What is the grain free dog food lawsuit

Lawsuit Claims Hills Pet Food and Veterinarians Fabricated Grain-Free Diet Scare

The legal complaint, filed in Kansas on February 6, 2024, is 124 pages of scathing evidence against Hills Pet Food, the Morris Animal Foundation, the Mark Morris Institute, Dr. Lisa Freeman, Dr. Joshua Stern, Dr. Darcy Adin and others claiming all were involved in an egregious, wide-ranging, and damaging campaign of coordinated, for-profit, faux-scientific misinformation by a large corporation to make veterinarians and pet owners (falsely per the lawsuit) believe grain-free pet foods were dangerous, linked to canine heart disease.

Using the tools of professional science and Hills vast veterinary influence network, the goal of the scheme was to persuade American pet-owners that grain-free diets werent just fad diets but actually dangerous for dogsan argument that, if successful, had the potential to eradicate the entire grain-free sector of the pet food market. They have been carrying out this wide ranging scheme ever since and it has been, by any measure, a breathtaking (if unlawful) success.

The lawsuit complaint introduces the case with this information:

Hills is unique among these three so-called traditional pet food companies for three different reasons. First, it is the smallest of the threeits annual revenues dwarf those of most other pet food brands, but they are only about 20% of Purinas revenues. Second, as by far the largest maker of prescription-only diets in the country and as the self-proclaimed #1 Vet Recommended Brand, Hills is tied much more closely to the veterinary community than either Mars or Purina. For Mars and Purina, marketing to vets and distributing through vet clinics are both relatively inconsequential parts of their sprawling companies; for Hills, they are a major component of the business.

The third thing that makes Hills unique among the three traditional pet food companies is its uniquely poor financial performance in the years leading up to 2018, when the misconduct at the heart of this suit began. During this period, the market for pet foods made by non-traditional, often independent, brands was growing explosively. For example, from 2011 to 2017, sales of grain-free dog foods, a leading category among independent makers, rose from 15% to 44% of all dog food sales in American pet specialty stores. Purina was so large and diversified that it weathered this storm successfully, growing steadily and preserving its market share from 2014 to 2017. But Hills did not. Over the same four-year period, Hills annual revenues were pancake-flat and its market share plunged by more than 20%. Long the third-largest seller of complete-diet dog food in the country, Hills fell to fourth in 2018, after being overtaken by Blue Buffalo, the largest of the new wave of non-traditional pet food brands.

Thus, beginning no later than 2018, Hills and a cluster of associated entities and individuals (collectively with Hills, the Defendants) embarked on a drastic and unlawful course to reverse this slide. They carried out a scheme to falsely convince American dog owners that a massive, unrelated, and hugely diverse group of dog food productsessentially any product made by any of the hundreds of independent firms that were collectively eroding Hills market shareall increase the risk and severity of a deadly canine heart disease called dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).

To carry out the scheme, Hills, along with a group of closely-bound academic veterinarians (the Veterinarian Defendants) and front organizations operating on Hills behalf, acted in a coordinated conspiracy.

First and most explosively, the Veterinarian Defendants fraudulently induced the United States Food and Drug Administration to launch a high-profile investigation into DCM.

The second strand of Defendants scheme: Hills co-conspirators, the Veterinarian Defendants authored study after study about DCM and then mischaracterized the findings.

The Defendants also created and fostered social media environments including at least one Facebook group that was an echo chamber, suppressing any contradiction of the propaganda campaign.

And then this lawsuit proceeds to provide detail after detail to how the Defendants allegedly fabricated the entire grain-free pet food link to canine heart disease scheme.

Such as Part One: The Cherry-Picking Scheme(Defendants Fraudulently Induced the FDA to Launch a High-Profile Investigation into Grain-Free Diets and Canine Dilated Cardiomyopathy)

Quoting: Significantly, 23 of the 28 canine cases in this report, or more than 80%, came from either Dr. Freeman or Dr. Adin. Just five came from sources other than these Defendants, in a nation with 70 million dog owners.

Dr. Freeman and Dr. Adin deliberately and intentionally chose an unrepresentative group of cases to show the FDA. They did this by cherry-picking DCM cases involving grainfree diets and submitting those to the FDA while simultaneously withholding cases involving grain-containing diets.

