Peon's Place

A visit to a local supply store for pets has convinced some that many people’s pets eat better than their two-legged companions, or their companion’s children.

Whatever you think your pet needs (dog or cat, that is, we are not getting into nutrition for birds, rabbits, turtles and the many exotic animals people keep as pets), there is a product ready to meet it: vegetarian, organic, holistic, natural, raw, kosher, all-meat, gluten-free, high-fiber, high-protein, grain-free, low-fat, “lite” and anti-allergy. There are products for young and old pets and those with sensitive skin, sensitive stomachs and sensitive skin and stomachs, as well as foods enriched with supplements like antioxidants, omega-3 fatty acids, glucosamine and chondroitin, the value of which has yet to be established for people, let alone pets.

Do the conscientious pet owners who buy these products really scour the supermarket for the human equivalent of “Grain-Free Optimal Holistic Nutrition for Dogs, Thoughtfully Chosen Whole Food Natural Ingredients in Every Bite,” as proclaimed on the package of Earthborn Primitive Natural dog food? Or baby food like Innova Puppy Food made with turkey, duck, barley, brown rice, apple, tomato, carrot, potato, egg, cottage cheese and alfalfa sprouts?

Parents know how to respond when a baby reacts badly to a newly introduced food. But if a puppy eating Innova had a food sensitivity, how could you tell which ingredient was responsible?

I’m not against feeding pets well. They are, after all, much-loved members of the family, providing valuable emotional support. Although both cats and dogs can be as mischievous as toddlers and as rebellious as teenagers, they are always happy to see you and they never talk back. In fact, too often pets are overindulged, with too much food and too many snacks in proportion to the exercise they get. Veterinary groups have estimated that 20 to 60 percent of American dogs and cats are overweight or obese and at risk of developing heart disease, high blood pressure and Type 2 diabetes.

Are the people who invest in high-end pet foods are getting their money’s worth. Are their pets really healthier and happier? Do they live longer? And are these foods any better than the generic versions sold in supermarkets and big-box stores? Recognizing the high value most owners place on their companion animals, and distressed by recent recalls of contaminated pet foods, two scientists decided to examine the pet food industry and the evidence for the value of its products and the claims made for them. Marion Nestle, the Paulette Goddard professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University, and Malden C. Nesheim, emeritus professor of nutrition at Cornell University, have packaged their findings in “Feed Your Pet Right: The Authoritative Guide to Feeding Your Dog and Cat,” published in May by Free Press.

In an interview, Dr. Nestle (pronounced NES-sel) said: “People are willing to spend anything on their pets. The $18-billion-a-year pet food industry is considered to be recession-proof. Although during this economic downturn shelters have been overwhelmed with pets people could not afford to keep, those who have kept their pets are not stinting on what they spend to feed them.” She noted, however, that the so-called premium pet foods cost three to four times more than supermarket brands. Within the premium brands, there is also a wide price range, yet when the ingredients lists are compared, they are strikingly similar since all have to meet certain nutritional standards. The first five ingredients of nearly every kind of dog and cat food are generally the same, representing protein, fats and carbohydrates, Dr. Nestle said, adding that “anything listed below the salt would be present in only very small amounts.” She and Dr. Nesheim compared 10 premium chicken dinners for dogs and found that all contained basically the same ingredients: All start with chicken or chicken broth, followed by grains and vegetables. The nonpremium brands use more grains and poultry, meat and fish byproducts.

Most important, Drs. Nestle and Nesheim say, is to look for products labeled “complete and balanced,” indicating that they meet the nutritional requirements of cats and dogs listed by the Association of American Feed Control Officials. This organization, in conjunction with the Food and Drug Administration, state officials and the animal feed industry, develops model regulations for pet foods, which are voluntary unless encoded in state laws. “All pet foods are made from the byproducts of human food production,” Dr. Nestle explained. “No matter what the package says, your dog is not getting whole chicken breasts, but what remains after the breasts have been removed for human food.”

And, indeed, it is primarily human food companies — Nestlé, Purina, Mars and Procter & Gamble — that make the pet foods sold throughout the world. Of course, in much of the world, domestic dogs and cats survive on table and street scraps, not commercially produced pet foods. In seeking evidence for the added value to health and longevity of commercial pet foods, the authors found almost none with any validity. No agency requires proof of pet food health claims, and no pet food company is willing to invest in decades of research to determine whether its products keep animals healthier and extend their lives, the authors state. Pet food companies say they do research, but it is rarely done in a scientific fashion, with comparable control and experimental groups. There is, however, ample evidence that, despite claims to the contrary, both dogs and cats “are perfectly able to digest grains if they are cooked,” Dr. Nestle said.

