PETA Kills animals?

[BagelDog]

http://www.petakillsanimals.com/

Wow. PETA kills more animals than they save.

[Payge]

PETA is in my opinion not an animal welfare group, and most people are unaware of that fact. In 2002 they spent less than 2% of their multi-million dollar donations on actually helping animals. The majority of it went towards the defense of criminals in their organization who had done such things as bombing labratories that used animal testing. PETA does not believe in what they call "animal slaves" ...we would refer to them as pets. Their vision for the world is one where noone eats meat, drinks milk, owns a pet, races horses...etc a world where animals are left to their own devices and humans are unimportant. In direct contrast to thier "We love animals" appearance they have euthanised thousands of dogs and cats because it wasn't worth the bother to rehome them. They proudly proclaim their affiliation with a radical group that the FBI considers "One of the biggest terrorist threats to the U.S."

"Even if animal testing produced a cure for AIDS, we would be against it"- direct quote from the president of PETA

[Irish]

Bageldog, don't believe everything you read. All things need to be taken with a grain of salt. I am not pro-Peta but there is no way I believe they are killing 78% (or whatever the % was) of their dogs. There would be absolutely no reason for it, if they were only in it for the $ - it would be cheaper to rehome than to euthanize.

I'm sure they do have to euthanize at times when it is neccessary. The group that sponsers this site is apparently focused on ruining Peta's reputation for reasons of their own.

Its kind of ironic, since Peta uses the same tactics that this site that is trying to ruin them: propaganda and misinformation.

[blue]

Im no statastician(sp) but euthinizing would be cheaper than to have a staff to properly rehome a dog or any animal. There was a news link earlier this week on Yahoo about PETA workers being prosecuted for "rescuing" dogs and then taking them to be euthanized. In this case I dont blame the PETA workers, they where saving dogs from the humane death of mass gassing of dogs.

I am not a fan of PETA.

[BigDog2191]

I hate PETA... :mad:

[mrose_s]

I cantgo either way, they turned me vegetarian which I am thankful for but i have heard a lot of bad crap about them too

[Sheba]

PETA is baaaad.Their exscuses are horrible!

[BagelDog]

Irish, does that mean I should froget what PETA says about how cruel IAMS is? Should I take that with a grain of salt? PETA is a horrible orginization, and nobody likes them. Their ridiculous, and oviously dint give a crap about animals, its all about harrassing people.

[CreatureTeacher]

Don't be too surprised, Bageldog. PETA is one of the most hypocritical organizations I've ever run across. The more people who understand how wrong PETA is, the better for the animals!

[Irish]

Like I said, I am not pro-peta, I just don't believe what that website had to say. I can't believe that PETA would have this huge organization that spouts animal rights - and then be secretly killing animals?? It doesn't make sense. I would also advise you not to go to a PETA website and believe everything you read there either. SOME things would be true, but a lot not true. Propaganda to make you believe their way. I'm not trying to ruffle any feathers here, just expressing my opinion. :)

[CreatureTeacher]

PETA does actually put quite a few animals to sleep. Their purchase records are on public record, where you can find industrial freezers and euthanizing agents. When they go out and firebomb a humane society's director's house, it doesn't occur to them that the fact is that there are way too many animals and not enough homes. They aren't an organization set up to adopt animals out. A shelter situation isn't really possible, and those animals have to go somewhere. Something like 75% of the animals in PETA's custody are euthanized. (I don't know the exact figure off the top of my head, but I can look it up if anyone needs to know.) They think they're doing the animals some great favor by "liberating" them, when everything they do just makes other animal rights groups look bad.

I'll give an example. Near our home in Wisconsin several years back, there was a story in the paper about PETA activists breaking into a mink farm at night and releasing all the minks into the wild. (They were destined to be fur coats.) Well, these were farm minks, and therefore had never seen "the wild", and had no idea what to do in it. The vast majority of them were killed on a nearby highway. The rest were picked up by other predators and probably made a pretty easy meal. Now what kind of moron doesn't think something like that through?

