Welcome to my blog post, where I jump straight to the point! Corn in dog food is not bad!
Corn has long been a contentious ingredient in dog food, with many pet owners opting for corn-free options believing it to be harmful, full of mold, undigestible, and devoid of nutrition. However, science paints a different picture.
Contrary to popular belief, corn can offer several nutritional benefits for our canine companions and may be one of the most nutritious ingredients in well-formulated dry kibble pet foods.
Don’t believe me? Read on…
Nutritional Composition of Corn in Dog Food
Corn is a rich source of carbohydrates, providing dogs with readily available energy to fuel their daily activities. Yes, domesticated dogs benefit from carbohydrates!
Additionally, corn contains protein, fiber, vitamins, and minerals essential for overall canine health. Perhaps its best nutritional benefit is its high content of linoleic acid, an essential omega-6 fatty acid crucial for dogs’ health.
Linoleic acid supports skin and coat health, immune function, and growth and development. Corn provides a readily available source of this important nutrient, helping dogs maintain glossy coats, strong immune systems, and healthy growth.
Many people consider corn a “filler”, not realizing just how much nutrition is packed into it. Styrofoam is a filler, corn is not.
Pet food ingredients like ancient grains and pulses are not as extensively researched as common cereals such as corn, rice, and wheat. Marketing wants us to believe alternative ingredients are healthier, but there is no proof.
Is Corn Digestible For Dogs?
One of the main concerns regarding corn in dog food is its digestibility.
Critics argue that dogs cannot efficiently digest corn, leading to gastrointestinal issues. Their argument is based purely on speculation, not science.
Humans often remark on how corn appears whole in their waste, overlooking the massive distinction between whole corn and ground corn.
After all, pioneers enjoyed cornmeal-based foods like johnnycakes and cornbread because ground corn is both shelf-stable and packed with nutrients, not to mention delicious.
Research indicates that when corn is processed correctly, it can be highly digestible for dogs.2 98% percent or more digestible, to be more exact, making it more digestible than beef!
Modern processing techniques have improved the digestibility of corn, making it an easily digestible source of nutrients for canines.
It’s time to put this myth about corn in dog food to bed.
Does Corn Cause Allergies & Sensitivities in Dogs?
Another common misconception is that corn is a common allergen for dogs.
While food allergies do occur (rarely) in some dogs, studies have shown that corn is not a primary allergen for canines.
For dogs without specific sensitivities, corn can be a safe and nutritious component of their diet.
Because it is so digestible, it may be a cleaner and safer option for sensitive dogs than less researched and more heavily processed starches such as “ancient grains”.
Does Corn Contain Mycotoxins and Mold?
Yes, corn (and other ingredients) can contain mycotoxins and mold, which are produced by certain fungi that can grow on crops like corn, particularly if they are stored in warm, humid conditions.
Mycotoxins are toxic compounds that can pose health risks to both humans and animals if consumed in high amounts.
Additionally, processing methods such as cooking and extrusion can help reduce the risk of mycotoxin contamination in pet food. Mold is just one of many contaminants pet foods of all types might face if they are not manufactured, stored, tested, and handled correctly.
As a precaution, pet owners should store pet food properly in a cool, dry place and avoid feeding their pets any food that appears moldy or has an unusual odor. Steer clear of brands like Midwest Pet Foods, which have had warning letters from the FDA due to gross negligence resulting in aflatoxins and mold in their foods.
If you have concerns about mycotoxins in your pet’s food, consult with your veterinarian for guidance.
Is GMO Corn Bad for Dogs?
GMO corn, like any other food ingredient, is subject to rigorous safety evaluations by regulatory authorities before it enters the market. Currently, there is no scientific evidence suggesting that GMO corn is inherently harmful to dogs. GMO crops undergo extensive testing to ensure they are safe for consumption by both humans and animals.
The nutritional composition of GMO corn is comparable to non-GMO varieties, and it can provide valuable nutrients such as carbohydrates, fiber, and essential fatty acids in pet food.
GMO crops often have traits engineered to resist pests or tolerate herbicides, which can lead to reduced pesticide use and lower environmental impact. Additionally, some GMO varieties are designed to be more resilient to adverse growing conditions, such as drought or disease, which can help ensure a more reliable food supply for both humans and animals.
Overall, GMO corn has been extensively researched and deemed safe for consumption by regulatory authorities worldwide. Concerns about GMOs often stem from misinformation or misconceptions, and understanding the scientific evidence behind their safety can help alleviate any unnecessary worries.
We know that corn is highly nutritious and digestible, eliminating the possibility that it’s a “filler” devoid of value.
From a practical standpoint, corn offers a cost-effective source of nutrition for dog food manufacturers.
Its widespread availability and relatively low cost compared to other ingredients help keep the overall price of dog food affordable for pet owners without compromising on quality or nutritional value.
All dry pet foods require some kind of starch to bind the ingredients together, and the truth is that in many formulations, corn is the superior choice.
The vilification of corn in dog food is unfounded when considering scientific evidence. When properly processed and included in balanced formulations, corn can be a valuable source of energy and nutrients for dogs. Pet owners should focus on selecting high-quality dog foods that prioritize nutritional balance and digestibility, rather than simply avoiding specific ingredients like corn. By understanding the science behind canine nutrition, we can make informed decisions to promote the health and well-being of our beloved pets.
Corsato Alvarenga, I., Aldrich, C. G., & Shi, Y. (2021). Factors affecting digestibility of starches and their implications on adult dog health.Animal Feed Science and Technology, 282, 115134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anifeedsci.2021.115134 ↩︎
Isabella Corsato Alvarenga, Amanda N. Dainton & Charles G. Aldrich (2022) A review: nutrition and process attributes of corn in pet foods, Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition, 62:31, 8567-8576, DOI: 10.1080/10408398.2021.1931020↩︎
The pet community has jumped head-first into yet another social-media-fueled panic about certain pet food brands. Once again, misinformation is spreading, rampantly! The now-closed Hill’s Science Diet Recall1 for Vitamin D has been brought up by concerned pet parents and influencers as “proof” of a bigger problem, and I wanted more information.
A Facebook group, led by a pet owner who claims to have been the lead plaintiff in (and “won”) the lawsuit against Hill’s Science Diet, utilizes its platform to advocate for raw and “natural” diets for pets.
The group actively discourages members from trusting veterinarians and feeding kibble, likening it to “playing Russian Roulette with your pet“. They openly criticize brands like Hill’s, Purina, and Royal Canin, alleging they contain fillers and toxins that primarily serve the companies’ financial interests.
That was a mouthful, but it’s important in the context of this story.
This blog post aims to provide a comprehensive overview of Hill’s vitamin D recall, including the reasons behind the recall and why it may have been blown out of proportion.
Hill’s Science Diet Recall information
The Hill’s Class Action Lawsuit for Vitamin D (and how it was resolved)
How many pets were harmed by Hill’s Science Diet
How many pets died because of Hill’s Vitamin D Recall
Pet food manufacturing quality control
Background on Hill’s Pet Nutrition
Hill’s Pet Nutrition is a well-established brand known for producing premium pet foods, including heavily researched therapeutic “prescription” diets recommended by veterinarians for various health conditions. With an average 2023 revenue of over $4 Billion U.S.D., they are a major player in the pet food market.
The company invests significantly in state-of-the-art research facilities. It employs a team of veterinarians, veterinary nutritionists, and scientists dedicated to advancing the understanding of pet health and nutrition.
This cutting-edge facility spans over 80 acres and is equipped with laboratories and top-of-the-line animal housing areas where humane controlled feeding studies are conducted.
Few brands meet this commitment to research and the advancement of nutrition.
While it does elevate them above many other pet food brands, this doesn’t make Hill’s Science Diet exempt from mistakes.
The Hill’s Science Diet Recall for Vitamin D
In January 2019, Hill’s Pet Nutrition received a complaint about possible Vitamin D toxicity in a dog that had eaten Hill’s canned dog food.
Hill’s Science Diet investigated and then quickly alerted the FDA that they were issuing a voluntary recall of select canned dog foods due to elevated levels of vitamin D.
A recall was issued on January 31st, 2019.
“Following that recall, we conducted a detailed review of all canned dog foods potentially impacted by the vitamin premix with elevated levels of vitamin D. This review included: analyzing consumer complaints; reviewing veterinarian medical consultations; auditing our supplier; and reviewing our own manufacturing and quality procedures. We then did additional product testing to ensure we had taken all appropriate action.“
Hill’s indicates in their press release that a “limited number of complaints” came in. Not thousands.
Elevated levels of vitamin D2 can lead to potential health issues in pets, including symptoms such as vomiting, loss of appetite, increased thirst, increased urination, excessive drooling, and weight loss. In some cases, it can lead to death.
A pet’s size and overall health affect its capacity to metabolize excessive amounts of Vitamin D.
Following the initial recall, the FDA requested that Hill’s Science Diet conduct testing on their retention samples. Retention samples refer to portions of each production lot that are retained at the testing facility in the event of any potential issues arising.
