After the complaint to the Antitrust, on 22.10.18, our newspaper puts the Unicomm distributor (Famila group) in default and informs the competent ASL about the deception of Pet Food under the Ultima brand by Affinity Petcare SA.
Pet Food and scams
The market of Pet Food has become in a few years the mecca of forgers and fraudsters. The reasons are basically two:
- Italian consumers, like their European counterparts, devote increasingly more resources to their pets. To the point that the market for food intended for them reached 2 billion euros in Italy (2017),
- the public control authorities have not so far carried out the necessary investigative activities. Also due to the serious delay of the Italian legislator in introducing a specific sanctioning regime. (1)
The labels of pet food are therefore still found in a gray area, a ‘no man's land’ where illegality and cunning thrive to the detriment of buyers and honest operators.
The paradox is represented by the result of a recent study by the University of Padua, which reveals that 3 out of 4 products, from the 40 samples examined, are illegal. A serious scenario, which apparently has not led to any official control.
The feed labeling rules are indeed in force, yet they are systematically violated. (2) From this observation stems the intervention of Great Italian Food Trade, firstly at the Italian Competition Authority (AGCM, so-called Antitrust), now also against the Unicomm distributor and the competent ASL.
The Ultima of scams
Information on the label of feed must first of all be based on the general criteria of truthfulness (and demonstrability), transparency (i.e. non-ambiguity) and clarity of information. In addition to having to comply with the specific criteria provided for by the appropriate regulations. (3)
I Pet Food branded Ultima they are instead distinguished by the wide use of misleading images, where whole fruits and vegetables are depicted that are present in completely negligible amounts. 0.35% of apple or dehydrated carrot pulp, depending on the case. Rather than 0.15% broccoli or 0.01% dehydrated red fruits. Meanwhile, the consumer pays, falling into the deception of buying premium products.
Nutritional and health claims on feed are themselves subject to specific rules, not dissimilar to those provided for foods, in the basic criteria.
Ultima, however, reaches the height of the scam, in associating 'homeopathic' doses of fruit and vegetables with claim nutritional and health ‘Fruit and vegetables are natural sources of vitamins, minerals, and antioxidants. They help strengthen the immune defenses’.
Where Regulation EC 767/2009 – besides prohibiting the boast on feeds of curative properties or disease prevention – stipulates that claims related to the strengthening or safeguarding of physiological conditions (as long as not linked to pathological symptoms) must be objective and substantiated.
‘Labeling, advertising and the presentation of foods or feeds, including their form, their appearance or packaging, the packaging materials used, the way foods or feeds are arranged, the context in which they are displayed and the information made available about them through any means,must not mislead consumers’ (reg. EC 178/02, article 16).
The responsibility of the distributor Unicomm is linked to the failure to monitor the blatant violation of current rules by its supplier Affinity Petcare SA, as well as to involvement in the aforementioned violations through advertising of ‘Ultima’ products on printed promotional material distributed in its centers, on Famila branded posters.
‘It is the responsibility of operators in the food and feed sector to ensure that in the businesses they control, food or feed comply with the provisions of food legislation relating to their activities at all stages of production, processing and distribution and to verify that these provisions are met’ (reg. EC 178/02, article 17).
It's time to put things in order, withdraw illegal products from the market and stop deceiving consumers by applying the appropriate sanctions.
Dario Dongo
Notes
(1) On sanctions on feed labels, see articles https://www.foodagriculturerequirements.com/approfondimenti_1/mangimi-le-sanzioni-per-violazione-del-regolamento-767-2009 e https://www.foodagriculturerequirements.com/archivio-notizie/pet-food-etichette-e-allegazioni-in-arrivo-il-decreto-sanzioni
(2) Cf. reg. EC 767/09
(3) Regarding nutritional indications, reference is made to the guidelines of the European trade federation Fediaf, Code of Good Labelling Practice for Pet Food, on http://www.fediaf.org/self-regulation/labelling.html
Dario Dongo, lawyer and journalist, PhD in international food law, founder of WIISE (FARE - GIFT – Food Times) and Égalité.
