Do any forum readers PERSONALLY have problems with Nutro Food??

[kaffe]

Actually, I don't find it difficult at all to fault Nutro even on their "legally advised silence" (if so it is).  And not all PF companies are like Nutro, my freind.  Sure, none of them are perfect and most of them will probably agree with that assesment.  But some of them at least have tried to engage their concerned consumers in dialogue... just here in Ithcmo, we've had the CEO's of Natura and Nature's Variety replying to our posts during their most recent PF issues... what about Nutro?  I think Nutro despises us as much as most of here despise them and their petfood swill.

Sorry - I'm mad... Nutro always makes me mad.

[Poco]

JoeZ, I'm not sure about this:

This is a very difficult path for Nutro to walk.  If a scare about their food, accurate or just rumor, hits the mass media, the resulting reaction could cost the company millions and possibly even threaten their viability.  Any good corporate lawyer will tell you NOT to say anything, deal with incidents in a hush-hush way, correct whatever problems there are and move on without public comment.  This is true for ANY company.  Because of our litigious society, it's difficult to fault Nutro if they choose this legal self-preservation approach

If there were something really wrong with the food, are you sure that a corporate lawyer would tell a company to say absolutely nothing?   Couldn't that go against a company later?  (I really have no experience with these legalities...but it just seems dangerous since people would be so angry if they found out that there was an intentional coverup that resulted in pets being harmed when that could have been prevented by an open recall.)

This Sandman is a not a lawyer, but he is a risk communicator.  It seems like he is saying to use a little reverse psychology, rather than act like an ostrich. 

http://www.psandman.com/handouts/sand48.pdf

[Arlo]

               This is a very difficult path for Nutro to walk.  If a scare about their food, accurate or just rumor, hits the mass media, the resulting reaction could cost the company millions and possibly even threaten their viability.  Any good corporate lawyer will tell you NOT to say anything, deal with incidents in a hush-hush way, correct whatever problems there are and move on without public comment.  This is true for ANY company.  Because of our litigious society, it's difficult to fault Nutro if they choose this legal self-preservation approach.

               When I've asked, I found quite a few folks with a very negative opinion about Nutro's customer service and their products.  Now, I find this to be true about ANY product or incident from ANY company - there's ALWAYS some folks who have problems - even the best companies are not perfect.  But in today's instant communication era, a few incidents can combine with speculation, rumor and misinformation, and quickly spin out of the control of a company's PR department.

Joe,

Do you really think the mass media cares that much about Nutro? They didn't care about 100 recalled brands and thousands of dead pets.

Do you honestly believe Nutro fears litigation? Lawsuits involving pets usually do very poorly in court.  If the person has a strong case, they get the value of the animal and the price of the product back. 

Why did you bother asking us about Nutro? IMO it seems you don't believe most of the comments made here.

Are we supposed to feel especially sorry for Nutro?  They're no better than any other pet food company and in some cases worse.

Have you met Duane-o?  I'm sure the two of you could have a wonderful conversation about over-the-top bloggers. 


I'm very sorry you wasted my time.  I don't like the implication (Webster's definition: something indicated indirectly, hinted at, suggested) that I am one of those folks who ALWAYS has problems with customer service.  I'm also very sorry you ignored Mary Smith's treatment, a first-person story with a paper trail.  And, I am very sorry for you, that you believe it's society's fault these companies stay silent. After all, we're all so lawsuit crazy, we'll run right out and sue them if they admit to a problem.

[Joe Z]

Hi all,

Kaffe:  You are so right that not all the companies are the same and certainly those such as Natura are very different (and responsive) than Nutro.  Yet independent oversite is still lacking and companies tend to protect their own interests first.  I personally know of an incident (a number of years ago - over eight) with a Solid Gold product where they changed some machinery and a lot more flax oil was dumped into the product causing illness.  It was only through dogged persistance and many phone calls that this was finally admitted.  There was no formal recall but product was sent back.  This doesn't make the company or the food "bad".  All companies - especially food companies - will have occasional quality problems for various reasons.  A few months ago, I picked up a large bag of Natural Choice Organic.  Though my pups have eaten it before with no problems, this time they wouldn't even take a bite.  Just sniffed it and walked away.  They wouldn't eat any from that bag.  Something was wrong with that bag but not neccesarily with Natural Choice (I screwed up on that one and never contacted the company).  I currently use Karma (from Natura), Natural Planet Organics and Brandon Farms Organic (from Blue Seal -hmmmm).  Currently, I like the companies and the products (and trust them) yet I will remain vigilant.  In years of working in the Natural Food industry (for people), I've seen too much "weird" stuff from reputable companies.  If companies will play games with people food, there is a good possibility that they would with dog food.  And if I didn't somewhat trust some companies - I'd be making my own dog food.


