Iams

[talon]

Hello,

I was once a user of Iams ( Eukanuba ) until I found out they are extremely cruel to dogs and cats. For anyone that isin't aware you can have a look for yourself at

IamsCruelty.com The video with the beagles is extremely upsetting and brings tears to your eyes, however, seeing what they do is more informative than just reading.

There may be someone who reads this, who like me, was/is oblivious to the fact that companies like the one above, experiment on dogs/cats so that we can feed our dogs/cats a better quality of food. It seems senseless to me.

They no longer have my money to aid in their cruelty.

[Dog_Horse_Girl]

I've been telling ppl this for years, and still they don't believe me. I oppose ANY and ALL forms of experimentation on animals b/c they cannot possibly give informed consent...the only exception is to treat a specific animal (individual) with a specific treatment for a specific condition when every available (existing) treatment has failed and the experimental one *might* change the outcome for the animal in question.

Wholesale animal experimentation is WRONG in any guise.

[KitKat]

Talon...this info comes up every so often, Iams was pulled up on their animal testing and it was made public a long while ago. They have since revised their practises and 'behave' as such with regards to their testing etc.

[Dog_Horse_Girl]

Talon...this info comes up every so often, Iams was pulled up on their animal testing and it was made public a long while ago. They have since revised their practises and 'behave' as such with regards to their testing etc.

Oh, really? I don't think they're any different, they just hide it better these days.

[ShesaLikeableBiBear]

This is from a recent email which I received from Nutro's general manager, it relates specifically to the question you have just posed.

Note that you may find Nutro on a list of animal testers as some extreme

groups consider that "AAFCO" testing (batch feed testing food before public

release of a batch, and looking at blood, urine, stool) is unreasonable

testing. But Nutro is comfortable that doing nothing more than what your

veterinarian might do as a routine health check is something they can live

with. This debate has been raging for years. Please keep me informed. I am

pleased that Nutro is so far (touch wood) squeaky clean. Nutro has an

arrangement that its suppliers must not test either.

In its web site you will see the following message here and there: "Nutro supports the safe, ethical and humane treatment of all animals, including those used by our

suppliers who provide our ingredients."

[Cordelia]

The Animal Lib psycho's gave Iams hell and much of the footage you see on the peta website is bogus (ie: not from Iams research facilities) or very very old.

Iams also have a rehoming programme for their dogs after they are no longer needed.

What else are they meant to test DOG FOOD on???

[malinwar]

homeless people...that way no dogs are treated badly and homeless people get fed

[Dog_Horse_Girl]

There are more ethical ways of testing foods on dogs and cats. IMHO a laboratory is not a lifestyle choice for a companion animal...I'm sure we are all dog-lovers who wouldn't volunteer our own dogs or our rescue dogs for laboratory feeding trials. These dogs have minimal contact with humans and virtually no stimulation b/c they're kept caged for much of their lives. I liken this to battery hens and I also oppose the keeping of any animal in a cage that is not large enough to offer reasonable comfort levels to the animal in question.

[Cordelia]

There are more ethical ways of testing foods on dogs and cats.

What? Other than........ feeding it to them????

Ok.... so what are the other more ethical ways of trialling dog food??

IMHO a laboratory is not a lifestyle choice for a companion animal

Lifestyle choices???

These dogs have minimal contact with humans and virtually no stimulation b/c they're kept caged for much of their lives. I liken this to battery hens and I also oppose the keeping of any animal in a cage that is not large enough to offer reasonable comfort levels to the animal in question. 

Oh! yep... the videos you've seen.

Heres some info for you from the Iams website: (assuming you are getting your info from the Peta (etc) websites).

An animal rights organization is making misleading allegations about feeding studies performed for The Iams Company at an external facility that we left in early 2003. These allegations not only are old, but also are highly sensationalized and laced with untruths.

Here are the facts about Iams:

FACT: Posing as an animal lover, an activist "undercover investigator" was hired for an Iams-funded role in the contract facility. She had responsibility for the socialization and enrichment of the dogs participating in Iams' feeding studies, and was paid to develop and implement a program to ensure that these dogs were well cared for. Rather than focusing on her assignment she captured video not of the scenes of the socialization and enrichment activities she was being paid to develop and deliver, but of dogs and cats that were housed in the same facility but not a part of Iams studies.

FACT: Iams doesn't kill dogs or cats! It's against the animal studies policy that has been in place for years.

