A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pets that had consumed the food experienced vomiting lethargy and other signs of illness After the recall the pet food company tested samples from the recalled food an

Wow, a recall of 4 million pounds is a huge expense and logistical hassle. It is great that the chemicals in the food samples are all approved for pet consumption. Now the company assumes it is off the hook on liability for getting the cats’ illnesses. However, there are numerous reasons that the company may still be culpable for the complaints. The problems may be related to the samples chosen to be tested, other parts of the food, or the product packaging. Additionally, contamination may be occurring during the transport, storage or sale of the cans. The cans could even be mislabeled and thus not consumed as intended. In any of these scenarios, the company would still be responsible for making changes to prevent illness of their consumers.

Firstly, given the size of the product recall, we shall imagine that the customer complaints were numerous and valid enough to warrant such action. Despite the analysis that went into this decision, we cannot assume the scientific investigation following was as well devised. If only a few samples were taken of the 4 million pounds, and those samples were not distributed representatively amongst the products, it is possible the suspect material was missed. In such case, not all the recalled food can be dismissed. Beyond that, the company has assumed that the raw material – meat, grain and whatever makes the substantial bulk of the food – is not the problem. If the meat, be it chicken, beef or pork, is substandard, and this could be the real issue.

Following investigation of what is in the can, the company should look at the can itself. Has the metal container been manufactured, sealed, or treated in the same way as before? If there is a different coating added, or if the seal is not as sturdy as before, this may affect the contents. Additionally, has anything changed in the recommended serving size, nutrients listing, or about the expiration dates? If the label has been designed differently and is less readable, perhaps pet-owners are overfeeding their animals. Or cats with special dietary needs are not getting the right food. Lastly, if expiration range was shortened and/or the cans of food were actually expired, this could be the culprit, and still something that the company is responsible for.

Lastly, the company must look at their partners in transportation, storage and sales. During any of these phases prior to purchase of the product, the cans could have been handled poorly and been contaminated. If a can is dented, the seal can be broken. And if dust particles such asbestos or other hazardous material lands on the outside of the package, that could be transferred to the meal as a pet is being served.

All in all, the company must provide a much more thorough investigation to ensure they are free from responsibility in the case of feline malaise. Beyond chemicals used, the food, package, and anything in the environment from factory to cat bowl could be contributing. Rather than risking another recall, and damage to brand reputation, the company owes it to its customers to find answers.