“Testing leading up to the January recall and the March and May recall expansions found that samples of the dog food contained excessive, potentially toxic amounts of vitamin D.”
U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA)
Of course, this is a scenario that should never happen, however, it did. There is no disputing that Hill’s Science Diet distributed contaminated food and that some dogs were made sick by it.
I’ll dig into that more, below.
Hill’s Science Diet Recall Timeline
Here is a timeline of events related to the vitamin D recall:
January 2019 – Hill’s Science Diet Received a report of a pet sick with possible Vitamin D toxicity
January 30th, 2019 – DSM Nutritional Products, the supplier of the vitamin pre-mix used in Hill’s Science Diet, issued a recall for the ingredient3. A single employee had included an extra drum of Vitamin D, instead of Vitamin E, into the mix.
February 1st, 2019 – The FDA started inspections of the pet food manufacturing facility.
February 2019 – A media frenzy ensued, with countless pet owners anecdotally reporting on social media that their pet had been sick from eating Hill’s Science Diet of all kinds (including kibble) up to a year prior. (This is reminiscent of the questionable 2023-2024 “Purina Panic”).
Many of these reports lacked solid evidence, as pet owners attributed various ailments without providing full context.
February 11th, 2019 – One lawsuit of many, Bone et. al. v. Hill’s Pet Nutrition Inc. et. al.5 1:19-cv-00831 is filed. The text of the lawsuit indicates a belief that “As a result of online consumer complaints, Hill’s thus knew or should have known of the elevated vitamin D levels in the Specialty Dog Foods by at least February of 2018.”
The lawsuit alleges that Hill’s Science Diet knowingly sold toxic food for an extended period, including dry pet foods that were not part of the recall. The plaintiffs claim their evidence for this assertion stems from anecdotal consumer reports observed on social media.
February 11th, 2019 – The FDA tested two samples of Hills Prescription Diet Digestive Care i/d Low Fat (SKU Number 10423). The results showed:
Lot code T1911124 3912 had: 100,170 to 107,282 IU/kg of vitamin D
Lot code T1911125 3912, had 102,829 to 102,346 IU/kg of vitamin D
Scientific literature suggests that concentrations exceeding 4,000 IU/kg of dry matter can induce symptoms, with higher levels correlating with more severe health problems and the potential for death.
There is no question that some pets were harmed by this.
March 20, 2019 – The recall is expanded to include additional formulas, following the testing of retention samples. Some of those formulas had not yet been distributed, and thus, posed no harm to pets.
Hill’s Science Diet states that they have “received a limited number of complaints of pet illness related to some of these products.”
May 17, 2019 – An additional lot code is added to the recall list when it was discovered to have been left off the March recall in error.
All told, one source I found indicated that 86 total lots of 33 varieties of Hill’s Canned Pet Foods were recalled.
That’s 675,000 cases—or 13.5 million cans
November 2019 – A warning letter from the FDA nailed Hill’s Science Diet for failing to follow Hazard and Risk-Analysis prevention.
“During our inspection of your facility, FDA Investigators noted violations of the Hazard Analysis and Risk- Based Preventive Controls requirements for animal food found in Title 21 of the Code of Federal Regulations, part 507, subpart C (21 CFR part 507, subpart C).“
Some, but not all of the foods were part of the “prescription” line. No dry food or treats were affected.
The Hill’s Vitamin D Recall was terminated on 12/21/2021, indicating that the company had responded satisfactorily and that there was no more threat to pet health.
Hill’s Science Diet made some major errors leading up to the recall.
How Did Hill’s Science Diet End Up With Too Much Vitamin D?
The manufacturing process involves the addition of specific vitamins and minerals to ensure the nutritional balance of the pet food.
A pre-mix should contain the correct levels of each nutrient, however, in this case, something was wrong.
An Employee at DSM Nutrition Products, the maker of the vitamin package used by Hill’s Science Diet pet food, had supposedly poured a drum of Vitamin D, instead of Vitamin E, into the batch of pre-mix.
How Hill’s Science Diet specifically missed the elevated vitamin in numerous lots remains to be understood. Understandably, this has caused many pet parents and veterinarians to lose trust in the company.
Regrettably, pet owners are left to speculate, and the speculations propagated by influencers and bloggers in this field have led to significant levels of panic, fear, and misinformation regarding the topic.
Hill’s Science Diet asserts that they have revised their criteria for third-party ingredient suppliers and have enforced more rigorous testing and safety standards internally. The issue should never have happened and Hill’s Science Diet deserves some fallout from the veterinary and pet community.
As with many things like this, however, there is no proof of an ongoing, or widespread issue involving “thousands of deaths”.
How Many Pets Were Harmed by the Hill’s Vitamin D Recall?
The exact number of pets affected by the Hill’s Vitamin D recall is challenging to ascertain.
While Hill’s initially reported receiving complaints related to approximately 0.1% of their product volume, the actual number of pets harmed remains uncertain.
Pet owners across various regions reported instances of illness and, tragically, some deaths potentially linked to elevated Vitamin D levels in Hill’s pet food. Many claim, online, to have experienced harm up to a year before the recall. Certain people outright blamed any foods in Hill’s product line, including cat food and kibbles that were not part of the recall.
However, without comprehensive reporting mechanisms or centralized data collection, determining the precise extent of harm inflicted on pets is difficult.
There is no published proof that excessive levels of Vitamin D harmed or killed “thousands of pets” as is commonly reported.
Hill’s Science Diet addressed complaints and, upon receiving evidence from pet owners such as purchase receipts and veterinary records, willingly covered veterinary expenses related to any verifiable illnesses attributed to their products.
Several unverifiable online reports assert that certain individuals were “offered only $5 or $10 coupons as compensation for their pet’s demise.” It is reasonable to surmise that these individuals may have lacked evidence substantiating their assertion that Hill’s food was responsible for their pet’s health issues.
In simpler terms, there is a possibility that they attributed the issues to food not included in the recall, had no veterinary records, or their pet’s records indicated a conflicting diagnosis unrelated to the food in question. Hill’s Science Diet pet food doesn’t have a responsibility to pay veterinary bills for those people.
Author’s Note: If you suspect your pet has been made sick by food, especially if there is a recall of that food, see a veterinarian! Get a diagnosis showing that the food caused your pet’s health condition. Save the food in its original container, and report your case to both the manufacturer and the FDA.
Avoid online speculation and at-home diagnosis, as these things are hard to receive compensation for if damages are legitimately due.
Some pet owners with verifiable claims declined to receive assistance and compensation from Hill’s and instead, filed lawsuits (35 of which were combined into a single class action that resulted in a settlement. More on this below).
At its core, the class-action settlement did little more than award some lawyers a payment of cash, and worse, delayed pet owners receiving payment to cover their veterinary expenses.
What’s more, there is no proof that any of the more egregious claims made by the lawsuits (such as Hill’s “knowingly” selling contaminated food and hiding the truth from consumers) were true.
The Bone vs. Hill’s Lawsuit
As mentioned earlier, one of the plaintiffs involved in Hill’s Class Action lawsuit surrounding the vitamin D incident has become a significant influencer in the world of Holistic pet care.
Her 13-year-old dog Duncan was suffering from pancreatitis when her veterinarian recommended a Hill’s diet to help with his symptoms. Pancreatitis is a common condition with a range of causes, including poor diet, obesity, genetics, and certain medications.
The diet she fed to alleviate his pancreatitis symptoms was recalled two weeks after her dog died. Her veterinarian said that his enzymes were elevated, but not enough to kill him. Despite this, his health declined quickly and he was put to sleep. She had a very valid claim against the Hill’s food, as it likely contributed to his early death.
His owner sought a minimum of $13,500 to cover her veterinary bills and the cost of replacing him with a new service dog. I was unable to determine how much of the final settlement she received.
According to her lawsuit, which was filed jointly with two other plaintiffs who had legitimate claims against the food itself, she asserted a belief that Hill’s Science Diet was aware of the excessive vitamin D in the product and had delayed initiating a recall.
Here is an excerpt from her lawsuit against the company, outlining one of the claims for which she sought damages:
“Dogs that consumed Hill’s products which are not yet part of the recall are exhibiting symptoms of vitamin D toxicity. For example, Plaintiffs have heard complaints from a number of consumers whose dogs ate dry dog food (rather than canned dog food) sold under the Hill’s Prescription Diet and Science Diet brand names and who reported that their dogs’ symptoms are consistent with vitamin D toxicity. Thus, it appears that Hill’s has recalled only a subset of its affected Specialty Dog Foods.”
This assertion lacks concrete evidence, relying solely on unsubstantiated information gathered through social media platforms. It necessitates readers to assume that both the FDA and Hill’s Science Diet were intentionally concealing a known problem and that they didn’t investigate claims.
When you hear people say that “Hill’s dragged their feet” or “waited 6 months to recall contaminated food“, this is where that information is coming from.
However, without a court judgment, verifiable proof, or official statements from credible sources, such claims remain speculative and should be approached with caution.
