Judge rules against prescription dog food companies
Rewards 12.5 Million judgement
The use of Prescription dog food is one of my pet peeves and shows that the phrase “Marketing over Mother Nature’ holds true.
If you are a dog owner, you may have heard about the class action suit against prescription dog foods. Hills, Science Diet, Royal Canin and Purina are some of the brands that are accused of misleading consumers and veterinarians about the benefits and ingredients of their products.
The lawsuit claims that:
- these companies charge premium prices for prescription dog foods that are not significantly different from regular dog foods. In fact, they are made in the same facilities, using the same suppliers as low-quality grocery store brands like Alpo and Beneful.
- they do not have any scientific evidence to support their claims of treating or preventing various health conditions in dogs. They are not made in facilities that follow traditional drug manufacturing protocols.
- that these companies have violated consumer protection laws and engaged in false advertising.
The class action suit was filed in 2019 by a group of dog owners who purchased prescription dog foods from these brands for their pets. They are seeking refunds, damages and an injunction to stop the companies from selling prescription dog foods without proper authorization and disclosure. The suit is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Prescription dog foods are supposed to be specially formulated to address specific health issues in dogs, such as kidney disease, diabetes, allergies, obesity and more. However, according to the lawsuit, these products are not regulated by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or any other agency, and they do not require a prescription from a veterinarian to be sold.
The lawsuit claims that these companies have exploited this loophole to market their products as prescription dog foods, even though they are not approved or tested by any authority.
This suit also accuses these companies of using low-quality ingredients and fillers in their prescription dog foods, such as corn, wheat, soy, by-products and artificial colors and flavors. These ingredients may not only be ineffective for treating or preventing health conditions in dogs, but they may also cause adverse reactions and allergies in some dogs. The lawsuit cites several examples of dogs that suffered from health problems after consuming prescription dog foods from these brands, such as vomiting, diarrhea, weight loss, skin infections, kidney failure and death.
The lawsuit seeks to hold these companies accountable for their deceptive and unlawful practices, and to provide compensation and relief to the dog owners who have been harmed by them. It also aims to protect the public interest and the welfare of dogs by ensuring that prescription dog foods are properly regulated and labeled, and that consumers and veterinarians are informed about their benefits and risks.
Please be aware that the FDA does not review or verify the health claims on any veterinary diet.
Take a close look at the ingredient list and ask your vet for evidence that the foods in the prescription diet are any better than most regular diets. Also please keep in mind that while your vet has the best intentions, they get little or no nutrition training and often what little training they do get comes from the very companies that are named in these lawsuits.
Ultra processed foods made with poor quality ingredients are not what your dog needs if they are suffering from an illness. Give your dog a fighting chance with fresh, quality foods for a long and healthy life.
This lawsuit was settled in July of 2021. Hills Pet Food paid $12.5 million to participants.
Is it any wonder that here at Lucky Dog Cuisine we believe wholeheartedly “Fresh is Better”.
The food we send your dog is the exact same food we feed our own beloved pack.
