Sign in or Register
Search Forums
Recent Topics
-
Search for Great Quality, Small sized dry kibble.
by
Kate G
1 day, 20 hours ago -
Struvite Treats?
by
RosiePops Mom
3 days, 21 hours ago -
4health and other Dental chew info
by
jetski racer
1 month ago -
Cane Corso lipomas
by
ste stef
1 month, 2 weeks ago -
Ultimate Pet Nutrition Nutra Thrive
by
l m
2 weeks, 1 day ago
Recent Replies
-
Mike Lower on Dog food review.
-
Jez Doh on Cat Lane review
-
Jez Doh on Search for Great Quality, Small sized dry kibble.
-
nathaniel reid on Struvite Treats?
-
nathaniel reid on Best Dog Food Reviews In 2024
-
nathaniel reid on Search for Great Quality, Small sized dry kibble.
-
Hazel willia on What supplements should dogs have daily?
-
Hazel willia on Ultimate Pet Nutrition Nutra Thrive
-
Cat Taylor on Full Moon Freeze Dried Chicken Treats
-
blazermax maxi on Chicken Soup for the Soul Pet Food
-
Shirley VerStraete on C.E.T. HEXTRA Chews by Virbac
-
Ahsan Bhatti on Chia Seed (Topic 2)
-
Robert Fine on Music
-
Lia S on Treat reviews/ratings?
-
Ramesh Kumar on Stella and chewys wild red raw kibble or open farm raw mix?
Hi Keremms,
Thank you for taking the time to comment. IMO the primary reason the testing was inconclusive was because the regulatory agencies involved did not run tests capable of giving a conclusive result. Digestion study and bite force studies can not tell you what a substance is. Microscopy revealed that No Hide look “indistinguishable” from rawhide, but it needed to be followed up with amino acid analysis. And apparently, not being familiar with how rawhide is typically made, regulators were seemingly unaware that a pathologist can not identify rawhide as skin since identifying elements like hair follicles etc. reside in the layer removed at the tannery.
Unfortunately, IMO many missteps were made along the way. Penn. regulators, apparently stated they missed that their pathologist referred to No Hide as “animal tissue” and needed to be shown that the label of the product they tested did not contain any animal gelatin after saying a finding of collagen could be from gelatin. Also, while they did protein and starch analysis and found No Hide similar to rawhide, they failed to test moisture content which muddied the waters of interpretation and after watching a production run, apparently never had sent a roll they witnessed being made to pathology to compare it to an “off the shelf” product. My understanding is that they seemed willing to do follow up amino acid testing but later apparently said they had run out of money.
It is hard to know why an AA analysis was not done. IMO it was simply lack of knowledge and experience in testing unknowns.
I fully agree with you when you said ” It is essential for regulatory agencies to follow through and conduct further investigations or request additional testing when faced with inconclusive results to reach a definitive conclusion”
Sign in or Register
Search Forums
Recent Topics
-
Search for Great Quality, Small sized dry kibble.
by
Kate G
1 day, 20 hours ago -
Struvite Treats?
by
RosiePops Mom
3 days, 21 hours ago -
4health and other Dental chew info
by
jetski racer
1 month ago -
Cane Corso lipomas
by
ste stef
1 month, 2 weeks ago -
Ultimate Pet Nutrition Nutra Thrive
by
l m
2 weeks, 1 day ago
Recent Replies
-
Mike Lower on Dog food review.
-
Jez Doh on Cat Lane review
-
Jez Doh on Search for Great Quality, Small sized dry kibble.
-
nathaniel reid on Struvite Treats?
-
nathaniel reid on Best Dog Food Reviews In 2024
-
nathaniel reid on Search for Great Quality, Small sized dry kibble.
-
Hazel willia on What supplements should dogs have daily?
-
Hazel willia on Ultimate Pet Nutrition Nutra Thrive
-
Cat Taylor on Full Moon Freeze Dried Chicken Treats
-
blazermax maxi on Chicken Soup for the Soul Pet Food
-
Shirley VerStraete on C.E.T. HEXTRA Chews by Virbac
-
Ahsan Bhatti on Chia Seed (Topic 2)
-
Robert Fine on Music
-
Lia S on Treat reviews/ratings?
-
Ramesh Kumar on Stella and chewys wild red raw kibble or open farm raw mix?