Complain about a product or service

Consumers Respond to Toxic Wal-Mart Pet Toy Stories

Standards needed to protect pets and their owners

By Lisa Wade McCormick
ConsumerAffairs.com

October 3, 2007

• RECALL LIST • Consumer Complaints --- News • CDC Links 2006 Salmonella Outbreak to Dog Food • FDA Orders Illinois Pet Food Maker to Clean Up Its Act • String of Illnesses Afflicts NUTRO-Fed Pets • Pet Owners Not Thrilled with Poisoning Settlement • Menu Foods Settles Pet Food Class Action • Many Pet Foods Still Missing From Store Shelves • Pet Owners Cheer Indictments in Toxic Pet Food Case • Indictments in Toxic Pet Food Case • Diamond Pet Foods Agrees To $3.1 Million Settlement • Tests Find More Toxic Pet Toys • Finding Safe Toys to Give Your Pet • China Agrees to Stepped-Up Food, Drug Inspections • Menu Foods Denies Acetaminophen Found in its Cat Food • Veterinarians Solve Pet Food Death Puzzle • Menu Foods Agrees to Test for Pain Killer in its Cat Food • Lab Tests Again Find Acetaminophen in Pet Food • Toxic Pet Toys: A Doctor's Advice • Consumers Respond to Toxic Wal-Mart Pet Toy Stories • Federal Import Safety Panel Outlines Proposals • Pet Industry Agrees on Need for Toxicity Standards • Industry Responds to Reports of Lead in Wal-Mart Pet Toys • Wal-Mart Attacks Lab Tests that Found Lead, Chromium in Pet Toys • Wal-Mart Reviewing Results of Tests on China-Made Pet Toys • Lab Tests Find Lead, Other Toxins in Pet Toys Sold at Wal-Mart • CANIDAE Denies Reports of Painkiller in its Pet Food • Lab Tests Find Painkiller in Samples of Pet Food • Purina Denies Claim on Bichon Frise Deaths • FDA Blocks Nutro Pet Food Shipment from Entering U.S. • FDA Testing Dog Treats Pulled from Wal-Mart Shelves • Wal-Mart Finds Melamine in Chinese-Made Dog Treats --- • More about Pet Food Recalls ...

Scared and horrified.

That’s an Ohio pet owner’s reaction to a ConsumerAffairs.com story that revealed what a forensic toxicologist called elevated levels of lead, chromium, and cadmium in two Chinese-made pet toys sold at Wal-Mart.

“A couple of weeks ago, I bought one of those toys for my two dogs,” pet owner Karen N. told us. “Now I’m really afraid because (the forensic toxicologist) in the article said the toy could shorten my dogs’ lives. This makes me sick.”

Our story also convinced the Middlefield, Ohio, woman that:

• National standards are needed for safe and acceptable levels of lead and other heavy metals in toys for dogs and cats. Many in the pet industry have called for such standards in the wake of our report;

• The Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) or some other governmental body should regulate pet toys. Currently, no federal agency regulates these products – even though adults and young children handle them;

• Pet product manufacturers should make dog and cat toys that only have ingredients from the United States. “I had no idea that China made just about every pet toy that’s in this country . . . I can’t find any dog toys that China doesn’t make.”

• Pet owners should discuss this issue with their veterinarians and with their children's pediatricians.

In September, ConsumerAffairs.com hired ExperTox Analytical Laboratory to analyze four Chinese-made pet toys we bought at Wal-Mart -- two for dogs and two for cats -- for heavy metals and other toxins.

High levels of lead

One of the dog toys -- a latex one that looks like a green monster -- tested positive for what ExperTox’s Forensic Toxicologist and Director, Dr. Ernest Lykissa, Ph.D., called high levels of lead and the cancer producing agent chromium.

Specifically, the lab reported the green monster toy contained 907.4 micrograms per kilogram of lead.

“That’s almost one part per million,” Dr. Lykissa told us. “With that kind of concentration, if a dog is chewing on it or licking it, he’s getting a good source of lead.”

The green monster toy also had what Dr. Lykissa considered elevated levels of the cancer-producing agent chromium -- 334.9 micrograms per kilogram.

