I got curious and did a search. It seems there was a
recall in 2007 for aflatoxin, which comes from mold on
peanuts and grains, and is said to be one of the most
powerful carcinogens ever discovered. But despite lots
of complaints, I didn't find anything about any actual
Why not change to a better product? Whatever is in
Beneful, it's clearly on the level of junk food. Personally
I wouldn't eat anything from Purina or Nestle. That's
industrial food product. There's no reason to expect that
it's made with fresh, healthy ingredients. Industrial food
products are sold by advertising, not by quality. Beneful
seems to be made mainly of corn meal filler (for fiber)
and chicken "by-product meal". Presumably that's the
feathers, droppings, guts, organs, and whatever else
is left over after chicken processing, sterilizied, dried
and ground into powder. Yum. At *best* it might include
the chicken mush used to make "fake" chicken
pieces in cheap restaurants, obtained by pressure-spraying
the chicken bones to get off any leftover residue. (I say
fake because the mush is glued together and apparently
bleached to look like a piece of white chicken meat.)
Are you really going to miss Nestle chocolate? If so then
here's your chance to taste chocolate that actually tastes
like chocolate. A quick search shows Nestle chocolate chips
contain "artificial flavoring". How bad can chocolate be to
need artificial flavoring?!
Any decent chocolate bar should have *at least* 50%
cocoa solids. If the percentage isn't even listed that's
clear evidence that it's junk candy.
Yeah, like I can read that!
Where does it say whether or not Nestle's includes GMO foods? Oh!
Not required, you say. How convenient.
You have proof? Let's see it. And not some picture of a lable too
small to read.
You better pull yer head out. Nestle's is one of the bad guys. Ppl
are fighting them, tooth and nail, all around the planet. Got water?
If not, it's probably cuz you didn't pay Nestle's enough for it.
That, or they jes stole it from you.
| > They are. Here's a photograph of an actual Nestle ingredient label:
| Yeah, like I can read that!
It's also apparently 2 years old, as well, and doesn't
match any of the items on the page you linked. (I also
got my info there. It's surprising how much variation
there is among products. Some of them even still include
But Doug Miller is unusually rude, uncommunicative
and just happened to have a picture handy, so I'm
guessing he has some kind of personal interest in
| Where does it say whether or not Nestle's includes GMO foods?
This is going a bit OT, but I came across a very
interesting Consumer Reports article last week.
Unusually, it was available for download:
They tested processed foods labeled organic
and/or GMO. The gist of the result was:
* Organic labeling can generally be trusted as non-GMO.
* Packages labeled "Non-GMO Project Verified" can
generally be trusted as non-GMO.
* Anything else -- natural, GMO-free, etc means
pretty much nothing.
* If it's not organic and it contains soy or corn
in the US, one should assume it's got high GMO
But with many foods in that category there's
no reason to think they're particularly edible in the
first place: Kelloggs, General Mills (GM and Nature
Valley), Frito-Lay (Doritos), etc. Those are all factory
On Sunday, March 15, 2015 at 5:14:01 PM UTC-4, Mayayana wrote:
Why yes, I'm sure Doug who's been here for years has a new
job as a shill for Nestles. They hired him this afternoon.
The specific claim you made was that Nestle chips use "artifical
flavoring". So why the segue now into GMO? But even that
is pretty dumb. If you look at the ingredients for their chocolate
chips WTF is GMO? Cacao? Would be the first. You made the
claim that Nestle used artifical flavoring in their chocolate
chips. The fact that you;re now talking about everything except
that, is pretty much proof that Doug is right.
Only because you're desperately trying to evade.
but I came across a very
Rest of irrelevant GMO drivel deleted.
You hippies are something else.
Fine, don't take my word for it. Go to a grocery store, pick up a bag of Nestle chocolate chips,
and look at the ingredients list yourself.
No artificial flavorings.
Either you're a liar, or you're mindlessly repeating what some other liar said.
| Fine, don't take my word for it. Go to a grocery store, pick up a bag of
Nestle chocolate chips,
| and look at the ingredients list yourself.
It's interesting what one can and can't find online.
I was unable to find any ingredients lists at any
Nestle site. But I did find this:
Nestle was pledging a year ago to remove artificial
flavors and colors (artificial colors?!) from many
of their candies by the end of 2015. Did they? Maybe.
