A pet food company recalled 4 million pounds of pet food in response to complaints that pets that had consumed the food experienced vomiting, lethargy, and other signs of illness. After the recall, the pet food company tested samples from the recalled foo

Recalling of four million pounds of pet food for testing was a wise act but the statement procures a sense of doubt in the mind of the observer as there are many nuances which have not been paid enough heed to. The health of a pet is in the hands of the pet food seller and enough attention is required so as to not miss out on any details in this whole process from food manufacture, to food transportation to food delivery to the shopkeeper to the customer carrying the food home to the physical health of the pet before the pet had fed on the food.

The pet food must have been transported in some truck or other perfidious vehicle from the factory. Chances may be such that while unloading the truck some dust particles to bottom cohered to the food and the customers who bought the food first from the stock had their pets ropey very soon. Now when the rest of the material is being tested there are no signs of adulteration.

Moreover a cruel businessman may offer payola to the chemist appointed to test the food so as to clear himself from blame. Otherwise he might have ended up in jail for the mass food adulteration. The salesman might have a late epiphany of what had occurred without his knowledge about it and wants to exculpate himself from blame although he is not culpable but the source of the food is.

Taking into consideration the innocence of the shopkeeper he and the pet owner has to make sure that the food has been delivered from his shop itself and no other factory and during recalling he gets the same material without any misplacement of the goods. A woebegone owner of a pet in such a mental state of mind might have provided some portion of earlier stock which proved to be edible and free of impurities when the chemist verified. The customer has to also make sure that this illness is not an aftereffect of some food the pet has had before. The pet must be taken to the doctor for a peruse study of the symptoms. This would reveal the exact reason which might have been implicit till then.

These factors are to be considered before devoting time and resources on adulteration tests carried out on the food samples. If raft of pets gets sick pervasively the investigation is to be embellished.