It’s Publication Day!

Calling All Pets
(and Pet Parents, Too)

Five years after the idea for a book on the pet food industry first took hold of me during a walk on Carmel Beach, I am proud to announce the official launch of TOXIC. From Factory to Food Bowl, Pet Food Is a Risky Business.

If you share your life with a companion animal—especially a dog or cat—you owe it to your pet to educate yourself about the practices that take place behind the scenes in the factories and kitchens where raw, canned, and kibbled pet foods are manufactured.

The reality behind the appetizing package labels and enticing website advertising may shock you. It will certainly disillusion you, as it did me.

The stories and investigations described in TOXIC are drawn from interviews with pet owners, public records, published articles, and FDA inspection reports.

FULL DISCLOSURE: My husband and I are very fortunate to share our home with our 7½ year old Australian Cobberdog, Rutlands Shalom. She thrives on a home-cooked diet that I prepare for her myself.

Word On the Street

As part of the run-up to the publication of TOXIC, I supplied Advance Review copies to a number of colleagues in the writing community. Several of these individuals have already posted their reviews, and I am proud to share a few of their comments here. If you wish to read a complete review, please click on the reviewer’s name or handle.

“As the former global pathogen product manager at a major testing manufacturer, I found this book a fantastic companion to Tainted by Phyllis Entis.” – George Nagle (Amazon USA reviewer)

“TOXIC provides an eye-opening look at the pet food industry’s failures.” – Amy M. Reade (Amazon USA reviewer)

“Well, wow! As with Entis’s first book, TAINTED, this new installment is frighteningly eye opening.” – PeaceLoveHope (an Amazon USA Vine Voice reviewer)

“My thanks to the author for this meticulous insight – would that it weren’t necessary to hold those responsible constantly to account, but it is … and this book does that with aplomb.” – MeandtheMutts (Amazon UK reviewer)

A Peek Inside the Book

If you have read this far, please let me entice you further with a short excerpt from Chapter 9: Pentobarbital’s Pervasive Presence. I interviewed Mark Johnson via email for this story.

Mark was a California cattleman and his dogs were his workforce. He maintained a string of Border Collies and Australian Shepherd mixes to help with herding. Mark first purchased Gravy Train canned dog foods in 2015, using the products as supplemental feedings and as rewards for his dogs. In January 2018, when disaster struck, Mark owned thirteen dogs, ranging from ten months to approximately seven years old. One of his six female dogs was pregnant.

Typically, Mark purchased five cases of dog food weekly, patronizing the local Walmart and Big Lots stores for his supplies. In early January 2018, he replenished his supply of canned food with a purchase of two Gravy Train varieties: Chunks in Gravy with Beef Chunks, and Chunks in Gravy with T-Bone Flavor Chunks. On or about January 12^th, all thirteen dogs fell sick within hours after eating the Gravy Train dog food. He took all of the dogs to his local veterinarian. Within two days of having consumed the dog food, all thirteen dogs were showing signs of kidney failure and were euthanized at the veterinarian’s recommendation.

Although the veterinarian performed a necropsy on one of the dogs, neither he nor Mark reported the dog deaths to the FDA. According to Mark, the veterinarian died shortly after the incident, and Mark was unable to retrieve his files. As of November 2018, Mark was still searching for replacement herding dogs that were in need of a good home.

How To Order TOXIC

TOXIC. From Factory to Food Bowl, Pet Food Is a Risky Business is available in digital format from all major ebook retailers, and can be purchased in paperback on Amazon.

Alternatively, you can have your favorite bookstore order a copy of TOXIC for you.

If you prefer to borrow your reading material from a local library, please consider asking your librarian to add TOXIC to the library’s collection.

Another Pentobarbital-related Pet Food Recall

Late this afternoon, Against the Grain Pet Food voluntarily recalled one lot of Against the Grain Pulled Beef with Gravy Dinner for Dogs (12 oz. cans; Lot #2415E01ATB12; Expiration date of December 2019) due to the potential presence of pentobarbital. The recalled dog food was manufactured and distributed in 2015 to independent pet retail stores in Washington and Maryland.

Who is Against the Grain Pet Food?

The company website makes the following claim:

Unlike 95% of other brands, Against the Grain owns its own manufacturing facility and produces its own products. This gives us accessibility and the ability to create totally unique and innovative products. Our manufacturing plant adheres to the highest standards of preserving our natural resources. For example, the use of natural light (skylights) is dominant throughout our plant, we have the maximum amount of recyclable materials in our retail packaging, all packaging materials are recycled, our water is supplied by our own on-site well, resulting in our conscious efforts to be socially and economically responsible.

In fact, Against the Grain Pet Food is part and parcel of the Sher family business. The telephone number provided on the Against the Grain Pet Food Contact page is 847-537-0102, the same phone number that appears in the February 3rd Evanger’s recall notice. The Against the Grain trademark (serial number 85569018) was registered on 2013-02-12 and is owned by Chelsea L. Sher. And, according to an article in the August 2012 issue of Pet Business, the Against the Grain product line, launched by Chelsea Sher and her twin brother Brett Sher, is manufactured at the Evanger’s factory. In effect, Against the Grain is an Evanger’s brand.

So, what’s the big deal?

The big deal is that the product recalled on February 3rd by Evanger’s was manufactured in June 2016 (with a June 2020 expiry date). The Against the Grain product recalled earlier today was manufactured six months earlier, in December 2015 (with a December 2019 expiry date). This is not a one-shot event.

