FDA Failure

[Ardentfrost]

ABC News: Officials: Pet Food Poison May Have Been Intentional

Officials: Pet Food Poison May Have Been Intentional

April 19, 2007 — For the first time, investigators are saying the chemical that has sickened and killed pets in the United States may have been intentionally added to pet food ingredients by Chinese producers.


Food and Drug Administration investigators say the Chinese companies may have spiked products with the chemical melamine so that they would appear, in tests, to have more value as protein products.


Officials now suspect this possibility because a second ingredient from China, rice protein concentrate, has tested positive for melamine. So has corn gluten shipped to South Africa. That means there is a possibility for another round of recalls.

The FDA's top veterinarian, Stephen Sundlof, says finding melamine in so many products "would certainly lend credibility to the theory that it was maybe intentional."


Melamine, which is used to make plastics in the United States and as a fertilizer in Asia, contains nitrogen. Nitrogen can appear to boost the level of protein in products.


The revelations have led the FDA to expand the number of products it is testing as they enter the United States. So far, those inspections at the border have not turned up any melamine in wheat gluten. Tainted wheat gluten used by Menu Foods is suspected in sickening hundreds, if not thousands of pets.


Some of the tainted pet food has apparently made it into feed for hogs. Federal agencies are trying to determine if it was actually fed to animals and whether it may have reached the human food supply.

IMO, I think this is the sort of thing we open ourselves up to when we trust the government to protect us instead of running tests ourselves. And by that, I don't mean in our homes, I mean consumer groups testing all types of food and informing us of the possible dangers.

I'm not even NECESSARILY saying this would have been prevented with consumer groups, I just see this as us trusting the FDA and we have no ability to control their effectiveness.

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

IMO, I think this is the sort of thing we open ourselves up to when we trust the government to protect us instead of running tests ourselves. And by that, I don't mean in our homes, I mean consumer groups testing all types of food and informing us of the possible dangers.

I'm not sure I follow. What makes you think we, as companies, don't test things? The government doesn't test everything that comes into the country Every major pharma company or food company has a division of quality control. We do test this stuff ourselves.

I'm not even NECESSARILY saying this would have been prevented with consumer groups, I just see this as us trusting the FDA and we have no ability to control their effectiveness.

This was an unfortunate mistake that began at its beginning...our imported materials from China. Mistakes happen.

I'm not sure what you're blaming the FDA for?

[Scrum]

What stops consumer groups from testing this now?

[7960]

Originally Posted by Scrum

What stops consumer groups from testing this now?

There's no money to be made from it.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I'm not sure I follow. What makes you think we, as companies, don't test things? The government doesn't test everything that comes into the country Every major pharma company or food company has a division of quality control. We do test this stuff ourselves.

This was an unfortunate mistake that began at its beginning...our imported materials from China. Mistakes happen.

I'm not sure what you're blaming the FDA for?

My blame for the FDA is that we TRUST them yet have zero control on their effectiveness. If it was consumer based and they made a mistake this big, they'd lose money. The FDA has no stake in ensuring they test things as thoroughly as we demand, just thoroughly enough to not garner attention.

[nbiggershaft]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

My blame for the FDA is that we TRUST them yet have zero control on their effectiveness. If it was consumer based and they made a mistake this big, they'd lose money. The FDA has no stake in ensuring they test things as thoroughly as we demand, just thoroughly enough to not garner attention.

If capitalistic forces do not currently prompt companies to test because the FDA is ineffective, what capitalistic forces would prompt them to do so without the FDA?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

My blame for the FDA is that we TRUST them yet have zero control on their effectiveness. If it was consumer based and they made a mistake this big, they'd lose money. The FDA has no stake in ensuring they test things as thoroughly as we demand, just thoroughly enough to not garner attention.

We trust them to allow safe products to enter our market. That is their job. Their job is not quality control; they have nothing to do with that. Once a product is approved to enter our market, it is out of the FDA's hands and up to the company to avoid lawsuits and make sure their approved product is consistently a quality product.

Your'e barkin up the wrong tree here.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

If capitalistic forces do not currently prompt companies to test because the FDA is ineffective, what capitalistic forces would prompt them to do so without the FDA?

Our demand for quality products.

Do you not demand quality products? If you want a really nice TV, do you shop at Wal-Mart? Or do you go to Best Buy or HiFi Buys or some other renowned A/V store?

Certain certifications for food would pull to the front and then you would know what you were buying. The food company would pay the certifying group to inspect their shit to certify it, pass on the cost of that certification to the consumer, and then you could choose which cert was more important to you. Company A and B would make certain promises about their certifications, and then you might have uncertified foods by companies that make their own set of promises.

Quality controlled by demand, not by bureaucrats who have no idea what our demands are.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

We trust them to allow safe products to enter our market. That is their job. Their job is not quality control; they have nothing to do with that. Once a product is approved to enter our market, it is out of the FDA's hands and up to the company to avoid lawsuits and make sure their approved product is consistently a quality product.

Your'e barkin up the wrong tree here.

No, all egg producers have on-hand FDA employees who do spot checks on eggs all day long. In other foods, the FDA does surprise inspections of factories, random samples taken from shipments, and other methods.

But I'm also talking about USDA and whomever else we trust our food quality with. There is a federally mandated minimum quality for foods, and I'm using the FDA to blanket any federal department that does that.

[thomez]

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

If capitalistic forces do not currently prompt companies to test because the FDA is ineffective, what capitalistic forces would prompt them to do so without the FDA?

the lack of the FDA would create a void that would be filled by demand for the service

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

No, all egg producers have on-hand FDA employees who do spot checks on eggs all day long. In other foods, the FDA does surprise inspections of factories, random samples taken from shipments, and other methods.

But I'm also talking about USDA and whomever else we trust our food quality with. There is a federally mandated minimum quality for foods, and I'm using the FDA to blanket any federal department that does that.

Keep in mind, we're talking about pet food here

I'd like to not pay for on-hand FDA people for my dog food.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

Keep in mind, we're talking about pet food here

I'd like to not pay for on-hand FDA people for my dog food.

Privitization = people who buy the products pay for the services. There would certainly be certified safe pet foods. Right now we're all paying for the FDA to lead the investigation.

[ballz2wallz]

I'm all for privatization. I just think you're depending on the FDA a little too much here.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by ballz2wallz

I'm all for privatization. I just think you're depending on the FDA a little too much here.

It's not my choice to depend on them.

[nbiggershaft]

Originally Posted by thomez

the lack of the FDA would create a void that would be filled by demand for the service

Thats a void the OP is already claiming exists.

[Ardentfrost]

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

Thats a void the OP is already claiming exists.

Who asked for the FDA if the demand doesn't exist?

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

It's not my choice to depend on them.

Well, you don't have to regarding this issue.

[Ardentfrost]

I wonder if pet food would be certifyable without the FDA's existance

Like I said originally, without the FDA this wouldn't NECESSARILY have been prevented, however, should they have been watching this industry due to the promises they make for other food stuffs? The article talks about rice protein containing the poison, and that's not the only food stuff China ships throughout the world... so now they've upped checking foreign foods.

Plus, if the FDA isn't responsible for pet food in some way, why do they have a "top vetenarian?"

[thomez]

Originally Posted by nbiggershaft

Thats a void the OP is already claiming exists.

a void that would come about by the non-existence of the FDA cannot already exist if the FDA currently exists - unless of course you are saying the FDA fills the void that would be filled by the private sector if the FDA didn't exist, which is exactly what I'm saying as well

[ballz2wallz]

Originally Posted by Ardentfrost

should they have been watching this industry due to the promises they make for other food stuffs?

No.