Purina one where is it made

Purina is headquartered in St. Louis, Missouri, where they are a major employer and contributor to the community.

They have a portfolio of some 30 well-known pet food brands, as well as producing cat and dog litter products. The Purina ONE brand is considered to be a premium dog food. It was the first line of natural pet foods with a wide national distribution in grocery and other retail stores. It seems to be marketed toward people who own rescue and shelter pets. Purina also makes a wide range of Purina ONE foods for cats. Purina ONE is sold in grocery stores but it is also found in pet stores and feed stores, making it a crossover brand.

It is a popular food with many dog show exhibitors and breeders as well as pet owners. Chicken, brewers rice, poultry by-product meal natural source of glucosamine , corn gluten meal, whole grain wheat , whole grain corn, soy flakes, animal fat preserved with mixed-tocopherols form of Vitamin E , pea fiber, oat meal, soybean meal, fish meal natural source of glucosamine , animal digest, glycerin, calcium phosphate, salt, calcium carbonate, caramel color, potassium citrate, Vitamin E supplement, choline chloride, potassium chloride, zinc sulfate, L-Lysine monohydrochloride, L-ascorbylpolyphosphate source of Vitamin C , ferrous sulfate, sulfur, manganese sulfate, niacin, Vitamin A supplement, copper sulfate, calcium pantothenate, thiamine mononitrate, pyridoxine hydrochloride, garlic oil, Vitamin B supplement, riboflavin supplement, calcium iodate, Vitamin D-3 supplement, folic acid, menadione sodium bisulfite complex source of Vitamin K activity , biotin, sodium selenite.

Probably the best thing about this food is that the first ingredient is chicken — a good meat protein. All of the Purina ONE foods start off with meat or fish. Now, Purina really likes grain and they defend it on their home site , which I find interesting and refreshing. Much of what they say here is accurate. And I like the fact that they talk about nutrition as opposed to just ingredients. Of course, dogs are carnivores, from a biological standpoint. Also in the top five ingredients is poultry by-product meal natural source of glucosamine.

And it is high in protein. Since it is a meat protein it is also relatively easy for your dog to digest compared to plant proteins depending how they are processed. The food also contains menadione sodium bisulfite complex source of Vitamin K activity , which is synthetic vitamin K3 — a controversial ingredient. For a premium dog food, this is a mixed bag of ingredients.

Chicken as the first ingredient is great but after that there is a lot of grain and ingredients from unnamed sources animal fat, animal digest. Some of the manufacturing facilities of Purina dog food are located in Missouri and Georgia. You can check out the table below for a detailed summary of all the manufacturing facilities where Purina dog food is made inside the United States. There are other Purina dog food facilities inside the United States where production is done but many of them are just distribution points for the products.

Purina dog food formulas are not made in China. However, some Purina dog treats are made in China and other countries. One internet user recently called Purina and was informed that most of their dog food is manufactured at their facilities in Missouri, United States but some of their dog treats are manufactured at facilities in China and other countries. One of my dogs is allergic to corn. It was very good of you to acknowledge Purina for their willingness to subject themselves to an interview.

I hope they will find the answers to your questions. It will make them a better company. Until there is a majority of consumers wnho boycott there mass companies which purina is just one, things will not change about 5 years ago I made a change to quality pet food after a lot of research and although it is seems motr expensive, I no longer have expenses for lg vet bills ,medicines and supplements, etc and my two senior cats are healthy and active at 14 years old.

Good real quality food is benificial to both humans and our furry friends. The conversation ending in a chuckle is inexcusable. I think you are too fair to some of these people Susan, an attribute that you have and that I lack.

I call it like I see it. The problem with meetings like this, is they will always have an answer, even for the difficult questions. And the irony about that, is the answers they provide are laughable. I think his chuckle was misunderstood. Of course he understands the sadness and loss of pet owners whose pets have died. Thinking a pet food caused your pets death is entirely different from actual cause which often cannot be determined without expensive testing which again most people cannot afford and therefore opt not to do.

