On that occasion, a number of netizens reported holes in their own web-purchased cat-and-dog food bags, suspected of being poisoned with needles. In response, many pet owners have concerns about pet food safety and fear that their own pet food will be poisoned.
Recently, there was an online video that gave rise to hot talk, which revealed that the dog food delivery box was badly damaged and that an unknown hole appeared on the dog food wrapping, stating that someone was specialized in going to the delivery station to inject poison in the dog food delivery and that there was a cyber-interception figure that “there were police stations that had been warned that someone bought dog food online had been injected with enemy fear and a case had been opened”.
In response, on October 22, the web-based video's dog food brand, Hi pet selection, published a rumour video that the fact was that, before October 15 of this year, the “dog bite” incident had occurred, the client had sent the video to the group because of the serious damage caused by the break-in of the express delivery box, and had not thought it had been posted online as a poisoning incident, which has now been returned. In addition, the brand published a tweet stating that the most critical evidence of the matter, namely, that the package of food returned had not yet reached the warehouse and that couriers had been contacted to get them to the warehouse as soon as possible tomorrow.
Since then, Internet users have indicated that they have seen cases of syringe poisoning online and have examined the cat foods they had purchased the previous few days. It is not surprising that there are multiple needle holes on them, which are very hidden and easily ignored without a close look. The client contacted the merchant on the first day of his discovery and did not throw it away because he feared that the cat food would be eaten by stray cats and then washed it out of the toilet himself. Similarly, there are netizens who say they have bought dog food in a similar situation and have chosen to flush it out in the toilet.
The public opinion generated by these suspected incidents of poisoning pet food is now receiving attention from a growing number of brands and pet owners, and daily consumption has shown that there are already many pet food brands indicating that the next private deliveries will take place and that the express delivery will not include a reference to pet food.
The Chinese pet shares are branded naughtyly, according to which all line products are owned by their own factory and directly to the warehouse, are tracked all the way and will be sent in the near future using white boxes without logo and allowing privacy protection on a single-sided express delivery.
The tender pet brand, Frigate, has issued a statement stating that Fregat's Fregat's Fregat's express delivery list is now hidden, that it is important to confirm the integrity of the appearance at the time of receipt, and that if any suspicious event is detected, it is refused. The cost of the return is borne by Fregat. The return of commodities would be handled in a uniform manner and would not flow back into the market in any way.
Lancai has also issued a circular on private shipments, and the order for the afternoon of 22 October has been fully private and has now been procured in a large-size delivery bag, with a package package attached to the original package to ensure that the delivery package is free of pet-related information, to be executed as soon as the new purchase package is in the warehouse.
In addition, various pet food brands have issued statements.
It is worth noting that there are some cat-and-dog packs that are themselves designed with gas holes called vents, which prevent pressure during transport from squeezing through the bag. This vent is impervious, so there is no fear that the food will deteriorate as a result. When checking the bags, care is also taken whether or not the vent setting is regular or not and whether there are any associated holes in the delivery package.
The lawyer indicated that if there was conclusive evidence that the pet food had been deliberately poisoned, the pet dog that poisoned the other person was an act of aggression against the other person ' s property and was liable for tort. Corresponding criminal liability is also incurred if “dog food poisoning” is a rumour, the creation of a false adventure is disseminated on the information network or other media, or, knowing that it is the above-mentioned false information, the deliberate dissemination of information on the information network or other media, seriously disturbing the public order. I hope they don't believe in rumors.
Source: Micro-Credit Public.