None of this should imply that different pet food products make no difference to individual animals. When my friends’ havanese began licking its paws incessantly, the vet suggested they try a corn-free pet food, which stopped the itching. However, they need not spend $31 for a 12.5-pound bag of premium food free of corn; Costco’s Kirkland Super Premium Dog Food, also free of corn, costs about $15 for a 40-pound bag. Still, Dr. Nestle suggested, “if one or another brand seems to completely change the way a dog behaves or cures an allergy, when you find something that works for you, stay with it.”

While many pay good money for marketing gimmicks, Dr. Nestle also does not object to people paying for attributes they value. If characteristics like natural, organic, holistic, vegetarian or kosher are important to pet owners, it may be worth it to them to pay top dollar for pet foods that claim to provide the desired attribute, even if there is no official or enforced definition of the claim.

Although some owners insist on cooking for their pets, the authors said animals are more likely to get all the nutrients they need, and in the right amounts, from a commercial product. “Besides, the pet food industry serves an important ecological function by using up food that would otherwise be thrown out,” Dr. Nestle said. “If everyone cooked human food for the 472 million cats and dogs in America, it would be like feeding an additional 42 million people.”

Yet more recalls of consumer products to be posted. McDonald’s in the U.S. is recalling 12 million “Shrek”-themed drinking glasses because of cadmium in the painted design.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission warned consumers early Friday to immediately stop using the glasses. It was not yet clear if the recall extended to McDonald’s in Canada. The 16-ounce glasses being sold as part of a promotional campaign for the movie “Shrek Forever After,” were available in four designs depicting the characters Shrek, Princess Fiona, Puss in Boots and Donkey.

The recall notice states “long-term exposure to cadmium can cause adverse health effects.” Cadmium is a known carcinogen that research shows also can cause bone softening and severe kidney problems. In the case of the Shrek-themed glassware, the potential danger would be long-term exposure to low levels of cadmium, which could leach from the paint onto a child’s hand, then enter the body if the child puts that unwashed hand to his or her mouth.

Cadmium can be used to create reds and yellows in paint. McDonald’s USA spokesman Bill Whitman said a pigment in paint on the glasses contained cadmium. “A very small amount of cadmium can come to the surface of the glass, and in order to be as protective as possible of children, CPSC and McDonald’s worked together on this recall,” said CPSC spokesman Scott Wolfson. He would not specify the amounts of cadmium that leached from the paint in tests, but said the amounts were “slightly above the protective level currently being developed by the agency.”

Mr. Wolfson said the glasses have “far less cadmium than the children’s metal jewellery that CPSC has previously recalled.” Concerns about cadmium exposure emerged in January, when The Associated Press reported that some items of children’s jewellery sold at major national chains contained up to 91 per cent of the metal. Federal regulators worry that kids could ingest cadmium by biting, sucking or even swallowing contaminated pendants and bracelets.

The consumer protection agency has issued three recalls this spring for jewellery highlighted in the AP stories, including products sold at Wal-Mart, the world’s largest retailer; at Claire’s, a major jewellery and accessories chain in North America and Europe; and at discount and dollar stores. Those recalls all involved children’s metal jewellery — and all of that jewellery was made in China.

Manufactured by ARC International of Millville, N.J., the glasses were to be sold from May 21 into June. Roughly seven million of the glasses had been sold; another approximately five million are in stores or have not yet been shipped, said Mr. Whitman. Associated Press reporters tried unsuccessfully to buy the glasses late Thursday at McDonald’s in New York, Los Angeles and northern New Jersey but were alternately told the merchandise was sold out, no longer available or “there’ll be more tomorrow.” E-mails sent after business hours to two spokesmen for ARC International seeking comment were not immediately returned.

McDonald’s said it was asking customers to stop using the glasses “out of an abundance of caution.” “We believe the Shrek glassware is safe for consumer use,” Mr. Whitman said. “However, again to ensure that our customers receive safe products from us, we made the decision to stop selling them and voluntarily recall these products effective immediately.” Mr. Whitman said that as the CPSC develops new protocols and standards for cadmium in consumer products, “we adjust as necessary to ensure that our customers can continue to trust what they receive from McDonald’s.”