The plaintiff-turned-influencer often claims to have “won her case” against Hill’s, but the truth is that her lawsuit, along with others similar to hers, were consolidated into a single case. That class-action suit (more info below) ultimately led to a settlement agreed upon by both parties, not a judgment.
Additionally, the judge ruled that her claims related to dog and cat food not covered in the settlement were excluded. She did not “win” this part of her argument.
“The cat and dry dog food-related claims included in Bone, et al. v. Hill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc., et al., No. 19-CV-02284-JAR-TJJ, are expressly excluded from this Settlement”
That was several years ago now (2021), and there is no evidence to suggest that she has pursued these claims in a new lawsuit, let alone one with a viable argument supported by fair and verifiable evidence.
The Hill’s Class Action Settlement of $12.5 Million
Several smaller lawsuits, including Bone v. Hill’s, were combined into one class action, which led to a settlement.
A settlement in a class action lawsuit refers to an agreement reached between the parties involved in the case, typically the plaintiffs (representing a class of individuals) and the defendant (usually a company or entity). This agreement resolves the legal dispute without the need for a trial.
As outlined in this court document9, the lawsuit progressed through legal channels, eventually culminating in an agreement between the parties involved. The settlement, valued at $12.5 million, aimed to provide financial relief to affected pet owners and underscored Hill’s Pet Nutrition’s acknowledgment of its responsibility in the matter.
The settlement funds were allocated to reimburse pet owners for veterinary expenses related to the recall and to provide refunds for the purchase of the recalled products.
4 million dollars of the settlement were allocated towards legal fees and counsel.
In a settlement, all representing parties must agree to the terms.
Thus, the plaintiffs agreed to accept a $12.5 million payout to satisfy the harm done to their pets by Hill’s mistake.
While some may argue that the settlement amount is insufficient, it’s important to note that without evidence of additional harm, Hill’s couldn’t be deemed accountable.
Two members of the class action formerly objected to the settlement. One of them failed to both substantiate her claim and submit a timely objection (Swaim), while the other (Hawley) was overruled with the following commentary:
“While a class member may wish to receive an unlimited amount of money from a settlement, that wish does not make the settlement unfair, inadequate, or unreasonable.”
Anyone can make a claim or initiate a lawsuit, but only those supported by credible evidence can substantiate their case. Anecdotal online reports, lacking concrete proof, do not constitute evidence.
Purina Dog Food & Viral Social Panic
This is the same thing we are seeing play out yet again with Purina in 2023-2024. A single, since-debunked viral post of heavy metals in the food sparked a public outcry where thousands of pet owners began claiming that Purina food harmed their pets.
A considerable number of pets reportedly affected by Purina dog and cat food did not receive veterinary care, and if they did, their diagnoses were unrelated to food-related issues.
Calls for recalls and class action lawsuits gained momentum as individuals initiated these actions based on their at-home diagnoses, attributing their pets’ conditions to the food. They don’t have toxicology reports or proof of these claims, and multiple laboratory results showed that their claims were without merit.
The outcry is isolated to members of the social media group that is, of course, run by the “former Plaintiff from the Hill’s Recall that won her case“.
While we can understand and empathize with her heartache, it’s important to note that there is a lot more to this story.
Notable Vitamin D Recalls in Pet Food
Several other pet food brands have faced recalls for elevated levels of vitamin D in their products, contributing to a broader concern within the pet food industry.
Some notable brands that have issued recalls for vitamin D include:
Pet food companies have a responsibility to ensure the safety and quality of their products through rigorous testing and monitoring protocols. Vitamin D levels, like other essential nutrients, must be carefully controlled during the manufacturing process to prevent potential health risks to pets.
Some smaller pet food companies have questionable testing protocols, and may easily overlook something like this (hence the reason that “no recalls” is not always a positive thing).
For large companies that produce food for millions of pets and perform thousands of quality checks each day during production, bigger questions arise about how something like that goes overlooked.
That doesn’t make it ok, though. Call your pet food companies! Ask them what testing they do on the ingredients before, during, and after production. Find out if they manufacture their food, or outsource it to a large co-packing facility where they have less control over the final product.
Ongoing pressure from pet owners, as well as research and development efforts, can further enhance quality control measures, ensuring continuous improvement in pet food safety standards.
Was the Hill’s Vitamin D Issue Blown Out of Proportion?
While any product recall can understandably cause concern among consumers, some argue that Hill’s vitamin D recall may have been blown out of proportion for several reasons:
Limited Impact
The recall affected specific varieties of canned dog foods (around 4% of the product line), and the vast majority of Hill’s products were not implicated. There are no verifiable reports of harm from other products.
While there may have been many pets affected in some way by the excess Vitamin D, their symptoms would have resolved when they were no longer fed the contaminated food. Ideally, those pet parents submitted claims to Hill’s Science Diet or participated in the lawsuit as a means to recover their veterinary bills.
Some pets may have suffered fatalities directly linked to the contaminated canned food; however, there is no documented evidence supporting the notion of widespread harm.
While acknowledging the inexcusable nature of the deaths of those pets, it is essential to base our understanding on verifiable facts and comprehensive data rather than anecdotal reports to form a clear and accurate assessment of the overall impact of the situation.
Lack of Proof
While various claims have circulated regarding the supposed harm to pets and perceived deficiencies in Hill’s Science Diet’s management of the food recall, it’s imperative to underscore the absence of verified evidence backing the idea of widespread harm or negligence.
Many blogs and influencers have crafted a narrative that may amplify concerns, yet it’s essential to approach these accounts critically and rely on concrete evidence rather than anecdotal information.
Without substantiated facts, it’s challenging to draw definitive conclusions about the extent of harm or any alleged negligence in this matter. I encourage readers to maintain a balanced perspective and rely on credible sources for a comprehensive understanding of the situation.
Proactive Measures
Rather than downplaying the issue, Hill’s did take proactive measures to address the manufacturing error and ensure the safety of pets consuming their products.
While this issue should have never happened in the first place, Hill’s Science Diet did take steps to remedy the problem and change the practices that led to it happening.
Understandably, some people may doubt the sincerity of those measures taken by Hill’s Science Diet. However, despite any skepticism, sales of Hill’s Science Diet have consistently increased each year.
This upward trend suggests that consumers and veterinarians place their trust in the brand. This continued patronage could stem from various factors, including the brand’s long-standing reputation, quality assurance measures, and effective communication efforts regarding product safety and improvements.
Ultimately, the sustained growth in sales reflects a level of confidence and satisfaction among consumers and veterinary professionals with Hill’s Science Diet products.
In my view, I would confidently choose to feed Hill’s Science Diet, particularly after the thorough research conducted for this blog post. The process revealed several misconceptions I previously held about the entire situation. I feel a sense of relief about this now, and I hope that my reporting helps others do the same.
Disclaimer: This blog post provides a general overview of Hill’s class action lawsuit and should not be construed as legal advice. For specific legal inquiries or concerns, please consult with a qualified attorney.
Footnotes
“FDA Alerts Pet Owners and Veterinarians About Potentially Toxic Levels of Vitamin D in 33 Varieties of Hill’s Canned Dog Food in Expanded Recall” ↩︎
FDA Warning Letter to Hill’s Science Diet, November 2019 ↩︎
Hill’s Science Diet Press Release “2019 Voluntary Canned Dog Food Recall: United States” ↩︎
Veterinary Information Network: “Supplier identified in Hill’s pet food vitamin D-related recalls” ↩︎
Hill’s Class Action Settlement Case No. 2:19-md-02887-JAR-TJJ ↩︎
“Sunshine Mills, Inc. Issues Voluntary Recall of Dry Dog Food Due to Potentially Elevated Levels of Vitamin D” ↩︎
“Nutrisca Issues Recall of Dry Dog Food Due to Elevated Levels of Vitamin D” ↩︎
Nutrisca “Natural Life Pet Products Expands Recall of Dry Food Due to Elevated Levels of Vitamin D” ↩︎
“In Association With Sunshine Mills, LIDL Voluntarily Recalls Orlando Brand Grain Free Chicken & Chickpea Superfood Recipe Dog Food Due to Elevated Levels of Vitamin D” ↩︎
“Wet Noses Natural Dog Treat Company® Voluntarily Recalls Simply Nourish Brand Frozen Dog Food Due to Elevated Levels of Vitamin D” ↩︎
“Fromm Family Foods Voluntarily Recalls Four Star Shredded Entrée Canned Food for Dogs Due to Elevated Levels of Vitamin D” ↩︎
“Tuffy’s Pet Foods; Inc. Issues Voluntary Recall of a Limited Quantity of Pure Vita Salmon Entrée Dog Food in a Tetrapak Carton Due to Potentially Elevated Levels of Vitamin D” ↩︎
“Nestlé Purina Petcare Company Voluntarily Recalls Purina Pro Plan Veterinary Diets El Elemental Dry Dog Food in the U.S. Due to Potentially Elevated Vitamin D” ↩︎
Welcome to the third installment of my series uncovering the controversial and misleading aspects of the documentary “Pet Fooled.”
In this chapter, I’m going explore the intricacies of pet food recalls, veterinary diets, and the rise of holistic pet food elitism.
