FDA Issues Jerky Treat Update; Admits Failure in Decade Long Investigation

On Monday, FDA officials issued another disappointing update into their ongoing investigation into the mystery surrounding the illness and death of thousands of dogs linked to jerky pet treats. The report covers, in excruciating detail, the culmination of nearly ten years of work. Unfortunately, microbiological and toxicological testing of treats remains inconclusive:

To date, testing for contaminants in jerky pet treats has not revealed a root cause for the reported symptoms in pets.”

Since the investigation began in 2007, FDA has received approximately 5,200 complaints of illness associated with consumption of chicken, duck, or sweet potato jerky treats, most of which involve products imported from China. The reports involve more than 6,200 dogs, 26 cats, three people, and include more than 1,140 canine deaths.

Sadly, these numbers are just the tip of the iceberg, because the vast majority of illnesses go unreported simply because so many factors must come together for the reporting to occur.


On the surface, it would appear that the FDA has made an enormous effort to locate the cause, testing the treats for what they believe are the most likely toxicological suspects. They are developing and improving tests for chemicals for which none had previously existed.

Importantly, the FDA collaborated with the Centers for Disease Controls on a study to determine whether jerky pet treat exposure is associated with illness in dogs. The goal of the study was to compare the foods eaten by sick dogs to those eaten by dogs that did not get sick to better understand what is making dogs sick. The manuscript of the study has not yet been published.


A closer look reveals a troubling picture, one where officials claim to be hampered by a lack of resources and tests that do not exist, animal studies that have yet to be done and adulterated pet products remain on the market.

An even deeper examination reveals some disturbing inconsistencies, omissions, and mistakes in the report. The report uncovers, that despite tremendous knowledge gaps in science, when food regulations were violated, and contaminated products were discovered, no regulatory action was taken. Repeatedly, products that were found by the FDA to contain ingredients not listed on the label – products that were found to be adulterated and misbranded – were left to remain on the market – exposing consumers to unnecessary risks.

The report revealed, that during testing, dozens of drugs, various chemicals, and undeclared ingredients were found that were not allowed in food and were not listed on the ingredient label. However, in every instance of a violation, FDA took no regulatory action. Not one of the adulterated pet treats were recalled.


[table id=3 /]


FDA reports they believe it is “unlikely that the reports of illness it has received were caused by the presence of antibiotic residues in jerky pet treat products.” FDA scientists dismiss the New York State Agriculture and Markets’ (NYSDAM) findings as insignificant and noted that when measurable levels of antibiotic drugs were found in the treats, they were consistently at “very low levels – almost all were less than 0.0001 percent (< 1 part per million, or less than one inch in 16 miles).”  And that NYSDAM testing results “showed very low (parts per billion) residues in some of the samples.”

Yet, in a recent NYSDAM report, they found sulfaclozine, an illegal antibiotic for which there is a zero tolerance, at 2 ppm in jerky pet treats. Additionally, NY discovered sulfaquinoxaline in concentrations up to 828 ppb (tolerance is 100 ppb) in jerky pet treats. The lab also detected amantadine in 36% of jerky pet treats tested (the highest concentration detected was 0.882 ppm) and they found DEET in 38% of samples jerky treats tested at concentrations up to 0.572 ppm.

In contrast, FDA says that “sulfaquinoxaline was found in [only] 1 store-bought sample. The highest concentration detected was 0.078 ppm” tested by NYSDAM.

Further, FDA writes that NYSDAM found sulfaclozine (for which there is a zero tolerance) in only 2 samples and the “highest concentration detected was 0.102 ppm.” FDA also claims the NY lab only found amantadine in one sample and the “highest concentration was 0.036 ppm.

These reporting inconsistencies are a pattern that has continued throughout FDA reporting of the investigation. Consistently, they have minimized and underreported the amount and number of drugs found by the NYSDAM in the treats.


Had any of the products been recalled, retailers would have been required to post recall notices in their grocery stores both online and off in conspicuous locations warning unsuspecting consumers of potential dangers.

The one tool which the FDA could use to raise awareness about the danger of these products is not being adequately utilized to its full potential. Instead, the agency continues to issue wishy-washy warnings that seem  to be carefully crafted to subdue any unnecessary fear in consumers and to limit the agency’s liability:

“FDA reminds pet owners that jerky pet treats are not necessary for pets to have a fully balanced diet, so eliminating them will not harm pets. Commercially produced pet food, which is very safe, contains all of the nutrients that pets need.”

Placing suitable warnings, appropriate to the risk level, on the FDA website is essential to effectively educate consumers about the risk of feeding a potentially deadly jerky pet treats to their dogs.

Until the FDA can overcome the obstacles to finding the answers to the jerky pet treat poisonings, the FDA should, at the very least, change the tone of their cautions to one with an appropriate level of concern for consumer safety.

dog cat poisoned pets safe food warnings news recalls alerts

Poisoned Pets | Pet Food Safety News remains free (and ad-free) and takes me many, many hours of laborious work to research and write, and thousands of dollars a year to sustain. Even if all you can spare is a few dollars – say, the cost of a can of pet food – it will help keep the Poisoned Pets’ website alive. If you find value in what I do, please consider a donation of your choosing. Thank you!




Mollie Morrissette

Mollie Morrissette, the author of Poisoned Pets, is an animal food safety expert and consumer advisor. Help support her work by making a donation today.

Comments (2) Write a comment


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.