There are other problems with PETA, such as their advocation of violent crime in the pursuit of their goal. The director of PETA was quoted calling one of her seasoned arsonists a "fine young man". This kid had been convicted of arson and assault several times. When he wasn't in jail, he was holding seminars on how to make small bombs, break into buildings, and set fires. (Apparently he didn't know how to set fires well, since he kept getting caught.) If it was up to this organization, there would be no animal research or even pets. No dogs for any of us if they had their way. They're strongly opposed to medical research on animals, but several of the "higher-ups" in the organization have long-term medical conditions that they treat daily with medicines that came from animal testing. One even has had an organ transplant, which was first performed successfully on a chimp.

You guys all know how nuts I am about animal rights. But there are ways to do things intelligently and ways to do things that make you look like an idiot. PETA practices the latter. Breaking into buildings and burning down the homes of humane society employees accomplishes very little in the grand scheme of the animal rights movement. What it does do is make the entire animal rights community look crazy. There are a TON of other organizations that are actually working hard in and with the system to win more and more protection for animals. PETA's not one of them.

[blue]

Thank you Emma, well put.

[CreatureTeacher]

Why thanks, Blue. :) I tend to be most articulate when I'm pissed off. ;)

[blue]

No you are most articulate when being passionate.

[CreatureTeacher]

Hmmm...then I'm "passionate" a LOT. :D

[blue]

Im to tired to look but I think I hav eseen a pissed off post from you on a thread I started.

[CreatureTeacher]

I was probably much more pissed off at the situation than I was at you, Blue. I quite like you. I just tend to be touchy about some things.

[Sheba]

Now I think IAMS is much better!

[CreatureTeacher]

Why would you think that, Sheba? IAMS is still just as awful.

[Renee750il]

Just because one is awful doesn't mean the other is any good! Faulty logic . . . PETA is now run by some very strange fanatics. Iams/Eukanuba is run by people who are only concerned about making the most money possible with the least amount of expense. One is just as bad as the other, and it's every bit as hypocritical for a company that claims to be manufacturing healthy pet products to be indulging in the types of invasive testing and cavalier treatment of animals as PETA's positions. Not to defend PETA's idiocies, but at least PETA has the bad excuse of being completely irrational. Iams doesn't even have that bad excuse.

[Saje]

So Renee, I want to know YOUR opinion as a researcher of the research done by PETA. Do you think it's at all valid? I'm pretty sure that I read some other research about it but PETA is the big one. :confused:

[Renee750il]

The info has been hinted at for a long time, PETA's just the group who stuck their neck out. Not many others have bothered to speak up - why should they, PETA's taking the flack. Humane societies and other advocate groups receive donations from Iams/Eukanuba and other pet food manufacturers. Think of it as old fashioned hush money. Eukanuba sponsors quite a few dog sporting events and dog shows. Most groups are too smart to bite the hand that feeds them. I kind of get a kick out of listening to the dog owners and trainers talking about nutrition at those things. They all very carefully do NOT say that they feed their dogs the sponsor's products!

If you look at it using common sense, Iams and Eukanuba aren't the biggest producers out there. If PETA were going to manufacture evidence, why go after one of the smaller fish when there are several other, larger ones? Their pattern has always been to single out the most egregious, dramatic example they can and use it to shake everyone's cage.

PETA has been taken over by the fanatics, but once upon a time they did do a good job of bringing things to the attention of the public. Like too many groups, though, they just got totally subsumed by the crazies in their midst.

[Saje]

Yeah. I have no doubts that they do it. And I'm sure that any company that isn't willing to say that they don't do invasive testing probably does things that we don't even want to know about.

[blue]

We must be thinking of different orginisasions. Im thinking of People for the Eating of Tasty Animals.

[Renee750il]

Blue, you're incorrigible . . . :p

[gaddylovesdogs]

PETA isn't all good, but in some ways they are. Proctor and Gamble (which makes IAMS and Eukanuba) is still a disgusting company.

[poeluvr]

Don't be too surprised, Bageldog. PETA is one of the most hypocritical organizations I've ever run across. The more people who understand how wrong PETA is, the better for the animals!
but on the other hand to most people this is surprising. Peta shows commercials where they help rescue slave bears. they have charlize theron, pam anderson, robin williams, you would have thought all these celebs would know, they do truly care about animals. I must say this is a shock to me, so much that i dont know if i beleive what they are doing. wouldnt there be more coverage? wouldnt more people know? PETA must have done something right to become one of the most accredited organizations (them and wwf)

[Renee750il]

Once upon a time, PETA made some great differences. Unfortunately, the fanatics have taken over and it bears little resemblance to what it once was.