Join me as I dissect the narrative presented in “Pet Fooled,” aiming to separate fact from fiction and shed light on the complexities of pet nutrition.
In case you missed it, I’ve linked Part One and Part TWO below!
Note: This is a multi-part series! Additional articles in this series will be posted below.
Part One: “Biologically appropriate” feeding, bacteria & pathogens in raw food, and the influence of “big kibble” on veterinary schools (See Part One HERE)
Part Two: Pet food marketing, ingredients in pet food (including corn and by-products), manufacturing, AAFCO, and FDA regulations (See Part Two HERE)
Part Three: Pet food recalls, veterinary diets, and holistic pet food elitism (See Part Three HERE)
Pet Fooled Recalls
In Pet Fooled, the narrator digs into pet food recalls, in particular notable ones such as Pentobarbital (euthanasia drug) and Melamine, which I will cover in depth below.
The narrator recounts the poignant narratives of several pet owners deeply entangled in legal proceedings linked to these specific incidents.
While these issues in pet food are inexcusable, there have been many dangerous problems associated with raw pet food, too, including bacterial contamination, nutrient deficiencies, and high copper levels.1
Pet Fooled advocates for raw feeding as a solution to what it perceives as shortcomings and safety problems related to commercial pet food. The documentary suggests that raw diets, which typically consist of uncooked meat, bones, and organs, mimic the natural diet of wild animals and offer superior nutrition for pets.
Consider Darwin’s raw food2 . This brand is promoted in the film as a safe food “free of pathogens”. Their use of a chemical called “PAA – Peroxyacetic Acid)”3 is not approved for use in pet food, and the company is well-known for its blatant and public refusal to recall contaminated food.
I believe the overriding theme here is that pet parents should be concerned about recalls and food manufacturing processes. However, Pet Fooled significantly neglects to address the substantial contributions of raw and boutique pet food brands to this issue.
Here is a great video that covers the issues with Darwin’s Raw Pet Food in more detail:
Replying to @Renn an absolutely interesting read! I’ve pointed out in previous videos that many raw food companies want salmonella to be allowed in pet food…to the point of suing the organizations to allow it. Their argument is not all salmonella is pathogenic. But what happens when a prominent raw company tests positive for pathogenic salmonella? Turns out…nothing good. There may one day be studies about PAA in raw pet food that make this discussion a moot point. Unfortunately, until then this raw food company uses an unapproved product on their pet food, ignores calls to recall their food and misleads their consumers about pets falling ill.
The melamine pet food recall of 2007 stands as one of the most significant incidents in the history of pet food safety.
It originated when an ingredient manufacturer deliberately adulterated their products with melamine, a toxic chemical compound used in plastics and fertilizers. Melamine had been added to wheat gluten and rice protein concentrate to artificially inflate the protein content, making the products appear more nutritious.
This ingredient was sold by the supplier for use in both human and pet foods. In other words, it was “human grade”.
Tragically, this adulteration led to widespread contamination of pet food, affecting over 150 brands and resulting in the illness and death of many pets across the United States.
The melamine pet food recall served as a wake-up call for the pet food industry, highlighting the importance of robust quality control measures, transparency in the supply chain, and regulatory oversight to ensure the safety and integrity of pet food products.
Adulterants like melamine and pentobarbital should never be present in pet food. Because of this, pet food companies, unfortunately, may not have been previously aware of the need to test for these particular substances. There are thousands of potential contaminants that might affect any kind of food on the market, including fresh and raw.
Pet Fooled portrays the melamine recall as evidence that commercial kibble pet food is inherently unsafe, while blatantly overlooking the crucial role that the recall ultimately played in enhancing the safety of pet food products.
The melamine pet food recall happened 18 years ago at this point, and many changes have been made since that time. Many (though not all) pet food companies have overhauled their sourcing and ingredient testing protocols, and that’s a positive move in the right direction.
Pentobarbital Euthanasia Drug in Pet Food Recall
The pentobarbital recall5 refers to a series of incidents where, before the melamine recall, traces of pentobarbital, a euthanasia drug, were found in certain pet food products.
Pentobarbital is sometimes used to euthanize animals, and its presence in pet food products raised questions about how it could have entered the supply chain. I covered this topic in depth, in an article titled “Are There Euthanized Animals in Pet Food”.6
The FDA maintains a zero-tolerance policy for pentobarbital in pet food and contrary to what is implied in Pet Fooled, this is not an ongoing or concerning problem.
Milo’s Chicken Jerky and Pet Fooled
Pet Fooled also talks about the social frenzy surrounding Milo’s Chicken Jerky treats, which lasted nearly 6 years.
The convergence of social media proliferation and heightened concerns about manufacturing processes and ingredient sourcing have created an ideal environment for pet owners to attribute illnesses to pet food and treats.
We saw this play out again in 2023-2024 with the “Purina Panic”7, a now-debunked social media phenomenon that led to thousands of people blaming Purina and other kibble brands for their pets veterinary problems and deaths.
A family highlighted in Pet Fooled attributed the death of their pet to Milo’s Chicken Jerky.
However, their pet’s demise was actually due to a common condition known as “bloat” or “GDV” (gastric dilatation-volvulus), which affects large and giant breed dogs. This condition, often genetic, involves the dog’s stomach flipping, and the consumption of chicken jerky would have been unrelated to its occurrence in their pet.
The FDA looked into the reports and complaints and found nothing wrong with Milo’s treats until 2013 when trace amounts of antibiotics were found. They were recalled again in 2018 for elevated levels of beef thyroid hormone.
Neither of these contaminants would be associated with deaths or severe illness, and while both of those are inexcusable from a manufacturing standpoint, stories of widespread harm remain unproven.
Social Media & Its Role in Creating Panic
In the aftermath of the Melamine recall, single instances of pet illness have repeatedly triggered widespread social media frenzies or specific brands and ingredients.
These social media frenzies often lead to rapid dissemination of information, with pet owners sharing anecdotes and experiences, often without full context or verification.
While it’s essential for pet owners to stay informed and advocate for their pets’ health, the proliferation of unverified information can also fuel unnecessary panic and misinformation.
In many cases, a single story of illness can quickly snowball into widespread fear and distrust of specific pet food brands or ingredients.
However, it’s important to approach such incidents critically and seek out reliable sources and evidence-based information before drawing conclusions or making decisions about pet nutrition.
Pet Food Manufacturers Sourcing & Quality Control
For pet owners rightfully concerned about the sourcing practices of pet food companies, the most effective approach is to inquire directly. Regrettably, misinformation often circulates implying that certain brands source all of their ingredients from low-quality suppliers or China.
However, without thoroughly investigating each company’s actual practices, it’s challenging to ascertain the validity of such claims.
As part of my ongoing commitment to finding the truth about pet food, I found this incredible document from Nestle Purina8, which outlines their responsible sourcing standard in depth. This document is a great example of what you want to see from a pet food company.
As mentioned in part two, a demand for transparency is important. This demand must hold small boutique and raw pet food companies to the same standard.
Here are some things pet parents can do:
Ask the brand how many quality checks are performed each day, across all stages of production.
Verify that the brand is keeping batch samples and lab testing the food often for nutrient levels and contamination.
Look into the company recall history, and determine if the recalls were a sign of due diligence and a commitment to pet safety, or if they signal a bigger problem with quality control.
Verify that the brand has multiple highly qualified food safety, nutrition research, veterinarians, and board-certified nutritionists on staff who stand behind the food because they put their hard-earned education, sweat, and tears into it.
Dr. Em is a practicing veterinarian who posts science-backed information about pet health, including nutrition. This video on choosing pet food should provide valuable insight, and balance the often controversial and misleading content promoted by “Pet Fooled”.
Veterinary Prescription Diets
In “Pet Fooled,” veterinary prescription diets are subjected to scrutiny, with the documentary casting doubt on their formulation, marketing, and suitability for pets’ health needs.
However, it’s essential to recognize that veterinary prescription diets are meticulously formulated to address specific health conditions in pets, such as kidney disease, urinary tract issues, and food allergies.
These diets undergo rigorous testing and adhere to strict nutritional standards to ensure their efficacy and safety under veterinary supervision.
While “Pet Fooled” may question the ingredients used in these diets, it’s important to understand that ingredients such as hydrolyzed proteins, novel proteins, and therapeutic additives serve specific therapeutic purposes and are recommended by veterinary professionals based on scientific evidence.
Therefore, while the documentary may raise concerns about veterinary therapeutic diets, these concerns are only based on emotional reactions to the perceived “issues” with certain ingredients.
Pet owners must consult with their veterinarians to determine the most appropriate diet for their pets’ individual health needs.
Dr. Em hits it out of the park once again, with this phenomenal video debunking many common myths about veterinary prescription foods.
Holistic Pet Food Elitism & Final Thoughts
Holistic pet food elitism, as portrayed in various discussions and documentaries like “Pet Fooled,” revolves around the belief that select “premium” and minimally processed pet foods labeled as “holistic” or “natural” surpass conventional commercial pet diets.
