|
bug
|
 |
« Reply #750 on: July 24, 2007, 12:26:18 PM » |
|
Wow. This is unbelievable. I can recall in first year university chemistry lab, the importance of being able to replicate test results. I'm pretty sure it was standard practice to use the exact same methodology as the original experiment, otherwise, the results could be challenged. This is what real science is based on. After replication, then, one might want to go out and use different methods of testing, etc. if technology has advanced (as in DNA testing), if they weren't able to perform as detailed a test as they would have liked in the original experiment, if the results contradicted each-other.
This is plain, ol' critical thinking and chemistry 101. Let's get on with it. Mr. Atkins, please send Donna's samples to Expertox and request the exact same testing that was performed on the sample she sent in independently. Then, post the results. Apples to apples, using the same type of apple.
To think, I almost had my mother switch her diabetic cat's food over to Evo as the % energy from carbohydrate comes in at 7%. This would have been an excellent dry food for her. As it stands, she will continue to feed her homemade stews supplemented with vitamins, minerals and a token amount of Orijen and Acana.
As for me, I was feeding my 5 cats Evo as a treat (and a break) from their usual dry. No more until I get some real scientific proof that Natura is serious about getting to the bottom of their quality issues . It does not matter one iota whether or not Donna's dogs got sick. If they never ate the sub-standard food, I would still want to know why it was allowed to pass quality control.
As far as I know, dry cat foods with a high protein content and no grains can be quite dusty as the kibble does not hold together as well as those with a binding agent. I have experienced this with several of these types of foods. I have no problem with this. I do, however, have a problem with companies messing with their formulas without informing their customers, at the very least, through their distributors (pet food stores).
Natura has gone further than any other pet food company. I agree. But, at this point, we are all fed up with the insane amount of worry we go through every time we place a scoop of food in front of our pets, every time they throw up, every time they have diarrhea, every time they are tired. What if it were your kids and the vitamins you were giving them to keep the healthy turned out to be poisoned? What if you didn't hit that toxic threshold until they were too sick to bring back to optimal health? What if you had to spend thousands of dollars in doctor's bills all because a company couldn't simply follow a basic, fairly inexpensive scientific protocol?
Mr. Atkins, just do it right and get it over with. As much as you'd like to reassure us that the food is good, we believe NO ONE. We just keep praying our babies aren't next.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Red and Bones, my baby boys, you'll always be in my heart. Mom will see you later. Look after each other, ok?
|
|
|
|
Offy
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #751 on: July 24, 2007, 12:27:18 PM » |
|
from BW: I must say that despite what Veronica claims, I think it is extremely suspicious, for them to make these results ONLY AVAILABLE from the ITCHMO FORUMS link!! Actually, I have never heard of such a thing!! I think it is preposterous!
Actually it is if they are tracking ip numbers and how many visitors and where they come from....
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 24, 2007, 12:37:44 PM by Offy »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
filbert
Random Dude
Full Member
  
Posts: 114
|
 |
« Reply #752 on: July 24, 2007, 12:51:55 PM » |
|
So, it's being suggested that they are guilty b/c they are hiding evidence that they are innocent?
If you find it suspicious, then fine, don't support them, but don't start slinging mud and speculating that they must be guilty of something b/c they don't feel the need to prove themselves innocent.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The opinions expressed in this post are solely those of the author.
|
|
|
|
Danielle
|
 |
« Reply #753 on: July 24, 2007, 01:06:21 PM » |
|
I just had another devious thought. If the link to the test results only works from itchmo, the only people who will see it are itchmo readers. What is to say the results posted on the linked page are accurate, and not just "results" fabricated and posted to shut up the troublemakers? If they posted the results on a page on their website accessible to the general public, then they are subject to Federal Trade Commission regulations for the content of that material. If the results aren't true or accurate, they can't post them on their main site without being subject to lawsuits. The circuitous link made especially for itchmo readers seems suspect to me.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Nabiya
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #754 on: July 24, 2007, 01:43:28 PM » |
|
So, it's being suggested that they are guilty b/c they are hiding evidence that they are innocent?
If you find it suspicious, then fine, don't support them, but don't start slinging mud and speculating that they must be guilty of something b/c they don't feel the need to prove themselves innocent.
Wow, filbert, I don't see any mud slinging going on here. Speculation may very well save the next round of pets from dying. What am I missing here? I think I'm going to report you to yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Laurie
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #755 on: July 24, 2007, 01:44:50 PM » |
|
I just had another devious thought. If the link to the test results only works from itchmo, the only people who will see it are itchmo readers. What is to say the results posted on the linked page are accurate, and not just "results" fabricated and posted to shut up the troublemakers? If they posted the results on a page on their website accessible to the general public, then they are subject to Federal Trade Commission regulations for the content of that material. If the results aren't true or accurate, they can't post them on their main site without being subject to lawsuits. The circuitous link made especially for itchmo readers seems suspect to me.
Danielle, I believe that is their intention. To post the test results directly on their website (even though the samples tested negative) may cause people unfamiliar with the forums to question why it was tested in the first place. Also, in my opinion, since it has been almost 4 months since the recalls, they dont want to dig up the past and cause people to be concerned once again. Unfortunately, there are people that have probably forgotten about it already. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
KimS
Long-Standing Member
Sr. Member
   
Posts: 322
Cake, Yum!
|
 |
« Reply #756 on: July 24, 2007, 01:51:33 PM » |
|
The spinning by Natura continues. How very typical.
