FERRET-SEARCH Archives

Searchable FML archives

FERRET-SEARCH@LISTSERV.FERRETMAILINGLIST.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Erika Matulich <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 27 Oct 1999 09:55:37 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
When I was writing an article on animal nutrition about 5 months ago, I
called and talked to the nutritionists and food scientists at Iams about
ethoxyquin in their food.  The response was that they recognized that
ethoxyquin was a sensitive issue with some pet issues because of rumors
of cancer, so they were making efforts to make it "not appear" on their
ingredient list.  One way they can do this is to add the preservative to
the packaging (although regulations require this fact to be labeled on
human food packaging, it does not on animal feed).  Another is to reduce
the amount of the ingredient to a level where it does not have to be listed
(even though it is still present, but in smaller amounts).  A third option
is to call it something else, or classify it with a group of other like
preservatives (as in the case of mixed tocopherals).  I do not know which
option Iams chose, as they did not disclose this information, I just DO
know that, technically speaking, ethoxyquin in some form is likely to be
present in Iams food because (as they said) it is one of the best ways to
keep fat from getting rancid.  (Another way is vitamin C or ascorbic acid,
which has a higher concentration in Iams now).  This information is 5
months old, so I don't know how "out of date" that makes the information.
 
- Erika Matulich and the Dirty Dozen
[Posted in FML issue 2848]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2