The lawsuit included this image of an email from Dr. Freeman to FDA regarding her protocol to submit DCM cases to FDA (note the second bullet point under item 2):

Lawsuit continues (bold added): In other words, under the protocol that Dr. Freeman established, an FDA report should only be submitted if a DCM-positive dog was not eating one of the core products made by either Hills or one of the other two largest and best-established manufacturers in the country. Freemans own protocol establishes that she cherry-picked her sample in a way that would create the impression of a connection between smaller brands products and DCM, whether grain-free or not.

The above is only a small part of a very detailed lawsuit. It includes a wealth of information evidencing the many involved and why they are involved in the claimed scheme. It includes damning information about the influence of Hills with veterinary schools, information on Dr. Freemans similar attack on raw pet food, and so much more.

To read the full complaint, Click Here.

The lawsuit is a class action, but the only Plaintiff mentioned is Ketonatural Pet Foods, Inc. The suit is seeking lost profits, reputational damages, and other economic injuries in an amount exceeding $2 billion (precise amount to be proven at trial).

Personal opinion: This lawsuit took courage to file; filing any lawsuit against Big Pet Feed giants is not a simple matter. This lawsuit gives us hope that manufacturers and veterinary scientists will in the future think twice before participating in potential schemes to defraud the public. Hidden secrets CAN become public knowledge when determined individuals have the courage and endurance to keep digging for the evidence. Kudos to Ketonatural Pet Foods for their determination. We will continue to watch this lawsuit closely.

Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,

Susan ThixtonPet Food Safety AdvocateAuthor Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsibleTruthaboutPetFood.comAssociation for Truth in Pet Food

Become a member of our pet food consumer Association. Association for Truth in Pet Food is a a stakeholder organization representing the voice of pet food consumers at AAFCO and with FDA. Your membership helps representatives attend meetings and voice consumer concerns with regulatory authorities. Click Here to learn more.

Whats in Your Pets Food?Is your dog or cat eating risk ingredients? Chinese imports? Petsumer Report tells the rest of the story on over 5,000 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. Click Here to preview Petsumer Report. www.PetsumerReport.com

Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here

The 2024 ListSusans List of trusted pet foods. Click Here to learn more.

The 2023 Treat ListSusans List of trusted pet treat manufacturers. Click Here to learn more.

If you bought certain Zignature pet food products labeled as Grain Free or Chicken Free, you may be eligible for benefits in a class action settlement

Important Update: Following the December 12, 2022 Hearing, the Court granted final approval to the settlement.Copies of the Court's Orders are available on the Important Documents page.

What is this about?

Plaintiffs claim that certain pet food products manufactured or produced by Defendant Pets Global Inc (Defendant or Pets Global) and marketed or labeled as grain free or chicken free, were actually determined through third party testing to contain grain and chicken. Pets Global denies these allegations and believes that it has valid defenses to these claims. The Court has not decided who is right or wrong. Instead, both sides have agreed to the Settlement to avoid the risk and cost of further litigation.

Who is Included?

The Class consists of all individuals in the United States who purchased certain Zignature pet food Products marketed or labeled as Grain Free or Chicken Free for personal, family or household use, and not for resale, from June 2, 2017 through June 24, 2022 (the Class Period).

What does the Settlement provide?

If the Settlement is approved by the Court, Pets Global agrees to monetary benefits to Class Members who timely submit a valid claim. Pets Global also agrees to revise product labels and marketing references so that any product label that makes a chicken free and grain free claim no longer contains those representations. Further, Pets Global has agreed to audit its suppliers moving forward.

Redford Naturals Dog Food Review (Dry)

The Redford Naturals product line includes the 10 dry dog foods listed below.

Each recipe includes its AAFCO nutrient profile: Growth (puppy), Maintenance (adult), All Life Stages, Supplemental or Unspecified.

Recipe and Label Analysis

Redford Naturals Chicken and Brown Rice Large Breed was selected to represent the other products in the line for detailed recipe and nutrient analysis.

Ingredients Analysis

The first ingredient in this dog food is chicken. Although it is a quality item, raw chicken contains up to 73% water. After cooking, most of that moisture is lost, reducing the meat content to just a fraction of its original weight.

