Itchmo Forums for Cats & Dogs Brought to you by Itchmo: Essential news, humor and info for cats, dogs and pet owners.
December 18, 2014, 12:29:12 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Go To Itchmo.com: Read the latest cat, dog and pet news, pet food recall info, product reviews and more — updated daily.


Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
  Print  
Author Topic: Taste of the Wild Dog Food Recall?  (Read 79604 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
5CatMom
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 454



« Reply #30 on: August 18, 2009, 08:46:16 AM »

Luc Barked: Mon Aug 17, '09 8:40am PST  
  
"I spoke to TOTW this morning. It's not just higher protein (IF that's even the cause). There seems to be three main problems JUST with the Pacific Stream (not including the other formulas). Those problems are:

1. Possible machine malfunction
2. Wrong protein source added (really bad for those dogs who cannot tolerate whatever protein they added)
3. Problem with South Carolina distribution plant

Now, those are all three VERY different problems. It all starts and ends with quality control. If you don't have that...you have Diamond."

http://www.dogster.com/forums/Food_and_Nutrition/thread/633854/2


Bam-Bam Barked: Tue Aug 18, '09 7:15am PST   
   
"Okay I JUST got off the phone with TOTW...
Here's the facts:
* It is not and was NEVER a recall
* It was a HOLD put on production, and a request for retailers to remove the Pacific Stream from their shelves
* The concern was that the protein levels were too high
* They got the tests back yesterday, and found that the moisture levels were too low and THIS in-turn caused the protein levels to skyrocket."

http://www.dogster.com/forums/Food_and_Nutrition/thread/633854/5
 

5CM
« Last Edit: August 18, 2009, 09:03:53 AM by 5CatMom » Logged

What is man without the beasts? If the beasts were gone, men would die from a great loneliness of spirit. For whatever happens to the beasts, soon happens to man. All things are connected - - - Chief Seattle

We are the caretakers of our creatures . . . the peacekeepers of our planet
Sandi K
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7276


« Reply #31 on: August 18, 2009, 09:47:56 AM »

So why dont they just come out with some sort of info so people currently feeding that food can stop using it....my issue is not with them pulling stuff off of shelves but with not letting people know that have that food in their homes and are currently feeding it. We here have the benefit of knowing this because of info from that dog forum, not everyone out there has that....how can those people call to ask questions when they dont even know there is a problem with the food? 

oops I meant rcexplorer....were you able to determine that its the dry food affected?
« Last Edit: August 18, 2009, 10:01:48 AM by Sandi K » Logged
Sandi K
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7276


« Reply #32 on: August 18, 2009, 10:06:59 AM »

Thank you for the info
Logged
lesliek
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 10359


Trooper,Remy & Fragile


« Reply #33 on: August 18, 2009, 10:34:43 AM »

Glad people are getting some answers,but agree with Sandi they need to be more public about it.
Logged

"the world's most inept extortionist"
JJ
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 8531


« Reply #34 on: August 18, 2009, 10:57:15 AM »

Luc Barked: Mon Aug 17, '09 8:40am PST  
  
"I spoke to TOTW this morning. It's not just higher protein (IF that's even the cause). There seems to be three main problems JUST with the Pacific Stream (not including the other formulas). Those problems are:

1. Possible machine malfunction
2. Wrong protein source added (really bad for those dogs who cannot tolerate whatever protein they added)
3. Problem with South Carolina distribution plant

Now, those are all three VERY different problems. It all starts and ends with quality control. If you don't have that...you have Diamond."

http://www.dogster.com/forums/Food_and_Nutrition/thread/633854/2


Bam-Bam Barked: Tue Aug 18, '09 7:15am PST   
   
"Okay I JUST got off the phone with TOTW...
Here's the facts:
* It is not and was NEVER a recall
* It was a HOLD put on production, and a request for retailers to remove the Pacific Stream from their shelves
* The concern was that the protein levels were too high
* They got the tests back yesterday, and found that the moisture levels were too low and THIS in-turn caused the protein levels to skyrocket."

