For Immediate Release

Canadian Pet Owner Finds Way to

Help American Victims of Tainted Pet Food

April 20, 2007 (Toronto, Canada) Pet owner Karen Fraser of Toronto Ontario responded to the tainted pet food scandal by founding Petitionz.org with Ron Smith. The web site has provided a constructive way for angered and grieving pet owners to respond to the ongoing pet food crisis.  People from around the world have signed the petition and voted in the polls.

While trying to keep up on the recall and reaction information that seemed to change by the hour Ms. Fraser came across articles by American media which indicated that U.S. pet owners would get little compensation if they won a law suit against Menu Foods.  Few states recognize pets as anything beyond property.

She then checked the web site for the Canadian law firm Falconer Charney as they had filed class action lawsuits against Menu Foods Inc. and Canada wide distributors and producers of potentially contaminated pet food.  On the site she found a court decision in Ontario granting damages to pet owners for emotional trauma.  Under Ontario law a pet is not just another object that people own.  A pet is an important part of people’s lives and Ontario law recognizes that people can be emotionally traumatized if their pet is hurt or dies.

Ms. Fraser called the law firm to ask if Americans could join the Canadian class action lawsuit because the headquarters for Menu Foods is located in Ontario.  Mr. Ted Charney called back promptly and offered this opinion, “Americans can file in Toronto because Menu Foods is headquartered in this province and made all material decisions in its operations from its head office.”

Like many areas of the law this is not black and white. The Ontario judge may only grant Americans the compensation allowed by the U.S. state where they live but she/he might grant compensation under Ontario law.  Mr. Charney suggests that pet owners should consider whether their state laws allow for compensation for emotional trauma before considering the Canadian lawsuit.

Falconer Charney is representing pet owners who wish to recover compensation and help prevent contaminated ingredients and poison from entering the pet food chain.

Ms. Fraser states, “While this is not a black and white solution I think the gray area is very promising.  Many pet owners feel their loss and the cruelty have been trivialized. They would like this experience to have some meaning and lead to protection for pets and people from now on.”

To learn more about the class action law suit and legal contact information visit Petitionz.org 

Contacts:        Karen Fraser             (416) 696-7621 or

                        Ron Smith                  (416) 893-1551

For Immediate Release

PETITIONZ.ORG FINDS BIGGER QUESTIONS & SMALLER ANSWERS

THE TOP 6 QUESTIONS SO FAR ABOUT THE PET FOOD RECALL

April 4, 2007 – (NA) – With only 4 full days of activity, PETitionz.org has begun to see some thoughtful and far reaching reactions from the thousands of visitors that have already visited the web site.

The Top 7 thoughtful questions from our visitors are:

1. Humans eating pet food.  Is this an urban myth?  Would an impoverished patient even tell a doctor that they had been eating pet food?  What about babies at the crawling and anything goes in the mouth stage?
2. Where did the rest of the wheat gluten go?  An article in the New York Times on April 3rd stated that the FDA is fairly certain that the wheat gluten did not find its way into the human food supply.  What are the guarantees that this did not happen?  The queries widen the pet food issue into many areas of the economy and current issues.  Even the gender of the majority of respondents may have far reaching results.  The majority to date are women; the consumer group that makes 85% of household buying decisions and has 90% of buying veto power.  They feel betrayed. Several have thought for the first time about the companies behind the popular brands of pet food who also make so many of the everyday human products used by their families.
3. What’s happening with all of the recalled food?  Where will it go?  Is there any chance it could be relabeled and resold?
4. Can the manufacturers not affected by the recall meet the demand?  Will there be shortages if this problem continues to widen with pet owners dependent on just a few companies?  The issue highlights the possible dangers of a near monopoly in segments of our economy.
5. Some Canadian visitors were upset at the nasty blog comments about “evil Canada” from some Americans.  Plus media articles are still blaming Menu Foods in Ontario when the product was actually traced to the Menu Foods facility in Emporia, Kansas.  The wheat gluten had been purchased from a U.S. supplier.  What, if any, are the effects on U.S. / Canada trade from this “myth information”?
6. One web visitor from Japan made us aware of the large export trade in North American produced pet food to Japanese pet owners via the web.  What about the pet food exported to world markets?  Have they been notified?  Who’s in charge here?
7. According to media sources, Menu Foods began testing the tainted food on 40 to 50 animals on February 27th killing at least 7 animals.  People want to know where this company got animals for “testing” purposes and what happened to any sick animals that did not die?

Here are 2 of our latest (as of yesterday) non-scientific polling results:

Q: Should pet food be randomly tested regularly?

52.9% - An independent arms-length testing organization should handle it.

34.1% - Federal Governments should do it.

8%      - State / Provincial Governments should do it.

0%      - We can trust the industry to do the necessary testing.

Q: How likely are you to buy “Certified” pet food (even if it is more expensive)?

68.9% - Definitely

14.8% - Very likely

11.5% - Likely

3.3%   - Not Likely

1.6%   - Always buy lower priced food

-30-

Contacts:

Ron Smith                                                                                           Karen Fraser

(416) 893-1551                                                                                   (917) 421-9670

This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it                                                                            This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it