Iams Pet Food Cruelty
- Thread starter Caninegirl
- Start date
I don't believe things like IAMS cutting off chunks of a dog's legs...there's no logical reason to do that...on the other hand, animal experimentation can get rather ugly and any company's claims that their experiments are "animal friendly" are completely fully of crap.
Until I see an independant organization intervene and do their own investigation and provide their own findings, I'll stick with both PETA and P&G being equally full of crap.
Until I see an independant organization intervene and do their own investigation and provide their own findings, I'll stick with both PETA and P&G being equally full of crap.
Of course both sides have an agenda! The likes of uncaged want to stop unnecessary animal suffering P & G want to make more profit.
I wonder how many of those saying its not true or its all done with no suffering etc would be happy for P & G and IAMS to have their dog for a month to run some tests on them.
http://www.uncaged.co.uk/pg.htm#rspca
some further reading
To me its simple I am aware that they test on animals Im also aware of the company's that dont and chose accordingly. I know I can get a lot better dog food than IAMs which has not meant invasive painful procedures on others dogs to feed mine
I wonder how many of those saying its not true or its all done with no suffering etc would be happy for P & G and IAMS to have their dog for a month to run some tests on them.
http://www.uncaged.co.uk/pg.htm#rspca
some further reading
To me its simple I am aware that they test on animals Im also aware of the company's that dont and chose accordingly. I know I can get a lot better dog food than IAMs which has not meant invasive painful procedures on others dogs to feed mine
motherofmany said:
Well I guess I'm a terrorist 
Any private business that, for example, engages in human rights abuses, I will picket if possible and/or financially support organizations that picket.
Even with illegal activist activity against private companies, I hesitate to use the term "terrorist" because given the state of the world, a few reactionaries breaking into a lab and freeing some monkeys seems small potatoes as long as there are people beheading hostages, kwim?
Any private business that, for example, engages in human rights abuses, I will picket if possible and/or financially support organizations that picket.Even with illegal activist activity against private companies, I hesitate to use the term "terrorist" because given the state of the world, a few reactionaries breaking into a lab and freeing some monkeys seems small potatoes as long as there are people beheading hostages, kwim?
Agility23- PETA really isn't as great as it sounds.
Beyond the fact that they are against animal testing, or using animals as sources of food and clothing, they are also against ownership of any animals at all. We've had a few of these wackos come try to "liberate" some of our dogs at dog shows (there's a good idea; liberating a Japanese Chin next to a busy highway. But it's okay, he'll be able to survive with his superior hunting skills ).
They also believe in extinction programs for certain breeds (do a search to see what they think about Pitties).
Furthermore, their personal shelter euthanizes more healthy, adoptable animals than the Humane Society shelter just minutes away. I think a few years ago they got into a bit of trouble when their employees were caught dumping the bodies of several (previously) healthy dogs into a dumpster.
I'm all for animal welfare- but I'm also all about enjoying the company of my thoroughly domesticated dogs. PETA is not.
Beyond the fact that they are against animal testing, or using animals as sources of food and clothing, they are also against ownership of any animals at all. We've had a few of these wackos come try to "liberate" some of our dogs at dog shows (there's a good idea; liberating a Japanese Chin next to a busy highway. But it's okay, he'll be able to survive with his superior hunting skills
). They also believe in extinction programs for certain breeds (do a search to see what they think about Pitties).
Furthermore, their personal shelter euthanizes more healthy, adoptable animals than the Humane Society shelter just minutes away. I think a few years ago they got into a bit of trouble when their employees were caught dumping the bodies of several (previously) healthy dogs into a dumpster.
I'm all for animal welfare- but I'm also all about enjoying the company of my thoroughly domesticated dogs. PETA is not.
Sadly, there is - or at least in their mind there is. They routinely use lab animals to research the effects of all kinds of formulations, e.g. fiber in the food, how it could affect wound healing and so on.
There is no excuse for testing practices like that and dogs could be used in clinical trials who are already affected by specific health problems. Cutting chunks out of muscles is one of the lesser problems, if you'd educate yourself a little more, you'd find things like dogs and cats being put into kidney failure intentionally, bones being broken artificially, wounds inflicted and infected, all in the name of "research" for pet food.
And these things aren't reported by any unreliable amateur websites but in scientific publications by the companies themselves.
There is no excuse for testing practices like that and dogs could be used in clinical trials who are already affected by specific health problems. Cutting chunks out of muscles is one of the lesser problems, if you'd educate yourself a little more, you'd find things like dogs and cats being put into kidney failure intentionally, bones being broken artificially, wounds inflicted and infected, all in the name of "research" for pet food.
And these things aren't reported by any unreliable amateur websites but in scientific publications by the companies themselves.