http://www.dogster.com/forums/Food_and_Nutrition/thread/633854/5
 

5CM
Moisture level too low - could someone find out if this means not enough moisture was put in to allow for less of the actual ingredient(s)? Would that mean more 'real' product, not moisture, was in the pacific stream? If this is the case - why would more product be a reason to pull the food?
Logged

May your troubles be less,
Your blessings be more,
And nothing but happiness
Come through your door
lesliek
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 10359


Trooper,Remy & Fragile


« Reply #35 on: August 18, 2009, 10:58:25 AM »

It would make the food more nutrient dense & cause stomach issues,remember the NV problem ?
Logged

"the world's most inept extortionist"
bug
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4905


RIP little angel Katey


« Reply #36 on: August 18, 2009, 11:03:55 AM »

It was probably over-dried, resulting in a too-dense food. I started a thread about a video from one of the PFCs. If you watch it, you'll see the process kibble goes through and where that "moisture testing" comes up.

http://itchmoforums.com/pet-food-questions-and-researching-foodsingredients/natura-manufacturing-tour-video-t8959.0.html
Logged

My little babies, you'll always be in my heart. Mom will see you later. Look after each other, ok?
5CatMom
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 454



« Reply #37 on: August 18, 2009, 11:43:18 AM »

Couple of things.

AAFCO Nutrient Requirements of Dogs (maintenance) - Dry matter basis, the minimum requirement is 18%, but there is no maximum.

http://www.peteducation.com/article.cfm?c=2+1659+1661&aid=662


TOTW contains 10% moisture, and 25% protein.  These are "as fed" values.  In order to compare to AAFCO, they have to be converted to "dry matter basis".

Here goes.  If the food is 10% moisture as fed, the remaining dry ingredients represents 90%.

Divide 25% (the "as fed" protein) by 90% (remaining dry ingredients), and you get 27%.  So the food contains 27% protein on a dry matter basis.  Well, that's higher than the AAFCO minimum of 18% protein.

OK.  Lets say Diamond has a manufacturing error, and the amount of moisture does down.

Let's say it goes to 1%.  Now the food is 1% moisture as fed, and the remaining dry ingredients represent 99%.

Divide 25% (the advertised "as fed" protein) by 99% (remaining dry ingredients), and you get
25.2% protein on a dry matter basis.

Now, let's say the moisture goes to ZERO.  Then the dry ingredients represent 100%.

Divide 25% by 100%, and you get 25% protein on a dry matter basis.

OK, we reduced the moisture in the food from 10%, to 1%, to zero%, and the protein went DOWN.

But Taste of the Wild said the moisture was too low, so the protein was too high.

Ack!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Now I'm really confused.


5CM  
« Last Edit: August 18, 2009, 12:30:51 PM by 5CatMom » Logged

What is man without the beasts? If the beasts were gone, men would die from a great loneliness of spirit. For whatever happens to the beasts, soon happens to man. All things are connected - - - Chief Seattle

We are the caretakers of our creatures . . . the peacekeepers of our planet
Offy
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 285


« Reply #38 on: August 18, 2009, 11:58:14 AM »

try this nutrition calculator:

http://www.scheyderweb.com/cats/catfood.html

with the NV way back when they said an ounce  Roll Eyes a half cup weighed more.. more calories.. nutrient dense. kinda like putting the whole chocolate covered cherry in your mouth at one time...(well, that is a good example for me cos doing that will make me gag cos it's SO sweet LOL)

well heck... an aluminum bb vs a lead one.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2009, 12:29:45 PM by Beyond Pissed » Logged

"If the pet food does not perform in the consumer's hands, then all of the advertising on earth will not be persuasive." Dr. R. Glenn Brown. Canadian Veterinary Journal, Volume 35, in April of 1994
bug
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 4905


RIP little angel Katey


« Reply #39 on: August 18, 2009, 12:14:46 PM »

Y'know, 5Cat, now that you've brought that calculation up...