TV is not reality — no surprise there though. People do not understand that correlation is not causation. Anecdotal evidence is not really evidence at all. Real concrete substantial evidence and result based facts are required, whether your emotions like it or not. No food company big or small, home kitchen to big corporation is responsible in any way shape or form for what a consumer thinks happened nor should they be.

People will say that they are willing to pay whatever price for a food to ensure it meets their expectation of what pet food should be. But that is just not true: not now, not before and not ever are they willing to pay the true cost of what they are asking for. They are not willing to in human food nor pet food.

The people who are asking for this will make their own instead of paying that price and this will leave other consumers paying for expensive food that they never wanted because their is no more choice left in the market. Companies have to make a profit to survive… that is the nature of our world. How many of you would work for nothing? How many of you think you deserve more money? These are some of the reasons big diversified companies buy out the smaller ones, because they are the only ones who can afford to run the business.

The smaller companies are often drowning in costs and not making any profit because they cannot produce the volume required for their business to be sustainable above and beyond operating costs. The smaller companies may have to sacrifice ingredients or quality of ingredients from time to time due to cost or availability because they simply do not have the buying power to get them.

I can then choose from these companies products whose ingredients meet my needs and expectations and pay accordingly for what I have chosen. Why do you feel you can trust a large company more than a small? Large could cut the same corners you say only small companies do. I want to share with your readers my experiences from inside the reality of the food industry. Removing my comments to bolster your personal viewpoint is not fair.

It is human nature I suppose, but it is the exact same thing your readers get mad a big corporations for doing. I removed the other comments because they all said the same thing…you kept hammering the same point. I guess the debate is about whether large PF companies are an advantage over smaller ones. Does that mean people do as well? Because we can all go back to eating whatever we want or smoking! But I think Field Professionals have already agreed that improper diet and toxic chemicals affect health!

It just does. Unfortunately, PF goes a step further. PF contains ingredients not fit for human consumption, and in combinations, and are heat treated, then chemically compensated. Particularly regarding the Poultry Industry. We can hardly expect them to do better with our Pets.

But we also know now, even more about the excessive use of antibiotics in animals raised for slaughter. The question is, why is it necessary to use antibiotics. The answer is, because of massive quantities of animals raised, and the hyper-speed rate of production! The greater wildcard is when a foreign country manufacturer now enters the system, using questionable Agri-business farming and manufacturing processes.

With even less regulation than the US. I would like an Industry Specialist and perhaps you are one to answer this. Ingredients should be ingredients. A piece of meat, or a carrot. Living in a controlled household. No variants. But certain Brands produce note this simultaneous results, such as ridiculous, pudding like stools!

This also happens when Formulas change. And when Company Ownership changes! Especially with cats!! When the Owner serves it, they get sick. Pretty basic testing procedure there. And not expensive at all. It was healthy before feeding the suspected PF. Owners are smart enough to know whether or not their animal lives in a controlled household no dangers. And then it gets sick within days of serving the new food.

Or there would be lawsuits galore. PF Defenders say of course not. Yet Owners have seen drastic results within a week. Our pets are the only animals we know of, among all species, that eat the exact same diet days a year often for years and years of its lifetime! And as they age, little problems keep accumulating. I would like to see a long term Industry testing of Brands tracking the health and welfare of pets for at least half their lifetime.

Not by keeping animals in cages. But through controlled households belonging to a combination of ethical Industry Professionals, Employees, Veterinarian Families and objective scientifically oriented Third Parties.

Finally, as to cost. And as these Consumers are being educated, they are choosing to feed fresh, whole, home-made food which does cost more. And the people in between choose RAW. Simple, nutritious, convenient, and less problematic. But the real question is this. How do they define acceptable profit; only by billions of dollars.

Or including ethical practices and business integrity? Several production batches of a PF brand might test okay for that stretch of time.

