German Shepherds Forum banner

1 - 20 of 55 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,707 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Consumers in Minnesota, California and Florida are suing Champion Pet Food for “False Advertising”, violations of “feed law”, and numerous other charges. The lawsuit includes results of heavy metal testing and includes results that this dry dog food contains BPA – a chemical typically not associated with dry/kibble pet foods.

This is a Class Action lawsuit – currently representing consumers in Minnesota, California and Florida. The consumers are suing Champion Pet Food “for their negligent, reckless, and/or intentional practice of misrepresenting and failing to fully disclose the presence of heavy metals and toxins in their pet food sold throughout the United States. Plaintiffs seek both injunctive and monetary relief on behalf of the proposed Classes (defined below), including requiring full disclosure of all such substances in its marketing, advertising, and labeling and restoring monies to the members of the proposed Classes.”


The lawsuit claims Champion pet foods (Acana and Orijen) “contain levels of arsenic, mercury, lead, cadmium” “known to pose health risks to humans and animals, including dogs” and interestingly for a kibble pet food…the lawsuit claims the dry pet food contained “BISPHENOL A (“BPA”)”.

https://truthaboutpetfood.com/lawsuit-filed-against-champion-pet-food-acana-and-orijen/




:surprise: :surprise: :surprise:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,922 Posts
Good heavens, I just bought a bag Acana for Deja. I am not in one of the states, mentioned in the lawsuit. This is going to hurt them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,722 Posts
I give up! I will simply buy 6 month supplies of First Mate. I have spent weeks switching Shadow over to Acana, after who knows how long researching and comparing.
One of my big concerns is that with an iffy immune system and allergies and a bad heart, I was not willing to risk recall issues.
These dog food companies are really getting on my last nerve.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,328 Posts
@Sabis mom
Champion opened a manufacturing facility in Kentucky (I think) to support the demand for the US market. I believe there has already been some issues with product from that facility. Although I don't know for sure, the Canadian market hasn't had issues.
Maybe email them and ask what the heck this is about.
Like with all pet food processing plants, there are more than one brand of food going through the plant.
My friends daughter worked at a pet food/canning place in Ontario that did dog and cat food from the bottom of the barrel foods you have never seen on a shelf here anywhere (shipped who knows where) containing mystery meat to "Wellness"
As a far as I knew Champion is independent from other processing plants here, but in the US...???
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,707 Posts
Discussion Starter #6 (Edited)
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

Face Book

Dear Fellow Pet Lovers,
The allegations contained within a Class Action Complaint that was brought against us on March 1st are meritless and based on misinterpretation of the data.
Let us assure you that our products are safe and that we systematically test our products at two third-party laboratories using the Official Methods of Analysis by Association of Analytical Communities (AOAC). While we plan to comprehensively refute the wide range of false allegations in a court of law at the appropriate date, in the interim we want you to be confident in the safety and quality of our products.
For more information, we urge you to read: ORIJEN and ACANA Foods in Comparison to Pet Food Safety Standards, here: http://bit.ly/2HMvJiy
As you know, our commitment to using fresh and raw meat and fish ingredients means that pets and Pet Lovers can count on Champion to provide safe, Biologically Appropriate™ nutrition. Much like the natural human food we consume, Champion Petfoods contains small traces of a range of naturally occurring elements. These so-called ‘heavy metals’ are found throughout the Earth’s environment, and the miniscule amounts of these substances found in Champion Petfoods are a safe and common component of both human and animal diets. Our Biologically Appropriate™ foods feature much higher levels of quality fresh and raw meat ingredients than conventional pet foods, including fish and seafood ingredients.
Please know that we are confident that we will prevail as the facts and evidence are presented to the court, and that these baseless claims will not deter us from our mission of delivering award-winning Biologically Appropriate™ foods. The legal complaint has no bearing whatsoever on the activities or operation of our business, and you will continue to enjoy the same high degree of professionalism and quality you have come to expect from Champion.
Thank you for your continued commitment to our company and our quality food products.
Champion Petfoods
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
98 Posts
BPA is a chemical used in the plastics manufacturing process that basically keeps the plastic "flexible". It lost a lot of favor in the container industry after it was found to have leached out of the plastic's matrix and was being consumed. Furthermore, BPA bio-accumulates. There have been studies showing BPA in the systems of newborns because the bioaccumulation has passed from mother to child. Think about that: babies are being born with BPA already in their bodies! And no one really knows what the long term effects of BPA consumption are, but I'd bet they're not rosy and good.

I worked in the glass container industry for a number of years, so I'm intimately familiar with the ins and outs of our competition in the marketplace. That said, most plastic containers - water bottles, drink bottles, food jars, etc - have went away from BPA, but I'm sure there are some that still use it for some things. It's weird that it would be in dog food though. Maybe it's leaching from packaging or an ingredient's packaging?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
I'm glad to see they've responded to the allegations of having unsafe food, and if the tests they do are industry-standard, then I hope they'll consider counter-suing or, at least, not agree to settle. Frivolous lawsuits just raise costs for everyone. Standards have been established for acceptable limits of certain elements in foods, and this is not only because it's often impossible to remove all traces of said elements, but also because most generally-accepted test methods cannot detect amounts of As, Cr, Hg, etc below a certain level.

I find the hysteria especially annoying considering how much sugar people eat. Talk about poison! Sugar is terrible and leads to all kinds of disease, yet it's contained in nearly everything.