“With that kind of chromium in there you have what can be an extremely toxic toy if they (animals) put it in their mouths. And dogs put things in their mouths. If a dog puts this in his mouth, he runs a big chance of getting some type of metal toxicity that may shorten his life.”

The Texas-based laboratory also found other toxic metals in the green monster toy.

“There’s cadmium, arsenic, and mercury in there,” Dr. Lykissa said. “This is not a clean toy. This is toxic. Bank on it.”

ExperTox also detected “worrisome” levels of cadmium in a cloth catnip toy – 236 micrograms per kilogram.

“That’s a big number,” Lykissa said. “It’s a good dose of cadmium.”

Veterinarians disagree

But two veterinary toxicologists who reviewed ExperTox’s results said the levels of toxic metals in the toys did not pose a health risk to dogs or cats.

Wal-Mart is also adamant that the chew toys are safe. Whether the toys pose a hazard to children and adults who handle them remains unclear.

The state of Illinois this week reached a settlement with a lunch bag distributor, who agreed to stop selling and distributing lunch bags containing amounts of lead in excess of the limits in Illinois law.

“It is crucial that children's products containing any amount of lead be taken off the shelves and out of the hands of young children,” Attorney General Lisa Madigan said.

ExperTox also analyzed two other Chinese-made pet toys – a cloth hedgehog for dogs and a plastic dumbbell toy for cats. The lab detected cadmium in those toys, but said the levels were “about the amount you’d find in one cigarette” and not considered significant.

Angus & Taylor

Nonetheless, ExperTox’s findings frightened Karen because she recently purchased two of Wal-Mart’s green monster toys for her miniature Schnauzers, Angus and Taylor.

“I had just brought the toys in the house, gave them to my dogs, and then went on my computer and read a consumer alert from your Web site,” Karen told us on Monday. “And there was that green monster toy.

“I couldn’t believe it had lead in it. My dogs had already started playing with.”

What’s even more concerning, Karen said, is this is the second time this year that she’s purchased the green monster toys for her dogs. The Schnauzers chewed on the toys for days, she said, and eventually tore the squeakers out of them.

Long-term effects

Karen is now worried about lead building up her dogs’ bodies and the long-term effects that could have on their health.

“I wish to God (your forensic toxicologist, Dr. Lykissa) was wrong about all this because if he’s not my dogs will inevitably suffer, which will cause me to suffer deeply in the long run.”

Karen said her dogs -- who are 10 months and 4 1/2 years old -- are in good health and have not shown any signs of illness from playing with the green monster toys.

But after reading our story, she immediately took the imported chew toys away from her dogs and returned them to Wal-Mart.

“The customer service lady said ‘oh, this is one of the recalled toys.’ But these toys are still on the shelf. Like I said, I just bought them a couple weeks ago.”

Still being sold?

ConsumerAffairs.com purchased the four Chinese-made pet toys at a Wal-Mart in Kansas City, Missouri. We checked the store last week and found a green monster toy that looked identical to the one we tested – except it wasn’t in a plastic bag like the one we purchased and the UPC number was one digit off.

We also couldn’t find the catnip toys on the store’s shelves.

Wal-Mart, however, never indicated it planned to remove the toys from its stores. Instead, the company’s hired public relations person, who did not cite any scientific credentials, attacked ExperTox and said Dr. Lykissa “severely misinterpreted” the results.

“After reviewing these test results provided to us…the results of these tests actually prove the products are VERY safe,” Melissa O’Brien, who identified herself as representing Wal-Mart’s corporate communication, wrote us in an e-mail. Other news organizations said O'Brien told them she worked for a public relations firm called Edelman.

“If these measurements are in fact the results, as you have reported, they have been severely misinterpreted by the director of ExperTox’s lab, if he is reporting these levels to be ‘high’ or dangerous.”

O’Brien pointed out that CPSC has a limit of 600 parts per million for the total lead in surface coating.

“By comparison, the highest concentration of lead found in any of the ExperTox tests is a very low 907.4 parts per million -- more than 600 times less than the CPSC limit for surface coatings.

“The conclusions drawn in this article appear to have been based on incorrect interpretations of the data, and based on the opinions of a person (who is) not an expert in consumer product testing,” O’Brien said.