The implication is that opting for anything other than raw, homemade diets, or certain premium kibbles may be seen as providing lesser care for your pet.
Echoing this sentiment, Dr. Becker asserts that feeding anything else amounts to “nutritional abuse.”
However, “holistic” and “higher quality” foods often come with a hefty price tag, placing them beyond the means of many devoted pet parents. Worse, many of these “better” or more “holistic natural” diets are unbalanced, may cause nutritional heart disease, can be subjected to recalls, and may contain pathogens and bacteria.
Science, and history, prove this.
“Higher quality” foods are not immune to any of the problems implicated by the film. They aren’t a magic solution, nor is there any proof that they are inherently and always better.
My point is to say that shaming pet parents for choosing the food they can afford to feed their pets is never ok.
Unfortunately, Pet Fooled staked a claim on that belief and used their platform to shame millions of pet parents into feeding their pets potentially unbalanced and often unaffordable diets.
There are many affordable, high-quality options out there and at Hello Danes, we will never, ever shame somebody for choosing a science-backed, well-studied food like Dog Chow.
While “Pet Fooled” raised valid concerns about pet food safety and manufacturing practices, it opted to sensationalize information, fostering an elitist mindset surrounding pet food selection.
Instead of promoting an informed and balanced discussion, “Pet Fooled” contributed to the polarization of perspectives on pet nutrition, hindering productive and science-backed dialogue on this important topic.
It is for that reason that Pet Fooled gets a resounding thumbs down from me.
Recently, I was checking in on a Facebook group when somebody posted about their dog suffering from copper storage disease. This condition can cause permanent damage to the liver. It’s something veterinarians are seeing more and more of, and copper in dog food may be to blame!
Copper Storage Disease has primarily been seen as a genetic disorder, occurring in only a handful of breeds such as Bedlington Terriers, Labrador Retrievers, Dobermans, Dalmatians, and West Highland White Terriers.
The disease can also be influenced by dietary factors.
Recently, liver health and copper disease have been receiving media attention. Dog breeds that are not traditionally seen with this condition are popping up with it.
This topic has been covered by the AVMA, Tufts, Cornell University, and other well-respected veterinary organizations. As always, we approach articles with a research and evidence-based mindset. Read on!
Symptoms of Copper Storage Disease in Dogs
Copper Storage Disease, also known as copper-associated hepatopathy or copper toxicosis, is characterized by an abnormal accumulation of copper in the liver, leading to liver damage.
Common signs of Copper Storage Disease include lethargy, decreased appetite, and weight loss. As the disease progresses, jaundice may become apparent, characterized by yellowing of the eyes, gums, and skin due to liver impairment.
Dogs with Copper Storage Disease may also exhibit increased thirst and urination, accompanied by a swollen abdomen caused by fluid accumulation.
Behavioral changes, such as disorientation or seizures, can occur in advanced stages. Recognizing these symptoms promptly is crucial for seeking veterinary attention and initiating necessary diagnostic and treatment measures.
Veterinarians can detect early signs of disease by tracking liver health through blood tests. Additional diagnostic tools, such as an ultrasound, may be employed to exclude other liver-related conditions if there are concerns.
If an accumulation of excess copper in the liver is suspected, the veterinarian might suggest a liver biopsy to confirm the diagnosis.
How is Copper Storage Disease Treated?
Copper Storage Disease is treated with a strict low-copper diet and copper chelators which can bind to copper and remove it from the liver.
The medications used to treat Copper Storage Disease in dogs are expensive and have side effects.
For dogs that have accumulated dangerous levels of copper in their liver, however, this is the only way to improve their quality of life. Early detection is key.
There is a lot of misinformation out there about veterinary diets such as Hill’s L/D Chicken Flavor Dry Dog Food (Liver Care) or Royal Canin Hepatic, but this is a great example of a time when one is necessary. These diets are professionally researched, formulated, and tested to treat specific health conditions.
Copper is an essential part of a balanced diet. However, similar to other essential nutrients like Vitamin C or D, an excess can pose problems. Over-supplementing certain vitamins and minerals, including copper, can lead to toxicity in dogs.
I dug into some of the veterinary articles on this topic, and yes, some researchers are concerned about copper in pet food3. The rate of Copper Storage Disease seems to have risen, in tandem with two major changes in the last 20 years:
A switch from Copper Oxide to a more bioavailable form of copper, Copper Sulfate
Pet food trends that encourage demand for extremely nutrient-dense “holistic” diets that contain a lot of organs, meat, and certain plants such as flax seed, mushrooms, and sweet potatoes
While this trend is only a correlation (causation has not been determined), it’s worth examining. Let’s dig into both of those in more detail!
1. Copper Oxide vs. Copper Sulfate
In 1997, a suggestion was put forth to discontinue the use of Copper Oxide in pet food. This proposal stemmed from a study revealing its limited absorption and utilization by the body (refer to the study HERE).4
Pet food companies, on the advisement of AAFCO, switched to other forms of copper that are more bioavailable.
They are commonly seen on pet food ingredient lists as copper sulfate or copper chelates such as copper proteinate, copper amino acid chelate, chelated copper, copper lysine, and copper glycinate (among others). These refer to various forms of copper compounds with organic molecules bound to them for enhanced absorption and utilization in the body.
This move away from the use of copper oxide was done even though there had not been widespread concerns about copper deficiency in dogs.
2. Consumer Demand for Meat-Heavy Dog Foods
In recent times, a growing occurrence of Copper-Associated Hepatopathy could potentially be linked to the rising consumer demand for nutrient-dense pet foods rich in animal-based components and organ meats, often referred to as “natural diets” or “holistic diets”.
Organ meats in particular are high in copper (yes, this includes freeze-dried liver treats).
It’s worth noting that while the concept behind these types of diets is that they are more “natural”, a truly “natural” canine diet is technically based on prey behavior and scavaging. For wild dogs whose meals must be chased or found, days can go by with very little balanced nutrition.
Put simply, nature is not nice.
Pet dogs fed commercially prepared and extremely nutrient-dense “natural” diets are often provided more nutrition in a compact package than was ever a reality for “wild” dogs. Additionally, pet dogs typically do not engage in the level of athleticism and endurance required by animals who don’t have the comfort of a warm home and ready access to water.
The daily abundance of nutrients can pose health risks, as over-supplementation and over-feeding are recognized as significant issues in pet nutrition.
Later in this blog, I present data on the copper concentrations in various pet food brands, and unfortunately, the findings often support this argument. Many expensive, nutrient-dense pet foods do seem to trend high in copper.
Additionally, there is a trend favoring pet foods containing vegetables high in copper, such as sweet potatoes, further complicating the issue.
Determining whether a specific formula contains excessive or dangerous levels of copper is challenging due to various factors. The bioavailability of copper varies among different forms, and its intricate interactions with other nutrients can impact how the body manages or eliminates the surplus.
Here is an interesting and informative video:
How Much Copper is In Dog Food?
Different pet food brands and formulas contain varying levels of copper. The Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) establishes a minimum amount of copper that all pet foods must contain.
However, AAFCO does not set a maximum limit on copper levels (unlike Europe, which does).
It’s important to note that you don’t need to start scrutinizing ingredient lists or searching for low-copper diets for your pet based solely on this information. As long as a pet food meets AAFCO guidelines, it should technically be safe for healthy dogs to consume, regardless of the copper levels.
Despite various opinions on copper in pet food, the reality is that there isn’t sufficient data to confirm whether excessive amounts are harmful to all pets. As a result, some veterinarians and researchers, including 13 who advised AAFCO against setting a limit on copper in pet food, suggest that pet owners refrain from excessive worry on this topic.
For dogs with liver failure, scientifically formulated low-copper diets known as “Hepatic” diets are crucial.
However, for typical, healthy pets, following AAFCO guidelines should be sufficient.
That aside, there is generally no need for an abundance of copper in pet food anyway. Thus, it may be advisable for concerned pet parents to avoid foods with excessively high levels.
The potential impact of excessive copper levels in pet food on all dogs is not yet definitively established. However, erring on the side of caution by avoiding foods with elevated copper levels is fine if you have concerns about your pet’s health.
How to Find the Copper Level of Dog Food
In many cases, the only way to find out how much copper is in your pet’s food is by calling them and asking. While not all companies disclose this information, reputable ones typically have it and are willing to provide it upon request. (Keep reading! I’ve done a bunch of digging for you and made a chart below).
Because we don’t currently know what a truly safe “upper limit” is, the goal should be to compare several brands and steer clear of those on the high side.
When you are looking for this information, find it on a dry matter basis. This is very important, and something I cover more in-depth below!
The FEDAIF (European Pet Food Industry Federation) sets an upper limit of 28 mg/kg or 28 ppm for copper.
It may be advisable to choose foods that stay under 28 mg/kg whenever possible. Knowing that all AFFCO pet foods meet the minimum copper requirement necessary for health (remember, pets do need copper in their diet), a lower number is preferable.
During a recent wellness check for my pets, my fantastic veterinarian noted that over his decades of practice, he’s observed a rise in liver and kidney disease among pets. It’s become so prevalent that he now starts monitoring for early indicators of these conditions in pets age 6 and up.
