: Ohio Department of Agriculture issues health alert referencing the Chicken Soup for the Pet Lover’s Soul product recall.
• May 3, 2012: CDC releases its initial Outbreak Investigation announcement, advising the public that 14 individuals in 9 states were infected with the outbreak strain of Salmonella Infantis.
• May 4, 2012: Ohio announces two cases of human illnesses linked to the same strain of Salmonella Infantis. State public health officials isolated the outbreak strain from an opened bag of Diamond Brand Chicken Soup for the Pet Lover’s Soul Adult Light Formula dry dog food collected from the home of an ill person, and an unopened bag of the product collected from a retail store.
• May 9, 2012: The Public Health Agency of Canada issues a Public Health Notice reporting one outbreak case of Salmonella Infantis illness in the province of Quebec.
• May 11, 2012: CDC updates its outbreak case count to 15 confirmed cases in 9 states, and one case in Canada.
• May 18, 2012: The Public Health Agency of Canada reports a second confirmed outbreak illness, this time in the province of Nova Scotia.
• June 13, 2012: CDC updates its outbreak case count to 20 confirmed cases in 13 states, and two cases in Canada.

The Recalls (from Diamond Pet Foods recall notices and emails to its international customers)

• April 6, 2012: Diamond Pet Foods announces recall of Diamond Naturals Lamb & Rice (best before dates 03 Jan 2013 and 04 Jan 2013)
• April 13, 2012: In an email addressed to its “Dear Valued Customers” with the subject line “Diamond Recall Clarification and Action Plans”, Diamond advises its international customers that Colombia and Japan were the only two international countries affected by the April 6th recall. The entire email was recently posted on the Facebook page of the Nigerian distributor of Diamond Pet Foods products. The email was signed by David Jack, Vice President, International Diamond Pet Food Company.
• April 26, 2012: Diamond Pet Foods announces recall of Chicken Soup for the Pet Lover’s Soul Adult Light Formula (best before dates 27/JAN/2013 and 28/JAN/2013)
• April 30, 2012: Diamond Pet Foods announces recall of Diamond Puppy Formula (best by dates 11-Jan-2013, 6-Apr-2013, and 7-Apr-2013)
• May 4, 2012: Diamond Pet Foods recalls several brands of dry dog food manufactured at its Gaston facility between December 9, 2011 and April 7, 2012
• May 4, 2012: Dick van Patten’s Natural Balance Pet Foods announces recall of several products manufactured by Diamond Pet Foods.
• May 4, 2012: Canidae Pet Foods announces recall of several dry dog food products manufactured by Diamond Pet Foods.
• May 4, 2012: Apex Pet Foods announces recall of Apex Chicken and Rice Dog food (best before 24-Jan-2013), manufactured by Diamond Pet Foods.
• May 18, 2012: Health Canada’s Consumer Product Safety announces series of recalls of Diamond Pet Foods brands of dry pet food that were shipped to Canada.
• May 18, 2012: Diamond Pet Foods recalls Diamond Naturals Small Breed Adult Dog Lamb & Rice formula (Production code DSL 0801), manufactured in its Meta, Missouri facility.
• May 21 and May 29, 2012: Agri-Food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore advises consumers of the recall of the affected production batches of Country Value, Diamond Naturals, Premium Edge, Taste of the Wild and SolidGold dry pet foods that were exported to Singapore.

What Else Do We Know?

• We know that the outbreak of Salmonella Infantis illnesses is linked inextricably with Salmonella-contaminated dry pet food manufactured by Diamond Pet Foods in Gaston, South Carolina.
• We know that the Salmonella found by the state of Ohio in a sample of Diamond Naturals Small Breed Adult Lamb & Rice that was manufactured in Meta, Missouri is not related to the Salmonella that contaminated the Gaston products.
• We know – courtesy of Laura Alvey, Deputy Director of Communications for FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine – that FDA is currently conducting an inspection of Diamond’s Missouri production facility.
• We know that the recalled pet food was distributed in the USA and – directly or indirectly – in Canada, Colombia, France, Ireland, Japan, the Netherlands,  Singapore and Spain.
• We know, through direct email correspondence, that Diamond’s direct customers in the following countries did NOT receive recalled pet food: Australia, Czech Republic, Finland, Hungary, Ireland, New Zealand, Romania, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom

What DON’T We Know?