Hatchet job

"The only conclusions drawn in our articles have been that experts disagree and that safety standards are needed to protect pets and the humans who come in contact with them and their toys," said ConsumerAffairs.com President and Editor in Chief James R. Hood. "Everyone agrees with that -- except Wal-Mart, which has contributed absolutely nothing to this dialogue."

"Edelman practices the slash-and-burn tactics now common in politics -- tactics that are totally inappropriate in the public health field," Hood said. "Wal-Mart's customers deserve better."

ConsumerAffairs.com also interviewed two veterinary toxicologists, who said the levels of lead, chromium, and cadmium in the green monster and catnip toys did not pose a health risk to pets, though they did not cite any long-term studies to back up their opinions.

“I don’t see any of those numbers being a toxicity concern for dogs or cats,” Dr. Mike Murphy of the University of Minnesota’s College of Veterinary Medicine told us. “Latex paint can contain one-half to one percent of lead, which is 10,000 parts per million. What he (Dr. Lykissa) is saying is that one part per million is a risk. But latex paint is 10,000 times higher than that and we don’t recognize latex paint as a toxicity risk to dogs and cats.

“I disagree with the interpretation that’s being made (by Lykissa),” added Dr. Murphy, who holds a Ph.D. in toxicology. “I consider these to be extremely low numbers and they are not a toxicological concern for pet owners.”

Dr. Fred Oehme at Kansas State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine said the risks to dogs and cats from these toys depends on how much of the heavy metals are absorbed in their bodies.

“Could they be harmful? The poisoning depends on how much is taken into their systems. Most animals require 30 parts per million of their total daily diet before you get into a problem with lead. Cadmium is more than that.

“I’m more concerned about the lead than the other two (heavy metals),” he added. “Lead accumulates and if it gets into the body, it builds up.”

Not swayed

ExperTox, however, isn’t swayed by its critics. It stands by its findings and calls them “rock solid.” Lab Manager Donna Coneley also said Dr. Lykissa is an expert at testing consumer products.

ExperTox, she said, has the most advanced and sensitive equipment for conducting heavy metal tests – specifically its ICP-MS or Inductively Coupled Plasma Mass Spectrometry.

That’s the machine ExperTox used to test the four pet toys we purchased at Wal-Mart.

“These (toxic) materials came off the toys freely, like with the lick of the tongue from a dog or cat,” Dr. Lykissa told us. “They were readily liberated from these toys. We didn’t take a sledge hammer and pound on them. I just did what a dog or cat would do by licking it. That’s why this is so serious.”

Toxicologists at the lab cut off a small piece from each of the toys, weighed the samples, and put them in acidic water.

“We left the samples for a while and then heated them up to body temperature,” Dr. Lykissa said. “Then we put them in (theICP-MS) and that machine told us this is lead and this is chromium . . .

“We didn’t dissolve the toys,” he added. “These materials were leeching off the toys. Whatever leeched off the toys is what I’m reporting to you. The material came right off. Somebody’s saliva or the sweat in their hands would freely pick up these materials. And that’s absorbing it. If you ate the materials, like a dog might, it would be worse.”

Expertox, however, doesn’t look at CPSC limits during its testing procedures, Coneley said.

“We simply pour out our results as we receive them. We don’t look at the limits on products.

“But in our opinion, that level of lead (907.4 micrograms per kilogram) is considered elevated and there are other choices (for pet owners),” Coneley said. “If someone wants to give a dog a toy with those levels (of lead) that’s their choice and I’m not going to argue with that. My choice would be to go with a more natural treat. I would not go with one that had elevated levels of chromium, lead, or cadmium.”

"Solid results"

Pet owners, she said, can trust the lab’s test results -- and the science behind them.

“These are actual, valid numbers. Whether or not they’re toxic to a dog (or cat) is left to interpretation. All we can do is give our opinion and cooperate with the Food and Drug Administration or other governmental agency, which we’ve done many time.”

This isn’t the first time in recent weeks that test results on heavy metals in pet toys -- and the interpretation of those findings -- have pitted Dr. Lykissa against veterinary toxicologists and others in the pet industry.

In late August, an Illinois pet owner -- worried about the safety of the chew toys her Shelties played with -- hired the laboratory at the Illinois Department of Agriculture to test 24 Chinese-made dog toys for lead.

