Periodically there is a news story regarding non-nutritional minerals (so-called “heavy metals”) measured in pet foods. Typically, it is sensationalized to create alarm in pet owners. The articles point toward minerals like arsenic, lead or mercury with the intent to provoke consumers to action. These minerals have also been in the news for drinking water and human foods. Lead poisoning was a concern in Flint, Michigan, USA, arsenic has been receiving press for its presence at detectable levels in rice-based baby foods and mercury has been a worry in fish for decades. If these are of concern for human foods, the logic would hold that they should be for pet foods, too.
While we certainly want to be safe and prudent with our pets’ diets, the consumer doesn’t seem to understand that no company intentionally adds these to a pet food nor are they being negligent. Generally, these minerals come into the food as a natural part of the raw ingredients. Said another way, zero quantities don’t exist. So we have to ask questions like … what is their true origin, what methodology was used to measure them, are they bioavailable, what is the tolerance level and/or do other dietary factors affect their physiological effects?