• We don’t know how the Salmonella Infantis entered Diamond’s Gaston production plant and how it remained – present and undetected – in the production plant from at least January 2012 into April 2012.
• We don’t know how many dogs and cats were sickened – and how many died – because of the contaminated pet food.
• We don’t know – because Diamond Pet Foods refuses to tell us – to which countries the recalled pet foods were exported.
• We don’t know what steps Diamond has taken to ensure that this won’t happen again.

“We do not share our product and distribution lists for competitive reasons.”

– Diamond Pet Foods (by email), June 8, 2012

More than two months after its initial recall announcement, and more than one month after announcing its expanded recall of dry pet food manufactured in Gaston, South Carolina, Diamond Pet Foods still has not provided international consumers with a list of countries (other than the USA and Canada) that are affected by its product recalls.

Nor, eFoodAlert has been told, does the company intend to do so in future. In reply to my repeated email and telephone requests for a list of countries to which the recalled products had been shipped, Diamond’s Media Desk put up a stone wall.

It’s not as though I was asking for a list of the company’s overseas wholesale and distribution network; all I was looking for was a list of countries.

FDA, too, has declined to release a list of affected countries, citing “confidentiality” concerns. It is standard practice, though, for FDA to notify all appropriate foreign counterparts in the event of any Class 1 recall, according to Laura Alvey, Deputy Director, Communications Staff for FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine. It’s then up to the notified counterpart agencies to decide what to do with the information.

This latest round of futile effort at communicating with Diamond Pet Foods was triggered by a pet owner in Malaysia who communicated with Mollie Morrissette of Poisoned Pets. This consumer purchased a bag of Taste of the Wild dog food with an unusual label.

When he peeled the label off of the bag, he discovered that the dry dog food he purchased from his local supplier was actually included in the list of recalled production codes and bore a Best before date of 19/Jan/2013.

I was able to determine that this stick-on label was NOT affixed by Diamond Pet Foods. “Diamond Pet Foods,” I was told in an email, “does not use a sticker for production codes or date codes. Our production and date codes are printed on the packaging inline after the bag is filled and sealed. Countries may use different date formats depending on the regulation of the importing country.” The company’s reply did not address the alteration in the Expiry date.

UPDATE (June 11, 2012): The pet owner in Malaysia received the following reply from Diamond Pet Foods earlier today:

The distributor made a mistake and did not inform us until your complaint.

They sticker another pet food competitor’s bags and their warehouse over stickered ours by mistake.

They are not authorized to do this and i have informed them of the damage that has been done in particular through comments made in pet food alert.

Disappointed this happened and too bad we did not have an opportunity to investigate and rectify.

Will not be happening again.

Adding to the confusion and consternation are the reports from European consumers. A consumer in Ireland and one in Holland were told by their retailer (Zooplus) that the recalled bags of Taste of the Wild dog food had been retested on entry to the EU, had been found to be safe, and that the recall codes could be disregarded. The original production codes and expiration dates imprinted on the bags by the manufacture were not altered or hidden in Europe.

Pet owners in Australia and Singapore, on the other hand, can breathe more easily than their European and Malaysian counterparts. Formal recall notices for the affected batches of food have been issued by the Singapore distributors, and are posted on the web site of the Agri-food and Veterinary Authority of Singapore. And the recalled product never was shipped to Australia. I have been informed by a spokesperson at Australia’s Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry that “…manufacturing facilities that produce goods for Australia are all located in California.” Diamond’s California manufacturing plant was not implicated at all in the company’s pet food recalls.

As of last report, the contaminated pet food was the source of 15 cases of Salmonella Infantis infections in the USA and 2 cases in Canada. At least two dogs are confirmed to be infected with the outbreak strain, and dozens of other reports of sick animals – dogs and cats – have been posted by readers of eFoodAlert. The full animal and human scope of this outbreak is undoubtedly far larger than the reported numbers of cases.

More worrisome than the actual numbers, however, is the inadequacy of the notification system. It’s usual for FDA to include in its Weekly Enforcement Reports (one of which will almost certainly summarize the Diamond Pet Food recalls – eventually) a list of countries to which a recalled product was shipped. But by then, the information will be irrelevant. Why not release this information when it can be of some use?

And why is Diamond Pet Foods making such a secret of which countries were the recipients of the recalled products?