Iams Pet Food Cruelty [Archive] - Chazhound Dog Forum

View Full Version : Iams Pet Food Cruelty

Caninegirl

04-04-2006, 06:09 AM

I came across this website earlier today, I didn't know Iams was so cruel.
"Iams Tortures Animals"
http://www.iamscruelty.com/

JennSLK

04-04-2006, 12:23 PM

OMG they were beagles. Like Emma

:(

Meggie

04-04-2006, 12:28 PM

Huh, darn, I gave a Peta site a hit. Something like this would carry more weight with me if it wasn't associated with Peta.

casablanca1

04-04-2006, 12:30 PM

I wouldn't believe PETA if it told me the sky was blue.

tobylittledude

04-04-2006, 04:57 PM

I saw the Iams cruelty photos some time ago. I swear I will never ever buy anything from that company. Don't forget that Eukanueba is part of the same company!!!! This company is EVIL

MISSLUCILUCK

04-04-2006, 05:34 PM

Unfortunately Iams and Eukanuba are the two largest funders of medical research done on dogs and cats... Another thing is - do a little research into what they and other dog food manufacturers make dog food out of - if you think the testing alone is bad - just wait!

Mordy

04-04-2006, 05:43 PM

I'm not a fan of PETA myself, but the cruelty they discovered did happend and the IAMS company even admitted it.

makenzie71

04-04-2006, 05:54 PM

haha...I love how the pictures and some of the segments of the video have absolutely nothing to do with Iams or Procter and Gamble. Added in there for "shock-filler". Peta has almost no support outside of their organization for this, either...except from those of you who fell for the "lets make it look like a Nazi death-camp" bit. Peta also has similar sites posted for almost every other pet-product manufacturer, too...that doesn't sound fishy at all.

On top of that, anyone encouraging activist activity against private businesses is nothing more than a terrorist.

Hey guys look! I found an unbiased website that says the EXACT opposite!http://www.iamstruth.com/iamstruth/en_US/jhtmls/home/IT_Home_Page.jhtml?li=en_US&pti=HP

Saje

04-04-2006, 05:56 PM

lol brought to you buy Iams. I'm sure that's just as unbiased. :rolleyes:

makenzie71

04-04-2006, 05:57 PM

I'm not a fan of PETA myself, but the cruelty they discovered did happend and the IAMS company even admitted it.

They admitted to experimenting on animals...but denied most of the claims made by PETA's investigator. Stated they were "bizaar" at best.

If everything that PETA and the anti-iams site was true, why wouldn't they have been in the main-stream media? You can't tell my the 6-o'clock news wouldn't be interested in a home-based shock-story that would effect every household in the nation...

lol brought to you buy Iams. I'm sure that's just as unbiased. :rolleyes:

Just adding some light to how seriously you can take such claims from an organization that thinks people shouldn't have pets.

Saje

04-04-2006, 06:07 PM

http://www.idausa.org/news/newsarchives/pg051403.html

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9852019/

http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=4136

http://www.enquirer.com/editions/2004/10/07/biz_biz1iams.html

http://www.daytoncitypaper.com/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=188

http://www.abbotsfordtimes.com/issues04/084104/news/084104nn5.html

How many do you want? This is old news so you if you are expecting headlines you are behind the times.

motherofmany

04-04-2006, 06:11 PM

On top of that, anyone encouraging activist activity against private businesses is nothing more than a terrorist.

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?

makenzie71

04-04-2006, 06:14 PM

How many do you want?

At least one from people who actually do invetigative reporting. Everyone of those simply say the same thing...a bunch of people are boycotting Iams...ntohign else. Nothing about how legitimate the claims are or efforts on their parts to investigate themselves or anything. It's just a story.

As said...Procter and Gamble never denied animal testing. In fact, they support it. But PETA has made claims that they've broken laws...why haven't convictions been made?

bubbatd

04-05-2006, 12:27 AM

Research and experimentation is in any dog food program... it's the only way they can improve. I'm sure none abuse the dogs.

rottiegirl

04-05-2006, 12:28 AM

That is so sad. I will never buy an iams product again!!

rottiegirl

04-05-2006, 12:30 AM

They forced vegetable oil down the dogs throat. They cut chunks of muscle out of the dogs legs. The dogs never even get to see sun light. That is cruelty!!

makenzie71

04-05-2006, 12:56 AM

They forced vegetable oil down the dogs throat. They cut chunks of muscle out of the dogs legs. The dogs never even get to see sun light.

