Should Lawmakers Hold 'Menufoods' Legally Responsible For Not Properly Informing The Public ?

Question

Menufoods was aware of the pet food poisoning problem, well before alerting the public . Very bad .
Numerous news reports claim that anywhere from 80 to 120 brands were affected. . . Menufoods first claimed 20 or 30ish, but now only acknowledges 53. . . Bad
Veterinarians are currently being surveyed all over the country . So far , although only 10% of the surveys have been completed. . . 417 pet deaths have been attributed to their products. . . if current percentages hold true. . that means that over 4000 of our pets will die. . . .Very, Very Bad

I do understand that the source of 'wheat gluten' is likely to blame, but what about Menufoods dragging their feet to inform us of a POISONING !! Then, rather than come clean immediately, they chose to 'trickle' the news, bit by bit !! . . Very, Very Bad

What do you folks think ?

Mom Knows - Are you sure ? I thought the House could protect our safety ?!?

Larry - To ask a question about pet food poisoning does not equate to not caring about other issues, especially our troops . P.S. Mr 3 Stooges, I'm a Veteran !!

Answer 1

There's an interesting underlying legal principal here. Up until now, you could only recover economic losses for a pet that was killed. That generally means vet bills and the cost of a replacement pet.

In fact the AVMA is much opposed to any new legislation (or interpretation of existing laws) that opens up the prospect of non-economic damage awards for the loss of a pet.

You can imagine how the vet community would feel about facing a damage award for emotional suffering when Fluffie dies in surgery. (See link below)

So right now, a class action suit against the food manufacturers to recover damages for the loss of even several thousand pets would be relatively limited in its potential recovery (probably less than a million $).

The REAL recoverable damages are by the brands vs. Menu (Iams and Eukanuba, Hills Science Diet, etc.). Those economic losses could be in the hundreds of million $.

Stay tuned...this will be interesting.

Answer 2

Oh..I'm sure it was intentional to NOT inform the public until the very last second, to keep those dollars rolling in. Why else, would they buy wheat from the other side of the world---too cheap to buy our wheat--ONLY-interested in PROFITS!! Not any animal's well being. If these were our babies dying--human babies--and that poisoned food had been in let's say our Cream of Wheat cereals or??any of the thousand wheat products humans eat...the Feds and lawmakers, and legislatures!! would be acting!
Menu Foods didn't disclose the poison because they don't care. Walmart waited until the last second to take it's pet foods off the shelf. And no one has been smart enough o tell me why the FDA and import controls in US did not CATCH poisoned WHEAT? What if it had been for human consumption? How many of us would be dead right now? I am on a personal boycott of WHEAT PRODUCTS!!! Let the companies who use wheat from China live without MY DOLLARS!!
It's the only real voice in America anymore-----spending money--or boycotting (not spending $$).
I say PROTEST! AMERICA!!
In the US our farmers are not allowed to use insecticides and poisons on food grown. How come foreign growers are allowed to not only use it on the foods they grow, but sell that food to unsuspecting, trusting AMERICANS.
Even 417 dead pets is outrageous. Wake up America...let's see some outrage here for once.

Answer 3

I know that if anything had happened to any of my cats or dogs I would be out for blood. Menufoods should be held fully accountable to those that were effected by this.

I was also interested in the revelation that all of those different pet foods come from the same place, some of which are "premium" brands selling for twice the price. If people are paying attention this will really hurt brands such as Hills Science Diet and Eukanuba.

Answer 4

"Lawmakers" do not hold companies liable for civil damages, which is what you are talking about. That's a matter for the courts. I don't think there was any law that would have required the company to notify the public of the problem. Unfortunately, there is very little regulation of the pet food industry. If menufoods did not break any laws, they cannot be held criminally liable, but they may be held liable for civil damages to the people whose pets died. I believe a good many of those people will probably sue---there may even be a class action lawsuit.

Answer 5

Lawmakers don't have much to do with it. It will be the court's decision.

Next, of course Menufoods knew about it before alerting the public....who alerts the public BEFORE they know what the problem is? The timing between finding out there was a problem, researching the problem, and broadcasting the problem was less than 48 hours. The number of brands that were problematic increased as they learned more about the problem. They also had to inform the brand holder before releasing the news to the public, which added time.

The source of the problem is one or two wheat fields in China that used a pesticide illegal in North America. As I understand, it was batched in with "clean" wheat, sold to an american processing plant and then sold to Menufoods. SO who do you want to blame? The Chinese farmer, the Chinese government who allows that pesticide, the exporter who didn't mark the wheat as not for consumption, the importer, the gluten manufacturer, the pet food manufacturer, the brand name holder, the pet store who didn't take it off the shelves in time?

They did not trickle the news, they did indeed release news and information as soon as they learned it. This may look like trickling but it wasn't.

Edit - Noting of course that Menufoods is not an American company; the DOJ would not go after them but would have to go after the brand holder. Same as for civil action. As well, the consumers agreement/purchase contract is with the brand holder not menufoods, so I don't know if they can be directly sued.

Answer 6

This company should have to ADMIT wrongdoing, apologize for everything. THEN they should pay restitution to the families who lost their pets. They should also be prosecuted. Anyone who can be proven to have had knowledge of this should go to trial and have some form of criminal record. Just because we're dealing with animals instead of people, doesn't negate the company's responsibility to provide a product that won't KILL them. They shouldn't be allowed to go free, with virtually no personal or professional impact.
We as consumers should refuse to purchase any of the brands they sell - stand up for our pets and send a message!

Answer 7

I definitely think that they should be held accountable for their actions. Thankfully, my cat food wasn't one of the many affected by this epidemic, but my heart goes out to all of they pet owners that are suffering through this ordeal right now. I believe there is a class action law suit forming over this issue.

Answer 8

Sound's like a class action case to me.

Answer 9

Lawmakers=legislators. This is not their role.
It is the executive, specifically the DOJ that should be investigating possible criminal charges.

Answer 10

Lawmakers are not holding Bush responsible for killing the Armed Forces

Do you actually think that pets are more important than the USMC