Klondike:  My observation over 30 years in the food and other retail industries, has been that companies will not be forth coming about problems due to possible legal lawsuits.  Even, if to our minds, it doesn't make sense in the long run, it is something that, I believe, most companies follow.  I've worked in the corporate world, in management, in education and in PR, and I've seen this in action.  Are there exceptions?  Probably.  Is it wide spread?  Probably not.  That's what I said in my rant, companies that turn away from this hush-hush model will reap the benefits (Mars, the current parent company of Nutro, is noted for their secrecy).

Arlo:  First - deep apologies if I offended you or wasted your time in any way.  I was not saying that the info I received from you and folks on this site was not valid or important.  And personally I believe all the comments made here and am not ignoring any. Please don't take offense where none was meant.  My comment about there are always people who will have problems was in no-way connected to the people here.  It was truely a genetic statement designed to address naysayers.    A large part of my audience for my newsletter and blog are not deeply educated on dog matters as the participants in this forum are.  I know that many are using Nutro and believe in the company.

I'm giving Nutro the benefit of the doubt.  Do they deserve this? No- probably not.  Do they get it from me - Yes - in my writings.  I had already told my readers a couple of issues ago that I would recommend switching from Nutro so my "benefit of the doubt" doesn't apply to actions.

Yes - I think the mass media is getting interested in dog matters and the menu recall stirred that up.  And while companies may not be afraid  of litigation, it is costly and they will avoid it if possible.  That is why companies "settle out of court".  And in all the settlements, there is a clause that says the victims may not talk to others about the case or settlement.  That's just standard corporate law practices.  Companies HAVE fallen due to lawsuits and bad publicity.

And yes  -- if a company admits a problem -- especially one that causes injury or death be it animal or human -- there will be a flood of lawsuits - a very large flood -- many will be frivilous and lies.

Feel sorry for Nutro??  No - not at all.  Not sure where you got that from as I don't believe I gave that impression (I'll re-read my stuff - I sometimes don't phrase things clearly)  But as I said, Nutro has an opportunity to emerge as a better company that champions their customer.  Do I think they will take this opportunity?  Probably not but I'd love to be surprised.

Finally - again I mean no disrespect to you or the others that responded to this thread.  It is all very helpful and informative.  I am not anti-Nutro or pro-Nutro.  I just want to learn the truth.  I do happen to believe the info I received here and on consumeraffairs for that matter.  It was the information received on this forum - especially from Mary - that convinced me to open my mouth about what I am seeing is a big problem with Nutro. And it was your input about threats that made me even more conscious of being "balanced" (whatever that means).  Please re-read my rant from the point of view of someone who knows little of the dog food issues.  I hope you'll see that it is a cautious, non-inflamatory exploration into this issue.  While I talk about Nutro, the main point is really how corporations, especially pet food companies, need to be more open and transparent.

I hope I cleared up some misperceptions and all your inputs does make me review my writing style for clearity.  I obviously still have a way to go.  If anyone has anymore concerns, I'm very willing to elucidate further.

[kaffe]

Kaffe:    And if I didn't somewhat trust some companies - I'd be making my own dog food.

    And that's why I and many others here are making our own petfood.   

[mainecoonpeg]

"pet food companies need to be more open and transparent"   

JoeZ, My cats and I had plenty of horrible personal experience from Nutro food.
This is all i have to say.
Arlo is right...........

[kaffe]

 ... And it was your input about threats that made me even more conscious of being "balanced" (whatever that means).  Please re-read my rant from the point of view of someone who knows little of the dog food issues.  I hope you'll see that it is a cautious, non-inflamatory exploration into this issue. 