According to PETA. According to Procter and Gamble, they didn't and don't (well I'm sure they experimented with common food-stuff oils).

Who are you gonna believe? Both sides have an agenda.

zoe08

04-05-2006, 12:57 AM

OMG I couldnt stand to watch much of that video! Poor beagles!! I want to take them all home!! It makes me want to cry. Poor doggy kept looking up and around and didnt know what was going on. :'(

brem

04-05-2006, 01:21 AM

Peta is a terrorist organisation. They condone bombings of facilities for the sake of a cause.

All companies make use of animals for testing. Better testing on animals than on humans first.

Also, Eukanuba does provide food for all the dogs of the MIRA organisation (it's a charity that trains dogs for the blinds and disabled). So all is not bad, all is not pink either.

Wake up people.

brem

04-05-2006, 01:26 AM

I mean peta wants you to give your dog, a carnivore, a meat eater, a vegetarian diet... COME ON!

blue

04-05-2006, 01:28 AM

According to PETA. According to Procter and Gamble, they didn't and don't (well I'm sure they experimented with common food-stuff oils).

Who are you gonna believe? Both sides have an agenda.
My opinion of PETA and P&G, Im opposed to both. I believe neither group.

Im gonna assume you are like minded from your posting.

makenzie71

04-05-2006, 01:32 AM

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.

blue

04-05-2006, 01:34 AM

rottiegirl

04-05-2006, 01:55 AM

makenzie71

04-05-2006, 02:02 AM

So where did the video come from then?

From PETA. IAMS says some of the video is not part of their operation and even PETA admits that many of the images are not from the IAMS facillity.

taratippy

04-05-2006, 05:18 AM

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

Agility23

04-07-2006, 03:40 PM

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?

I support PETA because they are like that if they support people who are willing to bread into testing labs etc then GREAT!!! i want nothing more than a chairity for animals that is willing to go to any extream to help end the cruelty they face in labs every single day.

makenzie71

04-07-2006, 04:24 PM

I support PETA...

I highly doubt anyone on this forum supports PETA...including you.

blue

04-07-2006, 04:28 PM

People for Eating Tasty Animals

Agility23

04-07-2006, 04:47 PM

I support PETA because they are like that if they support people who are willing to bread into testing labs etc then GREAT!!! i want nothing more than a chairity for animals that is willing to go to any extream to help end the cruelty they face in labs every single day.

break not bread

tempura tantrum

04-07-2006, 05:03 PM

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 :rolleyes: ).

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.

Mordy

04-07-2006, 05:05 PM

I don't believe things like IAMS cutting off chunks of a dog's legs...there's no logical reason to do that...

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.

makenzie71

04-07-2006, 05:41 PM

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.

I stand corrected...I really hadn't taken "healing process" experiments into consideration. I guess artificial wounds, intentional kidney failure, broken bones and all that are ok by me, too. I'm sure countless critters and people have all benefitted from the sacrafice.

Agility23

04-14-2006, 05:42 AM

taratippy

04-14-2006, 07:06 AM

I stand corrected...I really hadn't taken "healing process" experiments into consideration. I guess artificial wounds, intentional kidney failure, broken bones and all that are ok by me, too. I'm sure countless critters and people have all benefit
tted from the sacrafice.

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?

Meggie

04-14-2006, 09:39 AM

PETA are not against owning dogs it says so on there website i even emailed them once about it. They wants animals that can live naturaly to live naturaly parrots, monkeys etc there stance on dogs and cats is if we were to all let them go they would be ran over or shot in hours of being released.

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 (http://www.ingridnewkirk.com/), 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" (http://www.peta-sucks.com/araquotes.htm).

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.

Agility23

04-14-2006, 11:04 AM

I agree with her about the chickens.

Mordy

04-14-2006, 11:28 PM

I guess artificial wounds, intentional kidney failure, broken bones and all that are ok by me, too. I'm sure countless critters and people have all benefitted from the sacrafice.

In the case of dog food? Give me a break. :rolleyes:

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.

DogTreats

05-05-2006, 09:23 AM

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