“The only reason I tested these dog toys is because I have lost three Shelties in the last four years and I can only figure out why one of them died,” said Nancy R. of Orland Park, Illinois.

She contacted us after reading our story about ExperTox’s results on the imported Wal-Mart chew toys.

“Then my 83-year-old mom noticed that my dogs’ toys were all made in China,” Nancy said. “I went to Petco and PetSmart and couldn’t find any toys not made in China -- except one rope knot that was made in Mexico. I was doing this personally for the safety of my dogs and only tested for lead because that’s what they’re finding in the toys from China.”

The Illinois Department of Agriculture’s lab reported that the lead levels in all 24 dog toys Nancy tested fell within that state’s acceptable limits for lead paint in children’s toys.

The levels also fell far below the amount of lead paint in children’s toys that’s allowed by federal law – 600 parts per million.

The lab found the highest levels of lead in a PetSmart tennis ball -- 335.7 parts per million. It detected the lowest levels of lead in a Hartz Rubber Percival Platypus – 0.02 parts per million.

“These are all within the acceptable limits for lead content in children’s toys in Illinois,” the lab’s director, Dr. Gene Niles, told us. The veterinarian is a Diplomate of the American Board of Veterinary Toxicology (DABVT).

“There are no levels for lead content in pet toys. Are these numbers high or low? All I can tell you is that in Illinois, the state allows up to 600 parts per million for lead in kid’s toys and these are all within that guideline.”

But the lead levels in PetSmart’s tennis ball are 335 times higher than the amount of lead ExperTox found in the green monster toy.

Both safe ... or both dangerous?

Does that mean both toys are safe because the lead levels are far below 600 parts per million?

Or does it mean they both pose a health risk to pets and the children who play with them?

The answer depends on which scientists -- or public relations person -- you talk to about the findings.

PetSmart said its tennis balls are safe for dogs and the levels of lead do not pose any health risks.

“To our knowledge, we are not selling any products that have compounds that have tested above levels of toxicity established by the various entities named above and are not posing any health threat to pets or humans,” said Bruce Richardson, PetSmart’s director of external communication.

Richardson said his company routinely tests its dog and cat toys for lead and other toxins.

“The products we sell must meet a variety of safety and quality standards and protocols,” he said. “These are based on federal regulations and standards…as well as commonly accepted standards established by highly respected institutions such as the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).

“In addition, we have established our own stringent standards of quality and safety for areas not necessarily covered by those groups named above.”

Richardson took exception with our comparison of the lead levels in the company’s tennis ball to those found in the green monster toy.

He said it’s not fair to use ExperTox’s “benchmark” of one part per million as a safety measure for lead or other toxins in pet toys.

“The terms ‘high’ and ‘elevated’ are relative terms and must be used carefully and given proper context to avoid confusion and alarm,” Richardson said. “It’s not fair to pit a (forensic) toxicologist against a veterinary toxicologist on this issue. I don’t think he (Dr. Lykissa) has a leg to stand on. He’s not a veterinary toxicologist and has no point of reference when he talks about elevated levels. Elevated against what? I don’t think his results bring any value to this discussion. And his comments will not change anything we’re doing.”

ExperTox disagreed.

The lab’s manager said the levels of lead in PetSmart’s tennis ball are elevated and ExperTox does not consider them safe.

“Those are a lot higher levels than what we found in the green monster toys, and I don’t see how 600 parts per million is acceptable,” said the lab’s Donna Coneley. “We don’t agree that (335.7 parts per million of lead) is a safe level.”

Would Coneley let her dog chew on a toy with those levels of lead?

“Not from what I see here at the lab,” she said. “We have differing opinions on what is safe and acceptable.”

Coneley also questioned the validity of using the same “acceptable levels” for lead and other toxins in pet toys that are used in children’s toys.

Weight matters

“Weight is always a factor,” she said. “If you’re dealing with a teacup-size dog you can’t assume that what’s safe for a 20-pound child is safe for a three- to ten-pound dog. Cats are light as well. Their little bodies are not able to spread out the toxins. Animals also tend to chew things off more aggressively than kids.

“Everyone seems to concentrate on humans with this type of testing, but maybe more scrutiny is needed on what limits are safe for pets.”