The dog food companies won't knowingly endanger pets to save money, because doing so would be bad PR and lead to losses of revenue and consumer trust. Pet products are a huge market, and while it's always a good idea for pet owners to do their own research, sometimes they need a little background in science to get the most (and most correct information) out of what's made available.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
Perspective, part II

Don't forget, consumers in California have cancer warning labels on EVERYTHING.

"Acrylamide is the chemical over which the Council for Education and Research on Toxics (CERT), a non-profit organization, is suing. Specifically, CERT is suing coffee sellers like Starbucks and 7-Eleven. The lawsuit claims that because a chemical called acrylamide can be produced when coffee beans are roasted, stores that sell coffee should have to post a Proposition 65 warning. A ruling is expected soon, the Wall Street Journal reported." Here's Why Everything Gives You Cancer In California

How much does it cost annually for a company to print compliant labels on its products? All of its products? And how much does it cost annually for that company to hire personnel to interpret new regulations and put them into effect, and to respond to state audits ensuring continued compliance? And more importantly, when the consumers get passed these cost increases, is that cost worth it considering the actual (not the perceived) risk of using the product?

I'm all for safety. But I'm not for figuratively wrapping folks in legislative bubble wrap (it's got BPA!) and giving them a private air supply (It's got di-hydrogen monoxide!).

IMO, we'd all be better off as a society if we taught two things in schools (in addition to the basics): ethics, and risk assessment.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,722 Posts
The dog food companies won't knowingly endanger pets to save money, because doing so would be bad PR and lead to losses of revenue and consumer trust. Pet products are a huge market, and while it's always a good idea for pet owners to do their own research, sometimes they need a little background in science to get the most (and most correct information) out of what's made available.
Except that Iams refused a recall until they were ordered to do so, long after they knew that batches were contaminated and killing animals.
BB similarly has been in the hot seat for years now, and has done nothing.

Consumers are prone to falling for marketing campaigns, it's a problem.

I don't eat much in the way of packaged or processed food because I don't trust it. And since I don't have the knowledge or the money to feed raw, I rely on some integrity with these dog food companies and it seems sadly lacking.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,217 Posts
bigger and more important impact would be to take on the entire food industry.

Get the ANTIBIOTICS out of meat that YOU and your dog consume.

Enjoy chicken again.
Hormones are added as well. And all the High Fructose corn syrup and its anonymous names they use to disguise it that's in mostly everything people eat in the USA. Than we have Glycol that the FDA allows. Add in all the dyes in most foods and we have some pretty unhealthy foods here. I have to use a magnifying glass to study everything I buy at a supermarket.

https://www.mensjournal.com/food-drink/yes-theres-propylene-glycol-in-your-fireball-20141029/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
13,884 Posts
Hormones are added as well. And all the High Fructose corn syrup and its anonymous names they use to disguise it that's in mostly everything people eat in the USA. Than we have Glycol that the FDA allows. Add in all the dyes in most foods and we have some pretty unhealthy foods here. I have to use a magnifying glass to study everything I buy at a supermarket.

https://www.mensjournal.com/food-drink/yes-theres-propylene-glycol-in-your-fireball-20141029/
oh yes -- propylene glycol --- anti freeze in food .
hormones - glyphosphate residue from that monster roundup -- in case you do
not know https://www.canceractive.com/cancer-active-page-link.aspx?n=3426

this kibble company prides itself on using locally sourced ingredients -- so what does that say

with other companies they are all at the mercy of vitamin pre-mix packs which they all source
from China
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
855 Posts
I’m just amazed that the company filing this lawsuit against Champion states Pedigree as a 5 star pet food.

As mentioned previously, you can file a lawsuit for anything. Doesn’t make it truthful or accurate. But it certainly does hurt image when people don’t do the research and learn what is actually happening.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,497 Posts
Yeah I know stuff can easily happen and it does effect image. a tough business but hopefully this gets worked out. It is why though I am hesitant on using other foods only to mix it up a bit. I know there foods with more proteins and less peas, potatoes but I do trust Fromm and just add some fresh food in or dehydrated patties. I also there food choices up with honest kitchen at times. It is scary out there and all the things in food not to mention water and air is all nutty.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
307 Posts
Iams likely did a cost-benefit analysis and decided they'd have to be forced into an expensive recall rather than do it voluntarily. What was the contaminant and how was it killing animals? And when did this incident you describe happen?

Yes, consumers do rely on the integrity of companies producing pet foods and the robustness of their quality systems. We (consumers) always have to do our own risk analyses, weighing trust vs convenience, looking for evidence of quality product in the health of our pets. Luckily, most times all goes well. In the rare instances where it doesn't, results can be devastating.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,722 Posts
Iams likely did a cost-benefit analysis and decided they'd have to be forced into an expensive recall rather than do it voluntarily. What was the contaminant and how was it killing animals? And when did this incident you describe happen?

Yes, consumers do rely on the integrity of companies producing pet foods and the robustness of their quality systems. We (consumers) always have to do our own risk analyses, weighing trust vs convenience, looking for evidence of quality product in the health of our pets. Luckily, most times all goes well. In the rare instances where it doesn't, results can be devastating.
I believe 2007, melamine contamination if I remember, subsequent lawsuit revealed that for months they were aware of the issue and had paid off some people to evade a lawsuit but never issued a recall or fixed the problem as it was not in their own words a widespread enough problem to make it cost effective. Cheaper to pay the grieving owners.
 
1 - 20 of 55 Posts
Top