9/5/2007 9:27:00 AM
PT man wants FDA pet food decision checked
By Blythe Lawrence, Leader Staff Writer
Don Earl, the Port Townsend man who is suing Menu Foods Inc. and Kroger for $75,000 in damages after his cat Chuckles died from eating poisoned cat food in January, is now taking legal action against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
On Aug. 8, Earl, 52, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus by the U.S. District Court to compel the FDA to perform a proper investigation into what actually caused the deaths of what he estimates could be hundreds of thousands of animals.
According to court documents, "The FDA has been derelict in its statutory duty to properly investigate these independent findings, thus posing an imminent threat of grave public concern to the companion animals in 80 million U.S. households."
Earl's 6-year-old cat Chuckles died Jan. 6, 2007, 10 days after Earl bought Pet Pride's "Mixed Grill" and "Turkey and Giblets" at Fred Meyer in Silverdale. Both products were manufactured by Menu Foods Inc.
When Menu recalled 60 million packages of wet pet food in mid-March, Earl became suspicious when the villainous ingredient was proclaimed to be melamine, an organic compound used to make kitchen countertops and plastic dishes.
"Melamine is actually less toxic than table salt," he said. "We're talking about something substantially more toxic than melamine could possibly be."
Earl, who had kept the food Chuckles had eaten, decided to have samples tested by ExperTox, an analytical toxicology lab in Texas. Results showed that the samples of "Turkey and Giblets" contained acetaminophen, which can be deadly to cats. No traces of melamine were found in any of his samples, he said.
In the court documents, Earl alleges that there were inconsistencies in the statements made by FDA experts regarding the presence of melamine in contaminated pet food. On June 5, The Pittsburgh-Tribune ran an article quoting FDA spokesperson Doug Arbesfeld expressing interest in testing Earl's samples.
"We're very interested in being able to test these samples ourselves to determine the levels of those contaminants," Arbesfeld said. "What's significant is these things are there. They don't belong there. [The pet food company] should have - but did not - notify the FDA, which first learned of the acetaminophen findings after pet owners posted lab reports on the Internet."
A week later, a follow-up article in the Tribune announced the end of the FDA's acetaminophen investigation.
"The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Tuesday ruled out acetaminophen as a pet food contaminant after a Texas lab insisted it found the painkiller in numerous varieties," the article stated. "The FDA found no trace of the medication in five samples of one type of cat and two dog foods it tested in the past week."
It wasn't until after the article was published that Earl was contacted by the ExperTox with a request from the FDA, asking permission for the agency to test his samples, he said. Earl declined the offer, saying that the FDA was welcome to test the samples on location at ExperTox facilities, with ExperTox personnel on hand to monitor its activities.
"From the beginning, the FDA has refused to properly investigate evidence inconsistent with its melamine theory," he said. "The bottom line is we deserve to know the whole truth to insure this doesn't happen again."
Earl said the FDA has been attempting to discourage people from testing their own pet food for toxins. He hopes the writ of mandamus, which would force the FDA to conduct subsequent testing, will provide the public with some answers about what was really causing the animals' deaths.
"The story we're getting isn't the whole truth," Earl said. "Pet owners are still afraid, and no one knows what is safe to feed their pets."
FDA spokesman Michael Herndon declined to comment on the writ, saying the agency could not comment on criminal or civil cases. The FDA has until the beginning of October to file a response to the writ.
PT man wants FDA pet food decision checked
By Blythe Lawrence, Leader Staff Writer
Don Earl, the Port Townsend man who is suing Menu Foods Inc. and Kroger for $75,000 in damages after his cat Chuckles died from eating poisoned cat food in January, is now taking legal action against the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
On Aug. 8, Earl, 52, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus by the U.S. District Court to compel the FDA to perform a proper investigation into what actually caused the deaths of what he estimates could be hundreds of thousands of animals.
According to court documents, "The FDA has been derelict in its statutory duty to properly investigate these independent findings, thus posing an imminent threat of grave public concern to the companion animals in 80 million U.S. households."
Earl's 6-year-old cat Chuckles died Jan. 6, 2007, 10 days after Earl bought Pet Pride's "Mixed Grill" and "Turkey and Giblets" at Fred Meyer in Silverdale. Both products were manufactured by Menu Foods Inc.
When Menu recalled 60 million packages of wet pet food in mid-March, Earl became suspicious when the villainous ingredient was proclaimed to be melamine, an organic compound used to make kitchen countertops and plastic dishes.
"Melamine is actually less toxic than table salt," he said. "We're talking about something substantially more toxic than melamine could possibly be."
Earl, who had kept the food Chuckles had eaten, decided to have samples tested by ExperTox, an analytical toxicology lab in Texas. Results showed that the samples of "Turkey and Giblets" contained acetaminophen, which can be deadly to cats. No traces of melamine were found in any of his samples, he said.
In the court documents, Earl alleges that there were inconsistencies in the statements made by FDA experts regarding the presence of melamine in contaminated pet food. On June 5, The Pittsburgh-Tribune ran an article quoting FDA spokesperson Doug Arbesfeld expressing interest in testing Earl's samples.
"We're very interested in being able to test these samples ourselves to determine the levels of those contaminants," Arbesfeld said. "What's significant is these things are there. They don't belong there. [The pet food company] should have - but did not - notify the FDA, which first learned of the acetaminophen findings after pet owners posted lab reports on the Internet."
A week later, a follow-up article in the Tribune announced the end of the FDA's acetaminophen investigation.
"The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on Tuesday ruled out acetaminophen as a pet food contaminant after a Texas lab insisted it found the painkiller in numerous varieties," the article stated. "The FDA found no trace of the medication in five samples of one type of cat and two dog foods it tested in the past week."
It wasn't until after the article was published that Earl was contacted by the ExperTox with a request from the FDA, asking permission for the agency to test his samples, he said. Earl declined the offer, saying that the FDA was welcome to test the samples on location at ExperTox facilities, with ExperTox personnel on hand to monitor its activities.
"From the beginning, the FDA has refused to properly investigate evidence inconsistent with its melamine theory," he said. "The bottom line is we deserve to know the whole truth to insure this doesn't happen again."
Earl said the FDA has been attempting to discourage people from testing their own pet food for toxins. He hopes the writ of mandamus, which would force the FDA to conduct subsequent testing, will provide the public with some answers about what was really causing the animals' deaths.
"The story we're getting isn't the whole truth," Earl said. "Pet owners are still afraid, and no one knows what is safe to feed their pets."
FDA spokesman Michael Herndon declined to comment on the writ, saying the agency could not comment on criminal or civil cases. The FDA has until the beginning of October to file a response to the writ.