Yet others can easily reach extreme tolerances pesticide toxicity, inferior sourcing, dangerous storage and transport methods because as we all know, no system is perfect. As to testing, yes necropsy is expensive and emotionally charged. But if Veterinarians were supportive of questionable symptoms and premature death, perhaps the practice SHOULD be mainstreamed in order to collect relevant data that could be shot back to the Industry.

As it is, the Industry knows how Consumers tick. So their advertising is intentionally manipulative to establish a false sense of trust in their product AND practices. A lot comes down to differences in animals… I have one dog who can eat raw meaty bones with no issues at all and another who no matter what kind of meat… even a raw bone with no meat on it will have prolonged horrible vomiting and diarrhea sometimes… nights spent with the plain pedialyte and a syringe, days after with pumpkin and rice until his stomach settled down and he could finally eat something.

Different pet food diets are made in giant batches from a formula that normally should not change from batch to batch.

So if one consumer reports an illness related to that food what do you do as a company when you sold over bags of this same batch with no issues, and 15, before that without issue? How do you begin to investigate that? But what if it is sent to an independent outside lab and everything comes back within normal ranges or as expected. What do they test for now? Have they done their due diligence by doing this or should we as a consumer expect more if only one dog became ill?

It is easy to say just test, test, test… and a lot of the big companies do a lot of testing. I wish I could say the same about some of the smaller ones. They might do a feeding trial to make sure the dogs will eat their food over another but that is about it. Then there is also the ethical issues of testing on animals… but lets save that for another day….

With necropsy you are seeing the physiological cause of death not the direct causative agent. So to find the cause of one suspicious death it could cost thousands. No one can do this for free, even if they want to. So who pays for this? They make a pretty bag with flashy slogans to lure the consumer. The ingredients and formula come later… Something they often know nothing about.

They pay some company to make it for them. Because, I also think these issues are also rampant in human food which is regulated. Now… even with regulations someone has to be checking on all companies big and small, currently there is not a lot of actual checking.

But again who pays for checking, who does the checking, how often to they check and what are they checking for? But never read one like yours. It is about expanding the discussion. And learning from both perspectives. As an Industry Insider, you taking the time to share personal experience and knowledge is important and considerate!

I concede to the complexity of manufacturing volume, mass production, evidence investigation, geographical logistics, cost, and how to justify the value of results for the effort applied. Once intestinal inflammation starts, it takes its toll, weakening natural defenses, and very little irritation can set off severe episodes.

I know from experience. Sadly, for this kind of dog, I would claim a heredity predisposition, and not PF as the main culprit. But keep in mind, that PF over time, can be a colluding factor in promoting internal deterioration. So for the sake of progress in this discussion, we can say most dogs with severe reactions, have some contributing deficiency that makes them more susceptible than average.

Most PF Brands boast of comprehensive quality control procedures. Does it escalate the speed and depth of research? How often CAN a cause and effect be established? And how do they communicate with Consumers? So as not to alarm consumers?

We know, from common sense, that production mistakes can happen at any point. Fatal exposure to pesticide spraying, leaking chemicals, defective ingredients, dangerous storage and transport circumstances.

Can you say companies are truly vigilant against such mistakes, while they are just as comprehensive in dealing with major mistakes prior to batch releasing? If so, why is a library of sample food necessary? And the Animal Feed Industry has already admitted that livestock feed is intended for short-term maintenance of animals intended for slaughter.

How much more quality goes into a PF to ensure its natural to extended lifespan? And compared to fresh, whole foods? But we both recognize that no company will incur added expenses, for less profit. If true testing were a valid premise, then in-house necropsy would be part of the discussion. Again, an unpleasant subject. But back to the idea of practical in-home tracking of PF nutritional effects.

Career and Veterinarian Professionals tracking household pets offset by Objective Third Party participants. And because of Dept. And for what purpose.