Luckily I don't use their products anyway. Hopefully they'll lose a lot of business.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Offy
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #757 on: July 24, 2007, 02:33:12 PM » |
|
Well, it's on Itchmo.com and interestingly the "some supplements from China" "certificates of purity". I choked on my soda. I'm done.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
PFR07PS
|
 |
« Reply #758 on: July 24, 2007, 02:40:44 PM » |
|
So, it's being suggested that they are guilty b/c they are hiding evidence that they are innocent?
If you find it suspicious, then fine, don't support them, but don't start slinging mud and speculating that they must be guilty of something b/c they don't feel the need to prove themselves innocent.
I encourage everyone to try to remain objective while reading through the posts, calling to get information from the pet food company or through your own research. Above all I want our discussions here to stay focused. Also, while I may not agree with some of the comments that have been stated through customer service, I do encourage you to remember that these reps are in a very difficult position and they are not responsible for decisions made for their company; they are simply the one who responds to public inquiries. Filbert, I agree that we should refrain from mud-slinging. However, I also hope that the next time someone accuses me of fraud, extortion or lying that you will again come to the rescue. I think you may have missed those earlier comments about me. Thanks! Donna
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
PFR07PS
|
 |
« Reply #759 on: July 24, 2007, 02:47:01 PM » |
|
I would like to address some of the posts regarding “testing”. Obviously, this will speak to my experience.
I am actually glad that Natura decided to submit a sample to the Expertox Lab. It was really no surprise they would do so.
The fact that Expertox analyzed two different samples and one detected toxins and the other did not is really insignificant to me.
Keep in mind that what yielded a positive result for toxins in my sample was the embedded black chunks. The test of the overall sample that did not have the black chunks yielded no toxins.
Another reference is a post last evening from Spocko with his illustration of the “poison stew”.
Where toxins are found in dry food or canned food has a lot to do with how it might have been distributed throughout the mix during production.
We made a decision to do private testing on the embedded chunks found in the dog food. After much research, we selected AccuTrace who contracts work with ExperTox Laboratory. Expertox, who analyzed my samples, is accredited and certified. The people at both AccuTrace and Expertox have been very professional, extremely helpful in answering questions from a private citizen (who knew very little about testing) and very efficient in analyzing the samples and advising of results.
It is also interesting to note we contacted various other laboratories with the thought of getting a second analysis with a different lab, as we knew our discovery would be questioned, and rightly so. However, upon contacting these labs we found that they did not test for acetaminophen, yet they could outsource to another lab for that test. When we asked what lab they would outsource to, the answer we received every time was . . . . Expertox Labs. Thus, they are obviously well thought of in the industry.
Donna
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: September 15, 2007, 02:59:51 PM by PFR07PS »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
kaffe
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #760 on: July 24, 2007, 04:18:53 PM » |
|
Reading all this makes me wonder if they lost Donna's sample?
Shibadiva, Funny thing about that, I always get teased because I am so meticulous. I had four samples, two from each bag of dog food. Each of the four samples were in a sealed baggies with labels detailing my name, the case number, general sampling or best chunks, brand, and package coding. The four smaller baggies were then placed in a gallon size sealed baggie along with the completed submission form and 8x10 photos of some of the sample chunks. The large baggie also had an identification label stuck on it. I prepred one for Natura and one for Expertox and kept one for myself. Donna Hi Donna, I work less than 10 minutes away from Natura's offices in San Jose, CA. If you ever want me to go there and "view" your sample, retrieve it, pass on a personal message to PAtkins, see how busy he really is, take him to lunch, etc etc, just let me know and I would be happy to. Nabiya Nabiya: You rock!!!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Danielle
|
 |
« Reply #761 on: July 24, 2007, 05:04:56 PM » |
|
The intent behind my earlier post wasn't to "sling mud", just to question why the company initially said they would post the results on their website (clearly implying it would be public knowledge) and then only make it available to itchmo readers when this topic has been raised and discussed on several other forums by concerned pet owners. I can understand not wanting to raise the specter of a problem, but on the other hand, they could easily spin the results for those who haven't followed this closely to confirm what they've been saying all along--that they are at the forefront of testing, blah blah blah.
And even if their results were negative, that doesn't put the issue to bed because Donna's results were still positive. So there is a discrepancy. On whose side does the mistake lie?
If they were comparing apples to apples, and the test results were negative, I would accept that. But to me, it isn't valid when you don't even attempt to duplicate the test. Couple that with the fact that they apparently lost Donna's sample in-house, and I don't think they've given us a reason to believe these results.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
julia
|
 |
« Reply #762 on: July 24, 2007, 05:21:16 PM » |
|
It occurred to me that the link to the lab results on Innova website, aside from being accessible to itchmo readers only, is also there for the benefit of pet food distributors. I received an email from my local pet food store (in response to my inquiries) with a link to Innova lab results page, and they either found it by reading this forum or else got it in an email from Innova.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: July 24, 2007, 05:23:02 PM by julia »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lesliek
|
 |
« Reply #763 on: July 24, 2007, 05:31:10 PM » |
|
Julia- a lot of pf co's & pf store owners check here, I think its a good thing they do.They are able to steer people away from unrecalled foods that someone has had trouble with.
Maria- Have your vet do a free T4 test to double check thyroid.
Donna- Hang in there. We are all in your corner. You are trying to do the right thing & protect other peoples pets.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"the world's most inept extortionist"
|
|
|
|
lesliek
|
 |
« Reply #764 on: July 24, 2007, 05:32:22 PM » |
|
Sorry-above message to Maria was for Mickey.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"the world's most inept extortionist"
|
|
|
|