We can’t be sure if copper is the definitive cause of that trend, but it does give me pause!
I did a little market research for you, and have shared the results on the table below!
Copper Concentrations of Popular Dog Foods
I contacted the following companies directly to create a table, which is current as of January 2024. In creating this data, I intentionally chose brands and formulas based on the following criteria:
Popularity in different pet food markets
Word on the street (some brands are “known” to be higher in copper)
Range of formulation types and proteins used
Most pet food companies have numerous formulas, so I pulled specific formulas at random from their product pages.
Some companies post copper content on their website. For the rest, I contacted each brand directly for this information. This list below is the most up-to-date data (2024) on copper levels in popular dog food brands.
As you’ll see on the chart below, the copper levels vary significantly across brands. Some appear notably high, while others are relatively low.
Particularly, hepatic diets are formulated with carefully controlled low copper levels, catering specifically to pets dealing with liver issues or copper storage disease. I’ve included a few of those on the list for comparison sake.
All values listed below are on a dry-matter basis, calculated with moisture removed. This standardizes comparisons between raw, fresh, and kibble products.
1 Mg/Kg = 1 ppm. For example, 13.00 Mg/Kg = 13 ppm.
Please note that just because the copper level appears acceptable, does NOT mean that the other nutrient and mineral levels are. Always verify the analysis for calcium/phosphorus too, especially when feeding large or giant breed dogs.
Food Brand & Formula
Copper in Mg/Kg (Dry Matter)
Annamaet Grain-Free Manitok
14.59
Annamaet Ultra
13.49
Diamond Naturals Grain Free Beef & Sweet Potato
17.00*
Eukanuba Large Breed Adult
13.00
Eukanuba Large Breed Puppy
12.00
Eukanuba Performance 30/20
11.00
Eukanuba Puppy Food (Lamb)
15.00
Fromm Beef Frittata Veg
26.37
Fromm Bonnehill Farms Beefibowl Beef
54.70
Fromm Bonnehill Farms Turkibowls
29.39
Fromm Duck ala Veg
13.23
Fromm Gold Large Breed Adult
13.36
Fromm Heartland Gold Adult
22.74
Fromm Highlander Beef, Oats, and Barley
17.67
Hill’s L/D Chicken Flavor Dry Dog Food (Liver Care)
7.00
Instinct Raw + Kibble Blend Grain-Free Chicken
15.53
Instinct Raw Frozen Chicken
39.00
Instinct Raw Frozen Rabbit
55.94
Inukshuck Marine 25
39.00**
Nature’s Logic Canine Beef Meal Feast
10.20
Nature’s Logic Distinction Pork
24.80
Nutrisource Beef & Rice
15.90
Nutrisource Pura Vida Chicken & Brown Rice
17.10
Nutrisource Element Wild Range
23.90
Open Farm Grain Free Wild Caught Salmon
19.57
Open Farm Grass Fed Beef Gently Cooked
26.88
Open Farm Homestead Turkey Rustic Stew
23.02
Open Farm Open Prairie Raw Mix
14.67
Open Farm Lamb & Ancient Grains
17.12
Purina Dog Chow Adult (Beef & Rice)
12.40
Purina Dog Chow (Lamb)
15.00
Purina ONE Large Breed Chicken & Rice
14.20
Purina Pro Plan Complete Essentials Chicken & Rice
16.90
Purina Pro Plan Large Breed Chicken & Rice
15.10
Purina Pro Plan Sensitive Salmon Large Breed
15.10
Purina Pro Plan Sport 30/20 Chicken
16.10
Royal Canin Hepatic (Liver Care)
7.00
Spot & Tango Fresh Beef & Millet
20.90
Spot & Tango Fresh Lamb & Brown Rice
20.40
Spot & Tango Fresh Turkey & Red Quinoa
19.70
Spot & Tango Unkibble Beef & Barley
21.90
Spot & Tango Unkibble Chicken & Brown Rice
14.60
Spot & Tango Unkibble Cod & Salmon
20.10
Spot & Tango Unkibble Turkey & Sweet Potato
15.90
Stella & Chewy Raw Blend Red Meat
45.40
Stella & Chewy Raw Blend Wild-Caught
24.20
Stella & Chewy Raw Coated Cage Free Duck
28.43
Stella & Chewy Raw Coated Wild Caught Whitefish
21.56
Stella & Chewy Dandy Lamb (Raw)
49.00
Stella & Chewy Super Beef (Raw)
44.14
Stella & Chewy Tantalizing Turkey (Raw)
19.57
Stella & Chewy Purely Pork (Raw)
33.30
Victor Beef & Rice
16.00
Victor Grain-Free Ocean Fish
16.00
Victor Professional
15.00
Wild Earth Maintenance Golden Rotisserie
26.80
Wild Earth Maintenance Classic Roast
20.70
Wild Earth Performance
19.80
Zignature Venison
15.15
Ziwi Peak Air Dried Beef
28.00
Ziwi Peak Air-Dried Chicken
26.00
Ziwi Peak Air-Dried Mackeral & Lamb
39.00
Ziwi Peak Air-Dried Tripe & Lamb
51.00
Ziwi Peak Canned Lamb
24.00
Ziwi Peak Canned Venison
22.00
*Diamond Naturals (Diamond, Taste of the Wild, Nutra Nuggets, Kirkland/Costco) provided me with incomplete and inaccurate information. This value may not be correct. I’ve included more information about this at the bottom of the post.
**Inukshuck Despite numerous requests, this particular brand has not responded regarding the dry-matter analysis of their copper levels. The as-fed amounts (which they did provide) range from a minimum of 27 mg/kg to as high as 39 mg/kg. It’s reasonable to anticipate that the dry-matter value will be even higher. Inukshuck is known to be a higher-copper brand.
There are thousands upon thousands of formulas and pet food brands to choose from. If you don’t see your food on the list above, contact the manufacturer and ask for the dry-matter copper value!
Avoid any company that refuses to provide this information or tries to divert your attention from it. If a company cannot or will not readily disclose the copper level in mg/kg on a dry matter analysis to anyone who asks for any reason, proceed with caution.
The copper levels in the chart above are accurate as of February 1st, 2024. It’s up to the consumer to verify those values, and to understand that the amount of copper in a food is not the whole story! Zinc, for example, can affect the bioavailability of copper.
The amount of copper a pet ingests may climb with the addition of toppers, supplements, and treats as well.
Which Pet Foods Are High in Copper?
High copper levels in pet food can be detrimental to the health of some pets, particularly for those who cannot effectively metabolize or excrete excess copper.
If you have a breed that is predisposed to copper storage disease, it is especially important to avoid nutrient-dense foods and toppers that are exceptionally high in copper.
While copper is an essential mineral for various bodily functions, excessive levels can lead to toxicity. It’s important to note that copper requirements vary among different species and breeds of pets, so what might be considered high for one could be normal for another.
Some ingredients commonly found in pet foods, treats, and supplements that are naturally high in copper include (but are not limited to):
Organ Meats: Liver, kidneys, gizzards, and heart
Fish: Salmon, trout, and shellfish
Nuts and Seeds: Sunflower seeds, cashews, and flax seeds
Legumes: Lentils, chickpeas, and beans
Mushrooms: Shiitake, oyster, portabello, button
Certain cereals: Oats, quinoa, and ancient grains
Pet owners should be cautious about feeding foods high in copper to pets, especially if they have conditions such as copper storage disease, liver disease, or are predisposed to copper toxicity because of their breed or pedigree.
Feeding commercial pet foods formulated by reputable brands that adhere to industry standards and conduct regular quality control measures can help ensure a balanced and safe diet for pets.
Many pet food brands have questionable practices that lead to inconsistencies in product safety and nutrient levels; copper, like calcium, should be well controlled. Additionally, many homemade diets (including Dr. Judy Morgan’s “Pup Loaf”) may contain excessive amounts of copper because of the meat and organs that are used.
Veterinarians and researchers recommend sticking to brands that meet WSAVA recommendations, including Purina, Hill’s, Science Diet, Eukanuba, and Iam’s.
The widespread practice of incorporating goat milk into pet foods, especially those abundant in meat and organs, may not be the healthy nutritional practice it was once believed to be.
Zinc can increase the absorption of copper from the pet’s diet as well. If zinc and copper are not balanced together in the formulation of the pet food, it can cause health problems in pets.
Both Zinc and Copper are commonly found in “Multi-Vitamin” pet supplements.
A lot of questions are also being raised about the role of zinc in the development of Copper Storage Disease.
As-Fed vs. Dry Matter Calculation
When calculating nutrient content in pet food, it’s necessary to understand the difference between as-fed and dry matter basis. I’ll try to break this down into simple terms!
As-fed refers to the nutrient content of the food in its original, as-packaged, and as-fed state, including moisture content. (Yes, even kibble has moisture! Around 10%).
Dry matter removes the moisture content from the equation to provide a more accurate representation of the nutrient composition.