That’s the one point where nearly everyone involved in this debate is on the same page.

“There clearly is an absence of regulations for pet toys,” Richardson said. “Maybe the guidelines ... the levels ... for human standards are not so good based on the exposure for dog (or cats). That’s a huge question that needs to be addressed.”

PetSmart, he said, would not object to having national “acceptable standards and levels” for lead and other toxins in pet toys.

The president of the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association (APPMA) told us his members -- who represent more than 900 pet product makers, importers, and livestock suppliers worldwide -- would welcome such standards.

“They’re looking for a benchmark that everyone can follow,” said Bob Vetere, president of the non-profit organization. “Maybe what we need is to have everyone sit down at a table and talk about what makes sense.

“It’s not going to be easy to find an answer, but it’s a process that has to start. The CPSC is certainly somebody that needs to be sitting at that table, and we’d (APPMA) certainly be willing to work with them and help them on this issue,” he said.

The CPSC, however, said its agency currently has no regulatory control over pet products. “We only have jurisdiction over a pet-related product (that is not food), if evidence is presented that the product has put the safety of consumers at risk,” said spokesman Scott Wolfson. He did not address the potential danger to children and adults exposed to the pet toys.

Dr. Niles with the Illinois Department of Agriculture joined those who favor national “acceptable” levels for lead and other toxins in pet toys.

“We have to use human data now in the absence of pet data,” he said. “Work needs to be done to get standardized levels for pets. But you have to have the data. And I’m fully in favor of scientific data to support those guidelines. Once we get those guidelines, we can interpret this data in relationship to animals instead of humans.”

National standards

Remember worried pet owner Karen from Ohio?

She also supports the adoption of national standards for lead and other toxins in pet toys.

“Dogs are living beings,” she said. “They’re our companions. It shouldn’t just be this attitude that ‘oh, it’s a dog so we don’t need any standards.’

“There absolutely should be standardized levels (of toxins) for pet toys.”

Karen also favors federal regulation of pet toys. “And I definitely think the CPSC should take that over. We all know that babies and toddlers put things in their mouths ... they could easily put these pet toys in their mouths.”

Until that happens, Vetere said members of the APPMA will triple-checking their products to be sure they’re tested for lead and other toxins.

That action, he said, is the result of our story about ExperTox’s findings on Wal-Mart’s pet toys.

“Everyone (in this industry) is well aware of your story,” Vetere told us. “And the reaction from virtually everyone I’ve talked to about the story is: ‘Wait a minute. We didn’t know about this. Hello, what’s going on?’ And they’ve called their vendors and suppliers to be sure they’re testing the products.

“It’s good that you got this out there so they (our members) could know, and they are pushing very hard on their vendors now to get those test results. If nothing else, everyone is now aware of this in the industry.”

Made in China

Meanwhile, Karen and other dog owners told us they’ll no longer buy pet toys made in China. But that might not be easy to do.

“I can’t find any pet toys that aren’t made in China,” Karen said, adding she wished some company in the USA would start making toys for dogs and cats. “I’ve done my research and most of the pet toys are made in China. I’ve also written to different pet companies and they’ve told me that basically everything made in China.”

Pet owner Nancy from Illinois ran into the same problems during her search for USA-made dog toys.

“I was going to dump out all my old toys and buy only ones made in the USA,” she said. “But I couldn’t find any that weren’t made in China. What amazes me is that all these toys are made in China.”

Karen also told us she’s going to discuss ExperTox’s findings with her veterinarian.

“And I’m hoping that the veterinarians you talked to are right and that there’s no harm giving these toys to my dogs.”

Whether pet owners agree or disagree with ExperTox’s findings, the lab’s manager said this debate has given them the tools to make more informed decisions about the products they give their dogs and cats.

“That’s what this is all about, giving people more information that I feel will help them make a better choice. If a vet says he think our results are extremely low numbers than people can take that information and balance it against what Dr. Lykissa said to make a better decision.

“This has opened a Pandora’s Box and it’s good that people are now talking about this.”

Report Your Experience
If you've had a bad experience -- or a good one -- with a consumer product or service, we'd like to hear about it. All complaints are reviewed by class action attorneys and are considered for publication on our site. Knowledge is power! Help spread the word. File your consumer report now.

Back to the top |