Also, don't you think the companies should pay these vet bills of these poor people, It is unfair?
2007-03-23 04:11:18 · 13 answers · asked by Butterfly 3 in Pets ➔ Other - Pets
I mean the goverment should have some guides lines on there food as we do with ours, my pet is part of my family! If, they did then this would have not happened.
2007-03-23 04:15:48 · update #1
Um...they are doing something. They sent out a recall. That is all they can do.
There was human outbreaks- the E coli and salmonella outbreaks lately from a couple farms in california where it was unsafe to use spinach and green onions for a while. They did not pay for the human bills either, so why would they pay for the pet's bills?
2007-03-23 04:25:52 · answer #1 · answered by D 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would the government want to prevent the recall? The recall is important as we need to get the poison off the shelves immediately.
As for the company paying the vet bills, it would be up to the consumer to prove that the dog food was the one and only cause of the death or injury to the pet. Otherwise, we'd have people making fraudulent claims left & right. If the pet owner can prove it, unequivicably, then yes, the company should pay the Vet bills.
As for people getting attorneys, that's a waste of your money. The courts have LONG upheld that pets are chattel (property) and not worth any money for pain, suffering, or death beyond the cost of replacing the dog -- a few hundred dollars at best.
Addition: You are mistaken about government regulations on dog food preventing this from happening. We have human food recalls all the time -- nothing is prevented by government intervention here. Have you not been paying attention to all the human food poisoning that's happened lately?
2007-03-23 11:14:02 · answer #2 · answered by kja63 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think you're right to a point. There should be some sort of "quality" guarantee, even for pet food. Eventually, I'm sure there will be some sort of class action lawsuit and the pet food companies will end up paying many vet bills. In the long run, the real pressure may come from the pet food companies when they buy from certain suppliers. It was one of the suppliers that produced the tainted food product. Hopefully, this will never happen again because this sort of thing does more damage than people realize.
-BD
2007-03-23 11:26:01 · answer #3 · answered by Perfectly Said 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There already is standards and guidelines, run by the AAFCO. And this was not something the government could have prevented, wheat gluten is an acceptable pet food ingredient. Unfortunately, foods get tainted, happens all the time in human food. I think it shows how well the pet food industry is normally regulated that this happens so rarely in pet food, there has already been 4 major food recalls for humans this year.
2007-03-23 13:05:12 · answer #4 · answered by cs 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's just what we need - BIGGER GOVERNMENT!
When we ask the government to do things that we should do as a matter of course, we pay the cost in increased taxes and a loss of a bit more freedom. The original 2 purpose of the federal government were: 1) provide for the common defense, and 2) promote interstate commerce. Now the congress is into our lives at every turn from education to band aid production. It costs us trillions to have the government do all these things AND the government is the LEAST efficient entity in existence.
Please don't ask for MORE government - we will ALL suffer.
2007-03-23 11:23:17 · answer #5 · answered by onparadisebeach 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
How can thegovernment prevent intentional poisoning? The latest word on the Associated Press news wire is thatthe contaminant is rat poison - which means the tainted food was likely intentional.
They can't test every can or pouch that goes out ....
2007-03-23 12:48:34 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Let's see. We never had this happen before. The company stepped up immediately to pull their products. The government has unlimited amounts of personnel, money, business sense, skills. Yup, lets get them to do more.
My cousins cat was gravely sick from this. I love my 2 dogs and cat. Why would I ever want the worlds most inefficient organization to regulate this? They'll make it worse.
Instead of this small but serious problem, you'll have one large, expensive, serious problem. No Thanks!
2007-03-23 11:17:49 · answer #7 · answered by Partisanshipsux 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
i think the people make the food should pay the vet bill
2007-03-23 11:14:39 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Oh I'm sure they'll pay once the pet owners get attorneys.
As they should.
2007-03-23 11:14:15 · answer #9 · answered by Yinzer from Sixburgh 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
do you mean why is the government not doing more to urge the recall?
2007-03-23 11:14:41 · answer #10 · answered by Wizard of Ahhs 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