After processing, this item would probably account for a smaller part of the total content of the finished product.

The second ingredient is chicken meal. Chicken meal is considered a meat concentrate and contains nearly 300% more protein than fresh chicken.

The third ingredient is brown rice, a complex carbohydrate that (once cooked) can be fairly easy to digest. However, aside from its natural energy content, rice is of only modest nutritional value to a dog.

The next ingredient is oatmeal, a whole-grain product made from coarsely ground oats. Oatmeal is naturally rich in B-vitamins, dietary fiber and can be (depending upon its level of purity) gluten-free.

The fifth item is brewers rice. Brewers rice is a cereal grain by-product consisting of the small fragments left over after milling whole rice. Aside from the caloric energy it contains, this item is of only modest nutritional value to a dog.

The sixth ingredient is chicken fat. This item is obtained from rendering chicken, a process similar to making soup in which the fat itself is skimmed from the surface of the liquid.

Chicken fat is high in linoleic acid, an omega-6 fatty acid essential for life. Although it doesnt sound very appetizing, chicken fat is actually a quality ingredient.

The seventh ingredient is rice bran, a healthy by-product of milling whole grain rice. The bran is the fiber-rich outer layer of the grain containing starch, protein, fat as well as vitamins and minerals.

The eighth ingredient is herring meal, another protein-rich meat concentrate.

Fish meal is typically obtained from the clean, dried, ground tissue of undecomposed whole fish and fish cuttings of commercial fish operations.¹

After the natural flavor, we find flaxseed, one of the best plant sources of healthy omega-3 fatty acids. Provided theyve first been ground into a meal, flax seeds are also rich in soluble fiber.

However, flaxseed contains about 19% protein, a factor that must be considered when judging the actual meat content of this dog food.

From here, the list goes on to include a number of other ingredients.

But realistically, items located this far down the list (other than nutritional supplements) are not likely to affect the overall rating of this Redford Naturals product.

With 5 notable exceptions

First, this food contains dried egg product, a dehydrated form of shell-free eggs. Quality can vary significantly. Lower grade egg product can even come from commercial hatcheries from eggs that have failed to hatch.

In any case, eggs are easy to digest and have an exceptionally high biological value.

Next, we note the use of fish oil. Fish oil is naturally rich in the prized EPA and DHA type of omega-3 fatty acids. These two high quality fats boast the highest bio-availability to dogs and humans.

Depending on its level of freshness and purity, fish oil should be considered a commendable addition.

In addition, we find no mention of probiotics, friendly bacteria applied to the surface of the kibble after processing to help with digestion.

Next, this recipe includes sodium selenite, a controversial form of the mineral selenium. Sodium selenite appears to be nutritionally inferior to the more natural source of selenium found in selenium yeast.

And lastly, this food contains chelated minerals, minerals that have been chemically attached to protein. This makes them easier to absorb. Chelated minerals are usually found in better dog foods.

Nutrient Analysis

According to its ingredients alone, Redford Naturals Dog Food looks like an above-average dry product.

The dashboard displays a dry matter protein reading of 27%, a fat level of 16% and estimated carbohydrates of about 49%.

As a group, the brand features an average protein content of 28% and a mean fat level of 16%. Together, these figures suggest a carbohydrate content of 48% for the overall product line.

And a fat-to-protein ratio of about 58%.

Which means this Redford Naturals product line contains

Above-average protein. Near-average fat. And near-average carbs when compared to other dry dog foods.

Even when you consider the protein-boosting effect of the flaxseed, this still looks like the profile of a dry dog food containing a notable amount of meat.

Redford Dog Food Recall History

The following automated list (if present) includes all dog food recalls related to Redford through April 2024.

No recalls noted.

You can view a complete list of all dog food recalls since 2009 here.

Our Rating of Redford Grain-inclusive Dog Food

Redford Naturals is a grain-inclusive dry dog food using a notable amount of named meat meals as its dominant source of animal protein, thus earning the brand 4.5 stars.

Please note certain recipes are sometimes given a higher or lower rating based upon our estimate of their total meat content and (when appropriate) their fat-to-protein ratios.