[CreatureTeacher]

By all means, Lea, support the WWF! They do actually attempt to make a difference. The NRDC is also an excellent organization. (www.nrdc.org or www.biogems.org).

[poeluvr]

oh yea creature teacher i do support them..:)

[yuckaduck]

I thought that PETA did some good but they take there ideas way too far. They are not all good for sure. Like the tractor trailer that flipped on icy roads killing 25 pigs and leaving others dying. PETA wanted to destroy them but were refused, they don't tell you that a licensed vet was following the truck before the accident and stopped and was himself humanely destroying those that were suffering and saving the ones he could. They don't tell the whole truth and I would never give them a red cent because the money does not go to the animals. Better to donate to humane society or legitament organizations. However I did see the Iams video and as a result would never ever feed an Iams product even if it was the last thing on the earth. However honestly do the other dog food companies do it but just were never caught. Hard to say. But it sure is disturbing to see someone claim to be in for the animals and then they don't do as they say. How many PETA workers, eat meat, go to zoo's or circus'. Also please keep the zoo animals locked up I don't want a lion or tiger in my back yard eating my kids. They are just down the road. Scary, hard to know what to believe. Too bad! :rolleyes:

[poeluvr]

wow thats horrifiing,, I have seen how they load pigs they want to bring to slaughter houses completly disgusting!

[yuckaduck]

Agreed!

[MicFoster]

So can someone show me actual legimate information that P&G's process's are somehow not in the best interest of the animals. I have no correlation to P&G, but have been to the Iams/Euk headquarters in Dayton, and live across the street from the HRHC, and have yet to see any credible evidence that any wrong doing is occuring.

[Renee750il]

At least, as long as I am dealing with NaturaPet, I can be reasonably sure I'm not contributing to the profits of any company that might be using invasive and cruel testing procedures . . . and I know I'm getting an excellent product for my animals and good value for my money - something I know is not happening with P&G/Iams/Eukanuba.

[MicFoster]

How do you "know"?

[yuckaduck]

Personnally the video from IAMS was enough to make me say no way. Do the others do it? Probably. Can I prove it? No. I guess we all have to make our own decisions and as long as we as individuals are happy that is all that counts. I find it hard to watch the videos and get extremely emotional, then my brain goes to mush and I get very stubborn. Like no way am I ever feeding that. Each to their own and as long as the dogs are happy and you are happy, then I'm happy. I don't preach and I don't critiasize. I can't spell either but hey we all have our faults. :)

[MicFoster]

Are these videos online anywhere...I can't say that I have ever seen them?

[yuckaduck]

Go to Peta Videos
www.petatv.com
Iams cruelty is there as well as too many others to mention.
Good way to make up your own mind though.
Happy Trails. :)

[MicFoster]

Thanks for the link...I appreciate the opportunity to see what everyone is talking about. What leads everyone to beleive that what was shown in that video has any relation to iams/euk or P&G? I'm not trying to start and argument. Maybe I am missing something. I also find PETA to be a relatively questionable source (they don't exactly have an impressive track record). Is there any other info available that leads to the same conclusion.

[yuckaduck]

You are not being argumentative. It is good to ask questions and to question some thing. I have no other information but I believe what you see should be taken with a grain of salt. Maybe PETA does go, maybe they don't. The only way to know for yourself is to research it and make up your own mind. I'm not saying they are lying or decieving the public but I do believe that things are not always as they seem. Good Luck wish I could help further but that is the extent of my knowledge on this. :)

[Saje]

Thanks for the link...I appreciate the opportunity to see what everyone is talking about. What leads everyone to beleive that what was shown in that video has any relation to iams/euk or P&G? I'm not trying to start and argument. Maybe I am missing something. I also find PETA to be a relatively questionable source (they don't exactly have an impressive track record). Is there any other info available that leads to the same conclusion.

Those are good questions. I don't really have an answer but in my mind I feel comfortable with companies like Natura who are very open about the tests that they do and how their animals are treated. They respond very quickly to questions and seem to be very open about everything. Proctor and Gamble test their products on animals. That's just a fact. So why wouldn't they do invasive testing for their pet food? If they aren't open about it what are they hiding? I don't assume that just Iams does this. I assume that every company that doesn't openly say they don't, do. Why else wouldn't they say that? It's good marketing.

