mollie brownell morrissette - Comment

PETNet is a beginning to change. But...I see some problems. PETNet will be "entirely voluntary". The FDA will invite all U.S. States to participate, but they don't have to. This is a problem. State and Federal government on different pages regarding pet food (or human food) adverse event reporting doesn't benefit anyone. Pet owners will not have access to this pertinent information. While I understand that much/some of the PETNet reporting would be speculative - not confirmed pet food adulteration or contamination - I also understand that pet owner access to this information could save lives. Existing conditions of pet food has forced pet owners into becoming their own researchers and detectives protecting the lives of their pets. Federal and State agencies have shown us (pet owners) time and time again a lack of concern for our pets. Withholding this information from pet owners furthers an already great divide between pet owners and regulatory agencies; it furthers a lack of trust that desperately needs to be addressed. As example, several weeks ago I shared a story of seven puppies that died due to a suspect pet food. Their little bodies were studied at the University of Oklahoma vet school; the FDA and the State Department of Agriculture got involved. The pet food was tested; tissue samples were closely examined. The pet owner has signed a release providing her permission for the University to speak publically on the test results. Yet, the veterinarian won't return calls. The investigation by the FDA provides us no information; the investigation of the State Ag Department provides us no information. This could be a serious issue with the pet food, or it could be some other concern that killed these puppies. But no one is providing us with answers. (Seven of eight puppies died, one survived. To read the original story, visit http://www.truthaboutpetfood.com/articles/seven-puppies-die-suspicion-of-pet-food-contamination.html) No information