Will I now buy Nestle products? No. I wouldn't consider
it. Aside from political and business issues, and the fact
that at least up until recently they considered artifical
flavors and colors to be proper ingredients of candy,
there's one glaring issue that I happen to find relevant:
their chocolate is almost tasteless compared with good
quality chocolate. Also, some of their products still
appear to have hydrogenated fats. I can't confirm
that, though, because Nestle doesn't seem to want me
to see their ingredients lists.
I generally try to buy food products from local or
known, accountable companies. That's not always
so easy, though. For instance, I've been buying
Muir Glen canned, organic tomatoes because the
cans say they don't contain BPA lining, and because
I don't consider Whole Foods house brands to be
trustworthy. But it turns out that Muir Glen is actually
owned by General Mills. Does GM allow them to make
a decent product? There's no way to know. That's
the problem with factory food. Decisions are made
by businessmen and products are more marketing than
substance. The marketing and
name brands make things very confusing. Coke owns
Honest Tea and Green Mountain Coffee. Pepsi owns
Naked Juice. Post owns Erewhon. Dannon owns Stonyfield
Farms, which owns Brown Cow. (yogurt) It seems the
best indicator of sellout companies is when they suddenly
get good distribution. Which is a case made for the local
I believe beneful had had troubles for years, in a minor way. management hunkerd down and ignored the problems succesfully.
now for unknown reasons the problems size has grown exponentially, and managements hunker down response isnt working.
soon nestle beneful will act as though this is a brand new problem and steps will be taken to address the issue.
if for no other reason, while this can destroy the beneful brand it can damage the purina brand and can effect the parent company purina.
right now management is no doubt wondering what shall we do?
Several weeks after a lawsuit filed in California claimed that thousands of
dogs became ill or died after eating Purina's Beneful kibble, two senators
are urging the Food & Drug Administration to open an investigation into th
Illinois Senator Dick Durbin, along with California Senator Dianne Feinstei
n, sent a letter [PDF] to the FDA calling for the agency to quickly investi
gate claims that Purina PetCare Company's Beneful brand dry dog food contai
The senators also called for immediate updates on the implementation of FDA
requirements that could prevent such harmful contamination from occurring
in pet foods.
In late February, it was revealed that a California man had filed a class a
ction-seeking lawsuit against Purina saying the company's dry dog food cont
ains substances that are known to be toxic to animals and can lead to inter
nal bleeding and other serious health issues for pets.
The man alleges that less than a month after beginning to exclusively feed
his dogs Beneful dry kibble, all three became ill and his 8-year-old Englis
h Bulldog eventually died.
According to the lawsuit, illnesses experienced by thousands of dogs across
the country were a result of toxins in Beneful such as, but not limited to
, Propylene glycol and Mycotoxins.
Propylene glycol, the lawsuit states, is an automotive antifreeze component
that is a known animal toxin. However, the substance is also an FDA-approv
ed food additive for humans.
As for Mycotoxins, the lawsuit states they are a group of toxins produced b
y fungus that occurs in grains.
Representatives for Purina have said that the lawsuit was "without merit" a
nd that the company would vigorously defend itself.
In their letter to the FDA, Durbin and Feinstein are asking for updates to
the agency's implementation of a 2007 law enacted to help prevent contamina
ted pet food from reaching animals.
Under the 2007 law, the FDA is required to ensure that pet food companies r
eport to the agency within 24 hours of determining they have an adulterated
product in their supply chain.
Additionally, the law requires the FDA to set ingredient and processing sta
ndards for pet food, strengthen labeling requirements, establish early warn
ing systems for contaminated products and mandate that companies report con
taminated food and make key records available during investigations.
"The components of the law that FDA has implemented are important to the pu
blic and veterinarians, namely the searchable online recall list posted on
the agency's website," the letter states. "We appreciate that FDA has imple
mented an online database to inform consumers of pet food recalls. However,
eight years later, most provisions of the pet food safety law have not bee
n implemented and protections Congress enacted are not in place."
Tell a friend:
Me too, but I feed them both soft and hard food, and of course cat snacks.
My older cat stopped liking what i bought for years. Found only one type of
purina they like. I'm sure mold and fungus.problems can exist and be
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.