I appreciate your efforts... but the problem with presenting a "balanced" point of view, JoeZ, is that you will often end up with an article that SAYS nothing precisely because you are already sitting on the proverbial fence even before you start writing --- see what I mean?  ... no, no... beleive it or not, I do mean this in a helpful way --- I write for a living too (not obvious with my lopsy-dopsey posts   - but I'm better when I am writing something from a scholarly point of view).  It is a lot more effective when you begin with the investigative point of view: you have a propositional statement (what's wrong with Nutro is not a proposition) which you intend to prove or disprove... then you can end with some kind of solid conslusion... otherwise, you'll end up with an article that sounds like one of those Cat Fanciers or Dog Fanciers articles that don't "feed" anyone with information to mull over.  When you want to present a "balanced" view of a problem, approach it as you would do a synopsis: two (or several) views presented one after the other and then you can tuck in YOUR view or conclusions supported by your own anaysis of ALL the other views.

[karvskitties]

 ... And it was your input about threats that made me even more conscious of being "balanced" (whatever that means).  Please re-read my rant from the point of view of someone who knows little of the dog food issues.  I hope you'll see that it is a cautious, non-inflamatory exploration into this issue. 

I appreciate your efforts... but the problem with presenting a "balanced" point of view, JoeZ, is that you will often end up with an article that SAYS nothing precisely because you are already sitting on the proverbial fence even before you start writing --- see what I mean?  ... no, no... beleive it or not, I do mean this in a helpful way --- I write for a living too (not obvious with my lopsy-dopsey posts   - but I'm better when I am writing something from a scholarly point of view).  It is a lot more effective when you begin with the investigative point of view: you have a propositional statement (what's wrong with Nutro is not a proposition) which you intend to prove or disprove... then you can end with some kind of solid conslusion... otherwise, you'll end up with an article that sounds like one of those Cat Fanciers or Dog Fanciers articles that don't "feed" anyone with information to mull over.  When you want to present a "balanced" view of a problem, approach it as you would do a synopsis: two (or several) views presented one after the other and then you can tuck in YOUR view or conclusions supported by your own anaysis of ALL the other views.

Very well said.  And may I add - a little scientific research (or at least some links to back up the theory) - never hurts at all.

[MarySmith]

ARLO IS GONE!!!

Please don't leave, Arlo!

[mainecoonpeg]

Arlo.....Please come back.
You are very much a wonderful part of Itchmo.

It really twists my liver when some newbie shows up and causes all sorts of nonsense on the pretext of being a "writer".  That's NOT what writers do

Arlo, I have come to a  decision for myself and I hope maybe you'll follow along.
A very wonderful and wise person from this forum helped me to see the light.  There are posters who rant, posters who create havoc and posters who just like to rattle chains.  We had many of them a few months back and they left for their own reasons. 

I will read the posts or start to read and then have to stop.  I slipped up when I posted on this thread.  I should not have, but I did so because of your post.  Some of us have lived through  personal problems with Nutro food........I had pets die from the food.

Lucky for him, Joe Z has not had any bad experiences

And Arlo.....I need my Chow, Ellie and 3 little kittens updates............please

[Sandi K]

Oh no, what happened?  Where is our Arlo,  he cant leave!  Oh please Arlo, if you read this, come back!  You were such a big part of the Itchmo family and we need to know how the class on pet food goes as well as the taking care of the 3 kittens!  Arlo, you have contributed so much, we need you here!  Oh great, this is a bummer end to my day....

[JJ]

Gosh darn it (I'm being polite using those words when I have nastier ones that I will refrain from using) why is it we get someone new on here who does not take time to read a forum members others posts before blindsiding them? Arlo is a scientist and we truly need people from his field to help understand the myriad of problems that can continue to come up regarding food, health issues, etc with our pets.

I know we thought we had seen the last of the trolls and such type people on here who antagonize or just utterly exasperate another member on this forum that they up and just leave and we are then one less knowledgable person on this forum.

Just cause people come on here who have a blog, web site, etc. maybe they are looking for information to use on there because the site is not as visited as this one? They should take time to read other people's posts not just form opinons out of thin air. To make assumptions is totally wrong and doesn't belong on Itchmo. That is being totally unfair and shows lack of respect too.

[Joe Z]

sigh......

As mentioned, it was not my intent to disrespect or even annoy anyone on this forum.