Let's say their food is contains 50g protein/kg of food (just hypothetical), it wouldn't matter if there was more or less moisture in the dang stuff, 50g is 50g. The moisture would affect the consistency of the food (probably a harder, drier kibble, maybe crumbly) and the palatability. Also, if the moisture content was too high, the food would be more likely to support bacterial life, but too low? Hmmm. I somehow don't know that the CS reps really understand what the problem is. I can understand if there was an aberrant protein source inadvertently introduced into the food -- that could cause a problem with digestibility. I guess moisture could also somewhat affect digestibility.

This is a weird one.
Logged

My little babies, you'll always be in my heart. Mom will see you later. Look after each other, ok?
5CatMom
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 454



« Reply #40 on: August 18, 2009, 12:23:54 PM »

Bug,

LOL, I'm sure it's more complicated than just doing an "as fed" to "dry matter" calculation.

But, it's still interesting to think about.

Guess I'm skeptical of too simple explanations from a PFC.  

An "aberrant protein source inadvertently introduced into the food" -  that makes sense.

Hummm, this could get interesting.

 Huh
5CM
« Last Edit: August 18, 2009, 12:29:22 PM by 5CatMom » Logged

What is man without the beasts? If the beasts were gone, men would die from a great loneliness of spirit. For whatever happens to the beasts, soon happens to man. All things are connected - - - Chief Seattle

We are the caretakers of our creatures . . . the peacekeepers of our planet
mary blonde
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 255


Sabbath RIP 1996 - 2009


« Reply #41 on: August 18, 2009, 12:42:02 PM »

Protein source from China??
Logged

Got my coffee,
Got my cigarettes,
Got my computer
and took my Prozac...
It's gonna be a great day!
Carol
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3200



« Reply #42 on: August 18, 2009, 12:57:22 PM »

I received an email back from a vet at TOTW this am and was told basically what is posted at the greytalk forum...But my issue is with how this is going on with pet owners having it in their cupboards and not knowing about it unless they are a member at that forum  or here--nothing at the website...and my email mentioned feed refusal so I betcha there are dog owners taking their dogs for a check up to see if they are sick and who knows, maybe if this info was made more public---they might be sparred their $$$$'s that it may cost...  I see the bigger problem not being the high protein, but the lack of info to the public...their website would be a good first step!


(ps--my email from Dr Brookshire told me not to reproduce it ...or else it would be cut and pasted here, there, everywhere!)


edited to add...

If the info I received could be posted at the website it certainly would help answer some questions..and if that had happened with this situation I would be applauding..not criticizing..and that is a hard thing to get me to applaud a pet food company! Tongue
« Last Edit: August 18, 2009, 01:00:22 PM by Carol » Logged

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” — Margaret Mead

United we stand     Divided we fall....
Carol
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3200



« Reply #43 on: August 18, 2009, 01:55:15 PM »

another forum discussing...

http://dolforum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=43116
Logged

“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.” — Margaret Mead

United we stand     Divided we fall....
Sandi K
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 7276


« Reply #44 on: August 18, 2009, 01:59:37 PM »

Well looks like the "you cant believe everything you read on the Internet" lecture is being provided by Diamond in an e:mail to a member at the dogster link..... http://www.dogster.com/forums/Food_and_Nutrition/thread/633854/5

I would have loved to have seen Diamond just put out a statement saying they are pulling this food off the shelves and say why to get word out in order to get it away from dogs that might be eating it.  Instead they are starting the usual PFC tactic of bashing internet information.  Its kind of ironic, they are the ones that caused this problem for themselves by not being upfront about this.  Mincing words about whether its a recall is silly...they are removing product from the shelf so I call it a silent recall, they call it a call-back or now I see one e:mail where they are saying its a "hold"....would have looked much better to me if they had just put something out in order to get it away from dogs that are eating it.  

Just confirms my decision to not buy their food anymore.  
« Last Edit: August 18, 2009, 02:12:06 PM by Sandi K » Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Copyright 2007 Itchmo.com: Read the latest cat, dog and pet news, pet food recall info, product reviews and more — updated daily.
Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines | Sitemap