How have they benefited, they've produced a pretty crappy food, so Im not sure who has benefited from the suffering inflicted. Well apart from P&G of course. There are plenty of much better foods out there that dont inflict suffering on animals, why would one chose a bad one that does?
If its ok for this testing to be carried out for the benefit of other dogs, would you donate your dog to undergo these tests all for the good of the rest of dog kind?
You do see that they didn't really answer your question? No, while they don't suggest that we open our doors and let all our domesticated pets run free, Ingrid Newkirk, the cofounder and president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, has this to say about pet ownership:
""I don’t use the word "pet." I think it’s speciesist language. I prefer "companion animal." For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship – enjoyment at a distance."
-Ingrid Newkirk, PETA vice-president, quoted in The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223."
To me that sounds an awful lot like saying we shouldn't own pets.
""The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats ... If people want toys they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship they should seek it with their own kind."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, "Animals," May/June 1993"
""You don't have to own squirrels and starlings to get enjoyment from them ... One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, Chicago Daily Herald, March 1, 1990."
""Pet ownership is an abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, Washingtonian, August 1986"
So no, don't get rid of your "companion animals" on PETA's account, but we're supposed to phase them out. Mind you, this comes from the woman who compared the sad life and death of a broiler chicken to the Holocaust.
""Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughter houses."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, The Washington Post, November 13, 1983."
You won't find those quotes on the PETA site. I got them from "here".
But no, I would never support animal testing to attain the ultimate dog food. It's totally unnecessary. But that doesn't mean I would support PETA.
""I don’t use the word "pet." I think it’s speciesist language. I prefer "companion animal." For one thing, we would no longer allow breeding. People could not create different breeds. There would be no pet shops. If people had companion animals in their homes, those animals would have to be refugees from the animal shelters and the streets. You would have a protective relationship with them just as you would with an orphaned child. But as the surplus of cats and dogs (artificially engineered by centuries of forced breeding) declined, eventually companion animals would be phased out, and we would return to a more symbiotic relationship – enjoyment at a distance."
-Ingrid Newkirk, PETA vice-president, quoted in The Harper's Forum Book, Jack Hitt, ed., 1989, p.223."
To me that sounds an awful lot like saying we shouldn't own pets.
""The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats ... If people want toys they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship they should seek it with their own kind."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, "Animals," May/June 1993"
""You don't have to own squirrels and starlings to get enjoyment from them ... One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. [Dogs] would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, Chicago Daily Herald, March 1, 1990."
""Pet ownership is an abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, Washingtonian, August 1986"
So no, don't get rid of your "companion animals" on PETA's account, but we're supposed to phase them out. Mind you, this comes from the woman who compared the sad life and death of a broiler chicken to the Holocaust.
""Six million Jews died in concentration camps, but six billion broiler chickens will die this year in slaughter houses."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, The Washington Post, November 13, 1983."
You won't find those quotes on the PETA site. I got them from "here".
But no, I would never support animal testing to attain the ultimate dog food. It's totally unnecessary. But that doesn't mean I would support PETA.
In the case of dog food? Give me a break.
With a little more effort clinical testing can be done on animals that are already suffering from one particular health issue or another, there is no need to damage perfectly healthy animals for that kind of thing. Other companies manage to do without it too.
With a little more effort clinical testing can be done on animals that are already suffering from one particular health issue or another, there is no need to damage perfectly healthy animals for that kind of thing. Other companies manage to do without it too.
Some of the ingredients in Commercial Dog Foods...
Sorry, couldn't help listing a few.
Yet another reason to make your own!
Here is a partial list of commercial dog food ingredients;
Meat: Meat is the clean flesh of slaughtered animals (chicken, cattle, lamb, turkey, etc.). The flesh can include striated skeletal muscle, tongue, diaphragm, heart, esophagus, overlying fat and the skin, sinew, nerves and blood vessels normally found with that flesh.
Meat By-products: Meat by-products are clean parts of slaughtered animals, not including meat. These include lungs, spleen, kidneys, brain, liver, blood, bone, and stomach and intestines freed of their contents. It does not include hair, horns, teeth, or hooves.
How about a snack! Yummi huh.
You should see the veggie list - even better.
Lare
Sorry, couldn't help listing a few.
Yet another reason to make your own!
Here is a partial list of commercial dog food ingredients;
Meat: Meat is the clean flesh of slaughtered animals (chicken, cattle, lamb, turkey, etc.). The flesh can include striated skeletal muscle, tongue, diaphragm, heart, esophagus, overlying fat and the skin, sinew, nerves and blood vessels normally found with that flesh.
Meat By-products: Meat by-products are clean parts of slaughtered animals, not including meat. These include lungs, spleen, kidneys, brain, liver, blood, bone, and stomach and intestines freed of their contents. It does not include hair, horns, teeth, or hooves.
How about a snack! Yummi huh.
You should see the veggie list - even better.
Lare