I've argued with no one, didn't call anyone names nor posted anything that is counter to views expressed here.

I've simply posted a rant that I ran in my newsletter and posted in my blog.  I actually posted it here on this forum more as a thank-you for the info you folks shared with me.  Boy howdy - did that blow up in my face!

Somehow - it was taken that I was dissing the folks here and defending or supporting Nutro.  Nothing can be further from the truth!

Please follow my line of thinking here:

I've followed the consumeraffairs letters since March.

I've alerted the readers of my newletter about this each issue since.  Only one or two items per issue from the newsletter is posted on the blog.  I had not previously posted the Nutro warning in the actual blog itself.

I've been watching news feeds and monitoring developments with Nutro since I became aware of the issues.

Most of the items either refer the reader back to the consumeraffairs site or are very positive comments about Nutro

I had planned another continuing advisement to my readers in my newsletter.

But nothing was changing  -- more letters to consumeraffairs and that's it.

It was then I asked you folks about personal experiences about Nutro.

When it was mentioned and shown that negative things can get taken off forums, I thought, "hey, it's time to put this in my blog so no one can delete it and many can find it".

There are two issues I brought up in the rant:
a: there are reports that animals are becoming sick and that some have died after eating Nutro.
b. the expected investigation into this matter does not seem to be happening

It seems that the paragraph about "hard to fault" nutro for following a corporate mind set has been taken in an entirely different way it was meant.  It's a rather sarcastic statement.  This corporate mindset is NOT a good thing.

I even outlined what a much better proper response from Nutro should be. 

I was not letting Nutro off the hook.  What I was doing- and will continued to do - is increase the awareness that there is a reported problem with Nutro that needs to be rectified.

How this has made folks here very angry is puzzling.  As mentioned a number of times, I meant no disrespect and have apoligized if it seemed that I did.  That has brought even more hostility.  What's up with that??

No  -- I have not lost an animal to the tainted food scandel.  And my heart breaks for all that have.  And I don't want to see others lose their animals because of problems with poisoned foods.

Yet I'm being villified for trying to up the consciousness of a larger group to the current problems (and I don't mean THIS group - I just posted here as an informational thing of what I was doing).

As far as I can tell, we are all on the same side here.

I came into this forum with respect for all (I had been reading and watching it for quite a while but have not contributed).

I still have that same respect -- though somehow we have this misunderstanding.

Hopefully, this helps in clearing up the misperceptions. 

I only wish for all of us to live in love and happiness with our beloved animals.

[Mandycat]

     I have been mostly away from the forums for a while because my daughter and granddaughter were visiting from Florida and I have been trying to catch up today.  Reading this thread has made me feel very sad as I had hoped that we had moved beyond taking so much offense at new people who post a point of view that may differ from one's own.  I hope that Arlo has not left because he had much to offer the forum.  However, taking a post so personally as to actually leave is a bit rash, I think.  I think that Joe Z's posts are nothing more than an attempt to raise awareness of the Nutro problem and the company's response to the problem.  I, too, as Joe Z, am puzzled as to why this thread has raised so many hackles.  He raises some good points and some valid questions, and doesn't seem to disagree with the majority here who really hate Nutro!         I just wish everyone could be a little more open-minded when there are discussions that may require some exploration of varying  opinions and points of view.  "Me too" posts don't add to our knowledge and understanding of an issue, or make one think and expand the mind to consider other ways of looking at an issue. 
     BTW, I do not use Nutro and respect the individual opinions of anyone who has used it whether that opinion be good or bad.  We certainly know that there have been both good and bad opinions expressed about any number of foods and, although it is helpful to hear about individual experiences to help with our own decisions,  in the end it is "to each his own" as far as finding what works.

[MarySmith]

I wish that when people decide to leave Itchmo, that they would NOT delete the account. It makes it very hard to look up valuable information that they have posted in the past. If you click on the persons screen name, their profile comes up with a link that allows you to see each and every post that has been posted by that person - this a  very valuable search tool - and when an account is deleted, so also is that search tool deleted. If that person later decides to return, that link to the older posts is still missing, only the newer ones are listed in the profile.

This post is NOT directed at Arlo, but is just a broad wish of mine that is being written in this thread.