Did that make sense?

[yuckaduck]

Agreed! :)

[MicFoster]

You asked "So why wouldn't they do invasive testing for their pet food?"

Could it be that the people who work for iams/euk care about animals. I think it is very easy to start rumors that quickly become "fact". I have yet to see a single bit of hard evidence that even alludes to these accusations. I don't personally feed iams (to low in protein), but I think it is ashame to see people making their mind up on a few baseless rumors.

It is important to find out what effects different ingredients have on pets. Isn't it better to find out the effects on a few lab animals than to produce and distribute large quantities of product that could be potentially harmful to our pets.

At some point every ingredient used in pet food has been animal tested. The companies that don't currently test on animals have that luxury because of the tests that have been run previously.

[Saje]

No where on there website does it say that they do not do invasive testing. Why not? Other companies have that information on their site

http://www.eaglepack.com/pages/about.html
We Make Our Own Food In Our Own Plants
Eagle Pack Pet Foods, Inc. takes pride in the manufacturing of our food. Employees are personally involved with pets. Most days there are several pets in the office. Our people show, field trial and breed. We support area humane and no-kill facilities. We do not do any testing on laboratory or caged animals, nor do we have a kennel facility. Food related palatability trials are done with breeders or as in-home trials.

Or readily available like Natura. I have all of their info on animal testing if you are intersted. They rescue dogs and cats - sometimes from other labs - and rehabilitate them. They don't do any invasive testing. Meaning they only check for things like palatibility and stools.

this is what Iams says

http://www.iamstruth.com/iamstruth/en_US/jhtmls/article/IT_Article_Page.jhtml?li=en_US&pti=RP&articleID=2
We do not fund studies that require the loss of life of cats or dogs. We only conduct dog and cat studies that are the veterinary equivalent of nutritional or medical studies acceptable on people, including: urine, feces, blood and immune cell analysis, allergy tests, and skin and muscle biopsies.

We conduct studies with chickens and rodents consistent with Procter & Gamble's policy and practices.


Now where can I find Procter & Gamble's policies? And why do they do they do testing that other companies don't find necessary?

[blue]

You asked "So why wouldn't they do invasive testing for their pet food?"
Who asked this? I may have missed something. And why would somebody want to do invasive testing on their pet?



Could it be that the people who work for iams/euk care about animals. I think it is very easy to start rumors that quickly become "fact". I have yet to see a single bit of hard evidence that even alludes to these accusations. I don't personally feed iams (to low in protein), but I think it is ashame to see people making their mind up on a few baseless rumors.
What do you feed? I may not like PETA and do not support them but can you counter PETA's video about Iams/Euk? If you have something to make PETA look even worse than they do POST IT!! Or if you have something more shocking and make Iams look good make a new thread and POST IT!

It is important to find out what effects different ingredients have on pets. Isn't it better to find out the effects on a few lab animals than to produce and distribute large quantities of product that could be potentially harmful to our pets.

At some point every ingredient used in pet food has been animal tested. The companies that don't currently test on animals have that luxury because of the tests that have been run previously.

Every ingredient in food has been human tested as well, your point is what? I dont see feeding an animal human grade food the same as feeding an animal bone meal or any type of meal.

There are some weeks where money is tight where my dog is not alone in eating better than his/her owner.

[yuckaduck]

I don't know who does what because I don't work there, however when the Iams cruelty video became public I would have thought if it were not true and a flase rumor, Iams would have launched a massive law suit. I just can't image a company sitting by ideally after such a thing has been said and told to be a fact. If it is false then Iams would certainly get and exhaurberant amount of cash in a settlement and the video would disappear. I guess based on PETA's track record you can choose to believe or disbelieve anything, as with anything else. As long as you can sleep at night that really is all that matters. :)

[Renee750il]

How do you "know"?

Just reading a label on P&G/Iams/Eukanuba/Science Diet products tells the story on quality :rolleyes:

[yuckaduck]

And I use to think they were the best money could buy. She what you have taught me. Big lessons here. Thanks. :o

[German_ShepherdLover]

I Hate Peta!!!!

[yuckaduck]

They sure are not all that they claim to be.

[Buckshot]

Quote from germanshepardlover/I hate PETA/endquote

PETA hates me.