The Acana lawsuit is one that has captured the attention of the general public. This is because the dog food it belongs to, Pedigree, is a highly-rated brand that is widely known for providing quality pet foods. People who have bought this brand and have either experienced or heard about the results have nothing but good things to say about it. Unfortunately, this is where the story ends. It turns out that one of the plaintiffs in the suit, Laciella Johnson, has died from her injuries sustained while filing the lawsuit.
Why? Her case was not unlike many of the other class action lawsuits that are currently pending in Florida, and class action lawsuits can be notoriously difficult to prove. Attorneys general from both Florida and New York are attempting to use new stipulations and exceptions to protect themselves from liability. One of the possible exceptions, based on recent trends, is the use of certain types of metals in the manufacturing of certain foods. Because of this, the lawsuit was doomed from the start.
What is the problem with these class action lawsuits?
These lawsuits are based on faulty scientific testing methods. While the testing methods of class action lawsuits may be adequate under certain circumstances, the scientific proof required to sue a company can be nearly impossible to obtain. In fact, most scientific studies done on the effects of lead in our environment have been repeatedly discredited by scientists and industry leaders alike. Why have these studies become so unreliable?
Well, perhaps one of the biggest reasons is that attorneys general are afraid of being sued personally on behalf of their clients.
One of the most prominent attorneys in the state of Florida is Pia Farber, who represented the plaintiffs in the Acana lawsuit. Ms. Farber admitted to the class-action lawsuit attorneys that her preferred method of assessing the health risks of feeding our dogs Acana, were simply to use metrics such as “body weight”, “blood tests”, and “radiation exposure”. Clearly, this type of research lacks the capability to provide accurate or reliable scientific evidence in support of plaintiffs’ claims.
Another reason these lawsuits are doomed to fail is that many scientists are coming around to the realization that there are far more serious health concerns related to long-term exposure to naturally occurring heavy metals than are currently understood.
There have been numerous studies done that show cancer causing cells in the human body are formed as a direct result of long-term exposure to these metals. These studies have also shown that there are far worse consequences in store for our children if the currently approved manufacturers do not heed this information and immediately halt the production of any dog foods containing lead or arsenic. It has also been proven that lead and arsenic poisoning is very similar to the effects of severe depression!
The conclusion one could draw after reading this article is quite obvious:
If Acana owners truly want to protect their dogs, they should not rely on the company that manufactures their dog food to do their research for them. Instead, they should turn to an expert who knows how to evaluate the health problems inherent in the long-term consumption of naturally occurring heavy metals.
This includes copper and mercury, two of the metals cited as causes of the disorders in the plaintiffs’ case. Please take a moment to visit my website to learn more about how you can stop the lawsuits and get your dogs the safe diet they deserve.