The Against the Grain recall notice states that the recall was initiated “Out of an abundance of caution.” What does this mean? Now, we enter the realm of speculation – something I am not usually willing to do. This time, though, I’ll make an exception. There are four possibilities that come to mind.

Possibility #1: The same shipment of beef was used to manufacture both recalled products.

This strikes me as highly unlikely. First of all, the February 3rd recall was for ‘Hunks of Beef’, while today’s was for ‘Pulled Beef’ – two entirely different formats. Secondly, if the same shipment was used in both products, the ‘Hunks of Beef’ product would have been manufactured with 6-month old beef. Possible, of course, but not highly probably, unless the company stores its raw meat in the deep freeze for months at a time.

Possibility #2: Beef from the same supplier was used to manufacture both recalled products, and the manufacturer is just being super-cautious.

Evanger’s February 3rd update, posted on the company website, states:

We feel that we have been let down by our supplier, and in reference to the possible presence of pentobarbital, we have let down our customers. Despite having a relationship for forty years with the supplier of this specific beef, who also services many other pet food companies, we have terminated our relationship with them and will no longer purchase their beef for use in our Hunk of Beef product. As Hunk of Beef is a very unique product, requiring very specific cuts of meat, this supplier’s meat was used in no other products.

If this is accurate, then the Against the Grain product should not contain meat from this supplier at all. Again, this explanation does not make sense.

Possibility #3: Either the company or FDA arranged for lab testing of a number of Evanger’s products and detected pentobarbital in a sample of the Against the Grain product.

Based on my years of off-and-on contact with the food industry and regulatory bodies, I am confident that FDA is testing extensively for pentobarbital in samples of Evanger’s products. We won’t know what, if anything, they find until their investigation is complete and they release their results. However, a positive finding of pentobarbital would certainly trigger an immediate recall.

Possibility #4: Either the company or FDA has found evidence that meat from an unauthorized source was introduced into the company’s products.

This, too, would be sufficient to trigger a recall “Out of an abundance of caution.” Again, we won’t know whether or not this took place until FDA completes its investigation.

The good news for pet owners is that, so far at least, this problem appears to be confined to products manufactured at Evanger’s Wheeling, IL facility. Let’s hope it stays that way.

What Next For Evanger’s?

The pet health blogosphere is alive with questions and speculations over the February 3rd recall of five production lots of Evanger’s Hunk of Beef canned pet food. For anyone who has been in hibernation for the last several days, I’ll begin with a timeline.

June 6-13, 2016: Evanger’s produces five lots of Hunk of Beef canned food, using beef chunks furnished by a single unnamed USDA-inspected supplier.

December 31, 2016: A Washington state woman feeds Hunk of Beef to her five pugs as a special New Year’s Eve treat. Four of the dogs became severely ill within 15 minutes, and were rushed to an emergency veterinary center. One of the four dogs died; the other three required treatment in the veterinary ICU. The fifth dog, which ate the least amount of the food, did not require veterinary treatment.

January 3, 2017: The remains of the dead dog are submitted by the veterinarian to the Oregon State University Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory for necropsy and lab analysis.

January 4, 2017: Evanger’s posts its first comment on the reports, indicating that the Company was in touch with the pet owner and that Evanger’s had submitted the batch in question to a third-party lab for testing. Evanger’s also reported that “the entire lot went to one distributor in Washington State, and no other cans from this lot would be anywhere else in the country.” The samples were received by the laboratory on January 13th, according to the lab reports on the Evanger’s website.

January 11, 2017: Samples of the stomach contents of the dead dog and of the remainder of the opened can of dog food are received by the Michigan State University Diagnostic Center for Population & Animal Health (MSU) for toxicology testing.

January 16, 2017: Evanger’s posted an update on its investigation, including initial lab test results for Salmonella, Staphylococcus aureus, Clostridium spp. and Enterobacteriaceae. The test results were negative.

January 17, 2017: Dr. John Buchweitz, Clinical Toxicologist at MSU reports finding pentobarbital in the stomach contents and a ‘large quantity chromatographically’ in the sample of food. In reporting this result, Dr. Buchweitz adds, “If this sample came directly from a can, this is an urgent matter and needs to be reported to the FDA Feed Safety Portal.” Click on Toxicology Report to read the full report.

January 21, 2017: Evanger’s shared another lab report on its website, stating that the sample did not contain botulinum toxin.

January 23, 2017: Evanger’s posted its final lab test, reporting that the Hunk of Beef sample was ‘Commercially Sterile’.

January 30, 2017: Evanger’s posted yet another update, disputing reports that pentobarbital had been found in their dog food, adding, “These “claims” are simply fear tactics and either unrelated or unsubstantiated claims against our company and our foods.”

February 3, 2017: At FDA’s request, Evanger’s recalled five production lots of its Hunk of Beef canned pet food.

So, what happens next?

I have reached out both to FDA and to USDA, since Evanger’s procured their beef from a USDA-inspected facility to get an answer to that question. FDA, according to its standard policy, declined to comment on an in-progress investigation. In response to my email query, I was told by a USDA-FSIS spokesperson, “FDA is currently the lead on the investigation in Evanger’s Dog and Cat Food. USDA-FSIS is working with their federal partners at FDA to determine whether more Agency action is required.“

Reading between the lines, I think it is safe to say that FDA inspectors have been, and probably still are, swarming over and through Evanger’s production facility at 221 Wheeling Road, Wheeling, IL. Based on Evanger’s history, which I summarized in yesterday’s report, I hope and expect that the investigation will be exhaustive.