This distinction is crucial because moisture content can significantly affect nutrient concentrations, especially in canned, raw, fresh, or wet foods where moisture levels are higher.
By converting nutrient values to a dry matter basis, pet owners and professionals can make more accurate comparisons between different pet food products.
When evaluating copper content in pet food, I recommend comparing only the dry-matter value.
Can I Detox My Dog from Copper & Other Heavy Metals?
If you are concerned your pet has been ingesting too much copper, you need to talk to a veterinarian.
The concept of “detox” is often oversimplified or exaggerated in popular culture, leading to misconceptions about its effectiveness and necessity. While the body does have natural processes for removing toxins, such as through the liver and kidneys, the idea of undergoing specific “detox” programs or interventions to rid the body of accumulated toxins beyond what these organs can handle is not supported by scientific evidence.
Many products and treatments marketed as “detox” methods lack rigorous scientific validation and may even be harmful. It’s essential to approach claims of detoxification with skepticism and prioritize evidence-based practices.
If your veterinarian is concerned about copper storage or other liver problems, they will recommend an appropriate diet and may prescribe medication to help.
Milk Thistle Detox for Dogs
A common ‘detox’ remedy suggested by pet owners and certain influencers is milk thistle (“Silymarin”).
Expanding on the limited efficacy and safety research surrounding silymarin, I’d like to note that while it’s often promoted as a natural liver detoxifier, scientific evidence supporting its effectiveness and safety in dogs is limited.
Don’t skip seeing the vet because “Susie on Facebook” told you to give your dog a “liver cleanse” with milk thistle instead.
Low Copper Dog Food
Low copper dog food brands cater to the dietary needs of dogs requiring reduced copper intake, such as those with copper storage disease (hepatopathies).
These brands carefully formulate their recipes to contain minimal copper levels, ensuring the nutritional balance necessary for optimal canine health. Companies such as Hill’s Science Diet, Purina, and Royal Canin create specialized veterinary diets backed by research for this exact purpose! These foods typically require approval from a veterinarian.
By providing controlled copper content, these specialized dog foods help manage copper-related health conditions, promoting overall well-being and longevity in affected dogs.
For dogs that have not been diagnosed with copper storage disease or hepatopathies, it would be advisable to stick to well-formulated diets from brands such as Purina, Royal Canin, Hill’s, and Eukanuba. These diets’ copper levels consistently sit in a normal range, well below the European FEDAIC established maximum of 28 mg/kg.
If you’re considering preparing a home-cooked diet for your dog with conditions such as copper storage disease or any other health issue, it’s recommended that you work with a Board Certified Veterinary Nutritionist. Find one HERE.
Voyager Dog Food (Formerly The Scoop)
After losing a dog to diet-associated Copper Storage Disease, a veterinarian created a pet food company specifically focused on eliminating this problem. The brand claims to use no Copper Sulfate or chelated copper in their formulations, instead relying on natural copper sources from meat and organs.
I inquired with Voyager Food for information on their copper, calcium, and phosphorus levels as this information was not easy to find on their website. Please note, that none of their formulas are appropriate for large or giant breed puppies.*
From what I can tell, a Ph.D. Nutritionist was involved in the formulation of the food; however, it is unclear if that person is on staff or simply a consultant.
Further, unless I learn otherwise, we can assume the food is co-packed in a large factory that makes many other brands.
So while it may be a promising option for some pet owners, I’m not convinced it’s the best or only option.
*Voyager Foods responded to my inquiry about feeding large and giant breed puppies, to which they replied: “At the puppy stage no, but we have seen the diet do great for that 6-month and up range. For us to meet that requirement for puppies we would have to add a copper supplement which we truly believe would go against everything we stand for.”
I would not feed this to any large or giant breed puppy under the age of 18 months of age.
How to Prevent Copper Storage Disease in Dogs
Because research is still needed to fully understand why diet-associated copper storage disease is on the rise, and why some dogs are more susceptible than others, there are very few regulations or recommendations for this.
Based on the data I’ve collected, I think it’s safe to say that the following practices could help minimize risk in some pets:
Feed a well-balanced diet with copper below 28 mg/kg, dry-matter basis
Take it easy on offering food, toppers, and treats that contain a lot of copper
Avoid regularly creating nutrient-dense food bowls that are loaded with high-copper ingredients such as goat milk, organs, flax seeds, mushrooms, and sweet potatoes
Do not give “multi-vitamin” supplements that contain copper and/or zinc
Reduce all of the above factors as much as possible if you have copper pipes or use well water that is untested and/or unfiltered
Stick to WSAVA-compliant food brands such as Purina, Hill’s, and Royal Canin
See your veterinarian often for checkups, and ask about monitoring liver and kidney health
Are you concerned about copper in your pet’s food? Have you had a problem with a pet experiencing copper storage disease or health problems related to the liver or kidneys? Please leave your comment below!
I, for one, look forward to seeing a LOT more research on this topic.
*Diamond Pet Food Response to Copper Levels in Pet Food
When I first inquired about copper levels in Diamond Pet Foods (a manufacturer whose brands include Diamond, Taste of the Wild, Kirkland/Costco, 4 Health, and Nutra Nuggets) they responded by telling me that all foods have 17 mg/kg of Copper.
Having noticed that all other pet food brands had variable copper levels based on the formula, I inquired further. It seemed odd to me that every formula had exactly 17 mg/kg.
It took them two days to respond, at which point a veterinarian returned this note to me:
“The copper level is an average level based on the typical analysis across the formulas as the majority of the copper in the recipes comes from the mineral premix. Ingredients that contribute significant copper, such as liver, are not included in any of our recipes.“
D. Wilhite, DVM Veterinary Team [Diamond Pet Foods]
This clues me into two major observations of Diamond pet foods:
They don’t have, or won’t share the specific copper levels of each formula (as they provided me with an “average” across all formulas
Consequently, they might not be consistently testing and verifying copper levels in their pet foods through laboratory analysis, which raises concerns regarding quality control
Diamond Brand does NOT meet WSAVA recommendations, as one of the guidelines is that the pet food company should be able to provide the nutrient level of all essential nutrients (which they have failed to do)
During my discussion with Diamond regarding pet food, they indicated that they do not employ a qualified nutritionist (DACVN or PhD in Nutrition) on their staff and primarily engage with consultants.
Interpret this information as you see fit; however, to me, it raises several red flags, especially if I’m concerned about copper in my pet’s food.
Victor dog food is a popular option for Great Danes. This week, pet owners across the nation have been shaken by the alarming news of an unprecedented recall involving ALL Victor dog food. The Victor Dog Food recall (2023) affects all formulas with an expiration date before 10/31/24.
The massive nature of the current Victor recall underscores the critical importance of scrutinizing the quality and safety of pet food products, as well as the manufacturing practices of the companies we give our money (and trust to).
As details emerge about the specific reasons behind the Victor recall and the potential risks posed to dogs, we will update this post. In the meanwhile, if you feed Victor foods to your Dane, you must immediately stop. Read on for more information.
Victor Dog Food Recall 2023 Details
Here is what we know about the current Victor food recall:
ALL formulas are affected. If you have Victor in your home that was purchased before November 2023, it’s recalled.
The food may be contaminated with salmonella, which is a bacteria that can lead to symptoms such as diarrhea, fever, and abdominal cramps in humans and animals. In some cases, it can lead to death.
7 human cases of salmonella poisoning have been attributed to Victor Foods, going back as far as January 2023. 6 of those cases are infants.
There are likely many more cases that have not yet been documented
The problem was initially discovered by a random 3rd party test of Victor Hi-Pro Plus that was purchased at a store
There is also a timeline associated with this pet food recall which gives us some valuable (and scary) insight.
Victor brand has “No Recalls” Victor prides itself on having had ‘no recalls’. Enthusiasts of the brand promote this as a badge of honor, not realizing that the company had been selling contaminated food for at least 10 months.
Victor Hi-Pro Plus RecallSeptember 3rd, 2023 The South Carolina Department of Agriculture tests a sample from a random bag of Hi-Pro Plus purchased at a pet store. It tests positive for Salmonella, prompting the first recall which included 644 cases sold in 5-pound bags with lot code 1000016385 and a Best By Date of 4/30/2024(See more here)
Victor Beef & Rice RecallOctober 30th, 2023 3rd party sampling was done again, and 3 lots of Beef & Rice were found to be contaminated with Salmonella. Victor Beef & Rice formulas in 5, 15, and 40 lbs bags with an expiration 06/12/2024 were recalled. (See more here).
Victor Expands the Recall to EverythingNovember 9th, 2023 Days after the Beef & Rice Recall, Victor expanded the recall to include all foods with expiration dates before 10/31/2024. This includes all Victor foods manufactured at the Mid-America pet food plant in Mt. Pleasant, Texas, and formulas from Wayne Feeds, Eagle Mountain, and Members Mark (which are also manufactured by the facility. (See more here). If the bag says Victor, it’s been recalled.
The FDA Releases an Advisory about the Victor RecallNovember 9th, 2023 The FDA created a page in collaboration with the CDC with information about the Mid America Victor Pet Food recall that includes more detailed information about documented illnesses, procedures, recommendations, and the timeline of reported illnesses. (See more here).
