In China, the cows are badly malnourished, and the routine spiking of dairy products with melamine and other illegal substances has been an "open secret" for years, says the Wall Street Journal today in a detailed look at the dairy system there. At the root of the problem is a dairy industry rife with farmers who have no idea how to feed or care for their cows, and even if they do, would always choose the cheapest possible option; whether feeding them with straw instead of corn, or (it seems obvious) allowing them enough room to graze naturally.

That melamine should be added to milk is only the most deadly in a string of unethical practices, starting with ill-treatment of animals and continuing through routine addition of "protein powder," a nutrient-booster made of animal parts, soy, and other ingredients. This powder was added, not to contribute to the health of the customer, but instead to fool inspectors.

It wasn't foolish enough; inspectors learned to identify the additions, as well as the "fresh-keeping liquid" of preservatives and antiobiotics. Were the farmers upset about their lack of ethics? No, they were just concerned the milk would be returned to them and be "wasted." Enter melamine.

Melamine, a scrap byproduct of many Chinese factories, mimics protein in lab tests. And it is extremely cheap.

Sarah Gilbert is a former investment banker, Wharton MBA, and mama of three young boys. She keeps her finger on the pulse of hundreds of like-minded mamas through social media and reports on the mood of the biggest consumer group out there: Moms.

It was the middle of the night when I first heard the news about melamine-tainted powdered milk sickening and killing Chinese babies. I was up with my youngest, who was teething, and listening to BBC. As the night wore on, it seemed that the numbers kept growing. Many, too many. Outrageously many. I comforted myself, remembering that those thousands who were sick may be mildly ill, in a contamination situation even similar-seeming symptoms are blamed for the poison. But this is China, not noted for its transparency. Maybe the numbers were far higher. I shuddered, clenched my teeth, glad my baby never had powdered milk, glad I didn't live in China, sad for all those who were tossing and turning with a fatal fright.

Today's news that White Rabbit Creamy Candies, a popular Chinese candy sold in Asian markets in the U.S., were tainted with unacceptably high levels of melamine was not surprising. Why should candy be any more carefully screened than babies' milk? But it was devastating to millions of moms. It's hard enough for us to trust corporations with our kids' health; after all, the past 50 years hasn't exactly been award-winning. Sky-rocketing obesity rates. Enormous rises in childhood diabetes and heart disease. The as-yet un-attributed upswing in autism. Someone's to blame.

So maybe the pet food scare can't be blamed on China after all. The FDA announced that melamine, the same ingredient found in tainted kibble from China, has been used in animal feed ingredients made by a U.S. company. The ensuing recall involved feed made by Tembec BTLSR Inc. of Toledo, Ohio and used by Uniscope Inc. of Johnstown, Colorado.

Officials said that the melamine in animal feed does not pose any threat to human health, but this is still a very interesting development in the pet food scare. It was previously thought to be limited to China, and many people have been blaming the Chinese for inadequate labeling and quality control practices.

When the use of melamine in pet food was discovered in China, it was though that it had been added to show higher protein levels in the food. The American manufacturers are thought to have been using it to bind feed for cattle, sheep and goats.

Melamine has numerous industrial uses. It can be used as a binding agent, flame retardant, and is used in fertilizer in some countries.

The pet food recall is still at the top of the consumer radar these days, and we've been waiting for the lawsuits to begin. One of the first efforts is now underway, as a man whose dog passed away from kidney failure has filed suit against Wal-Mart Stores (NYSE: WMT), Menu Foods (an ingredient supplier blamed for the recall) and Del Monte.

This was to be expected, but I am surprised that Wal-Mart was included in the suit. Being a distributor of products, in most cases, should absolve one of liability unless the product is not removed from shelves after notification from vendors and suppliers. Perhaps this was the case with Wal-Mart. If so, the retailer deserves to be included here.

The same argument could be made for Google Inc. (NASDAQ: GOOG), which is sued routinely for making certain information available through its search engine. Apparently, being a "distributor" of information means legal liability, which is nonsense. This kind of thinking moves the responsibility from the creator of a service or product into the realm of the middleman. Is this right? Well, it can be -- it's all in the details of each case. In the Wal-Mart case, the charges include language like "failed to prevent the distribution of tainted pet foods after the discovery of contaminated wheat gluten in their ingredients." If true, then Wal-Mart's inclusion makes sense.