Can a Dog Eat Victor Recalled Food?
The FDA, the CDC, and the authors of this blog recommend that Victor Dog Food be destroyed so that no humans or animals can touch or eat it.
Even if your dog seems to have no ill effects, a pet with salmonella in their gut can shed the bacteria in their feces. Additionally, food bowls, your pets eating area, and their saliva may be contaminated and contribute to the spread.
In other words, if your dog is eating salmonella contaminated food and then gives you kisses, you could become sick.
While many people can get over salmonella poisoning at home with a few uncomfortable trips to the toilet, many others end up in the hospital. The CDC considers a salmonella outbreak to be a serious event.
If you have an immunocompromised person, infant, or elderly person in your home it is especially important that you take precautions with food that may be contaminated with salmonella.
We recommend a cold-turkey switch to a brand that meets WSAVA guidelines (more on this below).
If My Dog is Not Sick, Can They Keep Eating Victor?
No.
Many dogs do not show symptoms of Salmonella poisoning (though some do), even if they are actively carrying and shedding the bacteria from their stools and saliva.
Even if your pet seems to be “just fine” eating the Victor dog food in your pantry, it is recommended that you immediately switch.
There is also an ethical dilemma at play if you continue to feed Victor food despite the current recall. We must hold Victor accountable for their poor quality control. By seeking a refund for the potentially contaminated food that you purchased, Victor bears the financial burden of the mistake (as they should).
Additionally, if your pet is shedding salmonella while out and about they could make others sick. This could result from them visiting with kids, going to the nursing home as a therapy dog, pooping in public areas (even if you scoop it up), and other normal activities.
What are the Signs of Salmonella Poisoning
Both dogs and humans can become sick from Salmonella. Now that the Victor recall has been posted, MANY people are realizing that they or their pet had been made ill with food poisoning at some point in 2023, but never considered that it could have been because of their pet’s food.
The symptoms of salmonella poisoning in dogs and humans are very similar:
Nausea (May result in pets turning their nose up at Victor Food)
Diarrhea
Blood in Stool
Vomiting
Lethargy or Low Energy
Fever
Abdominal Cramps
Salmonella infection can also lead to heart problems, eye problems, arthritis, muscle pain, and urinary tract symptoms.
If you or your pet have had these symptoms, and your pet was eating Victor food (or one of the other brands included in the current expanded recall), you are encouraged to report it to your veterinarian, your doctor, and the FDA.
Salmonella is not destroyed by freezing temperatures.
Killing or eliminating Salmonella involves thorough cooking of contaminated food items. Cooking your pets kibble to destroy any potential salmonella contamination is not recommended, however, as this may alter the nutritional balance of the food.
Practicing good hygiene by washing hands thoroughly with soap and water after handling Victor kibble or coming into contact with potentially contaminated surfaces is essential. After you dispose of your Victor food, thoroughly wash and sanitize the feeding area, scoops, and bowls.
If you use a pet food storage container, it must also be thoroughly sanitized.
Unfortunately, dish soap doesn’t kill bacteria; so depending on how thoroughly you wash something, it may still require sanitization. If your dishwasher has such a cycle, we recommend using it!
If you have been affected by the Mid America Victor food recall and need alternative foods, we recommend sticking to brands that meet WSAVA guidelines and thus, have exceptional quality control practices.
Pet food manufacturers that meet WSAVA recommendations have transparency in pet food labeling, exceptional quality control, and highly qualified nutritionists involved with the formulation of the food.
Here is our list of pet foods that meet WSAVA recommendations, are ideal for large & giant breed dogs, and provide a veterinary-approved alternative to Victor pet foods. If you are shopping for a small or senior dog, choose a comparable formula from the same company:
Check out THE GIANT DOG FOOD PROJECT to compare brands and values.
If you are looking to stay away from the “Big 5” for some reason (though, we urge you to reconsider), other brands that are close contenders include grain-inclusive Farmina, Annamaet, and Instinct Kibbles.
How to Switch from Victor to Another Brand
It is important that you immediately stop feeding Victor altogether. We recognize that this can be upsetting for pet owners that feel their pet has done well on Victor food. However, there are many alternatives out there and switching quickly is important!
Once you have chosen a food, thoroughly sanitize your pets eating area and then offer a SMALL meal of the new food.
Instead of offering two meals, offer 3-4. Split the food up over the course of the day.
Additionally, for the first few days, reduce the overall amount that you offer! Many pets want to gorge on new food because it’s novel and interesting; do NOT allow this unless you want a yard full of poop!
Check the feeding recommendations on the bag, too. Chances are, you can feed LESS food if you choose a brand like Purina Pro Plan, Royal Canin, or Hill’s! Overfeeding is a COMMON cause of loose stools and the nutritional values will likely be different on a new food that you choose.
We recommend shopping at Petsmart or Chewy, and choosing autoship to save money and time. If your pup has digestive upset for more than a few days, see your veterinarian!
Victor Pet Food Quality Control & Recalls
It’s crucial to understand that recalls aren’t inherently negative. Some companies promptly issue small recalls as a testament to their commitment to prioritizing pet health over marketing and profits.
However, the magnitude and context of the recall involving Victor pet foods serve as a clear example of a problematic recall, prompting a reassessment of our perception of the brand.
Many people have rewarded Victor for having had “no recalls” in the past.
We can now clearly see that this was misguided, as the current recall shows a problematic issue with quality control.
The reality is that a company boasting “no recalls” may simply be overlooking (or worse, ignoring) potential issues.
Pet food manufacturers should prioritize routine and thorough equipment sanitization, along with batch testing, to virtually eliminate the risk of pathogens like aflatoxins, salmonella, and E. coli in their products.
The salmonella contamination in Mid America Pet food was caught twice by 3rd party testing, not the company itself. This is a glaring indication that a crucial step was missed.
Salmonella poisoning cases associated with this outbreak date back into January, 9 months prior to the first recall. This is an indication that contaminated food has been on store shelves for the better part of a year. For many pet owners, this has explained a lot of problematic symptoms they had seen in their pets for the last several months.
A quick search through many Facebook dog groups indicates that many pets have actually been sick. It took a massive recall for people to figure out why.
How has Mid America Pet Foods Responded to the Recall?
Unfortunately, Mid America (the makers of Victor foods, as well as the manufacturing plant for Eagle Pack, Wayne Feeds, and Member’s Mark which were also recalled) has had a questionable response to the recall.
Numerous pet owners mention enduring lengthy waits on hold, spending hours waiting to connect with a representative only to be told that “Victor cares”.
Other individuals have surfaced, expressing concerns about Victor pet food causing illness in their pets before the recall. After reaching out to Victor about this, these owners consistently cite that the company failed to acknowledge any responsibility for the reported issues.
Worse, Victor representatives are telling some people that the salmonella recall was done out of “an abundance of caution” and that the Beef & Rice formula is truly the only affected one.
Given that the problem was found twice by a 3rd party test, and that salmonella is easily spread when food is exposed to contaminated manufacturing equipment, I’m not inclined to buy into their desperate plea to brush this off as “no big deal”.
The designation of a recall as “voluntary” does not necessarily imply that it was initiated solely at the company’s discretion.
Rather, it indicates that the company took the proactive step of reaching out to suppliers and informing consumers. This designation does not rule out the possibility that the FDA exerted pressure, or that the company could have faced regulatory action if it had not taken this initiative.
In cases where companies are under serious scrutiny from the FDA and CDC (as is the case with Mid America Food at the moment), opting for a “voluntary recall” notice can be viewed as a strategic marketing move to stay ahead of potential regulatory actions.
Does Victor Dog Food Meet WSAVA Guidelines?
The solid majority of veterinarians, who see 100’s of pets each week and share advice passed down to them from board certified veterinary nutritionists will recommend foods that meet WSAVA guidelines. These foods include brands such as Purina, Iam’s, Eukanuba, Hill’s, and Royal Canin.
Victor foods do not, and have never come even close to meeting WSAVA manufacturing and formulation recommendations. Here is a simple list of reasons why they do not adhere to basic ethics:
Victor foods does NOT have a qualified nutritionist on staff. Their ‘head chef’ has a science degree and an online certificate in companion animals from a farm animal organization.
Victor foods do not perform feeding trials or contribute to research with peer-reviewed science
Victor foods does not easily provide nutritional values on request: when we inquired about their calcium levels, we were told they would only speak on the phone (not in writing). They only publish their calcium levels on select bags and they do not share a guaranteed analysis of calcium, leaving owners to dig for this very important information.
Victor does not have good sanitation protocols and does not perform regular bacteriology screenings on their foods (an observation implied by the evidence, which indicates that they have been selling salmonella contaminated food since at least January, 2023.
There is a reason that veterinarians always recommend that pet owners look past pet food marketing and instead, into the companies dedication to animal health, formulation, and quality control.
Victor Pet Foods for Puppies
We do not recommend Victor pet foods for puppies, as the calcium levels are too high to be safe for growing large and giant breed dogs.