FACT: Iams does not authorize the debarking of any dogs.

FACT: Iams has an industry-leading global animal studies policy that ensures the care and welfare of every dog and cat participating in our feeding studies.

FACT: Iams is committed to the ultimate elimination of laboratory feeding studies as scientifically valid alternatives become available -and we are actively using, developing and seeking alternatives!

FACT: Iams takes full responsibility for the destiny of each and every dog and cat participating in our feeding studies, a program established as of July, 2003. Dogs and cats are adopted into loving homes after they stop working with Iams or they retire with Iams.

There are several other links on the page that refer to correspondance to PETA regarding their trials and studies.

Iams Page

[Rusky]

they just hide it better as Lillysmum said.

People here prefer to think it doesn't happen, that ok, read both sides then make up your own mind.

Uncaged

There is no reason to test the food on lab animals, why? can anyone tell me why they need to keep caged animals. These animals are not pets, they don't go home to a nice beddy, they live in a lab, why? for a ruddy dog food? disgraceful.

They SAY they don't kill them anymore, have a look at the research.

They ADMITTED they killed them prior to 2003, had a big come clean we will be good people now.

To me it doesn't matter, the past, the present or the future I will not use their products. I use every opportunity to advise people of the previous (admitted) findings and suggest that they research very carefully to be comfortable with the diet they feed their pets.

For those who are not anti vivisection ir really doesn't matter.

[Wiz's Mum]

As someone who has owned an ex "test pet" from Friskies I can tell you I have never owned a happier, healthier or well-adjusted dog.

Harvey was an 16yo Welsh Corgi when I picked him up from the Friskies Kennels. He was in fabulous condition, he had the best of kennels - a large indoor run all to himself (it was 2 or 3 m wide and 6m long, centrally heated and air-conditioned) with an equivalent area outside which was grassed and to which he had free access. There was also a large play area at the bottom of the grassed runs where multiple dogs could play under supervision. I also watched a kennelhand return one group of dogs and take the next lot out for their walk to the dam and back (about 5kms).

I was given a copy of Harvey's medical records and he had been seen regularly by qualified vetinarians, and he had the cleanest teeth I had ever seen.

At this facility they had corgis, beagles and cats. All of the animals are rehomed with families after their "career" is done.

Poor Harvey, you should have seen the shock on his face when he realised that his new insulated kennel was not centrally heated (and it was only March in Orange at that stage) Poor love really thought he was roughing it

Now I realise that not all facilities are the same, but I do want to know that my pet can eat pre-prepared food with no long term affects.

[Rusky]

Friskies is Purina

isn't your pet the lucky one, and I am very happy that he lives with you and is not still a lab animal

Nestlé Purina Petcare

Nine beagle dogs were kept in single isolation for 15 weeks, during which time their diets were changed every three weeks. The dogs suffered from diarrhoea in an experiment which has no relevance to improving the care of pet dogs. In addition to the inevitable distress of social isolation, frequently changing dogs' diets can also be stressful as they do not have the opportunity to establish a dietary routine.

(Published 2003: Conducted by Veterinary University of Vienna, Austria; Hanover University, Germany; Nestlé Purina PetCare R&D, Nestlé Research Centre, Lausanne, Switzerland)1

Forty-eight labrador retrievers were kept in a laboratory environment for fifteen years (unless death occurred sooner). The dogs had their food intake restricted for the first three years of the study, after which their diet was restricted still further until some animals were being fed just half the amount of food of their litter mates. Dogs were weighed weekly, x-rayed annually, had heart scans, ECGs and blood pressure taken. Once a year the dogs were starved overnight then injected with glucose, before blood samples were taken from their jugular vein five times in two hours. Body weight of feed-restricted dogs was on average 26% lower than the body weight of litter mates. Adult body weights for this group were as low as 22kg; the ideal body weight for Labrador retrievers is up to 34kg.

(Published 2002: Conducted by researchers from the Pet Nutrition Research Department, Nestle Purina PetCare Research, St. Louis, USA)2

Eighteen dogs (6 German Shepherds, 6 English Setters and 6 Miniature Schnauzers) were kept in single isolation for 12 weeks and fed either dry or canned dog food. Four dogs either became ill or refused to eat the food offered during the study.

(Published 2002: Conducted by Nestle Purina PetCare Company, St Louis, USA)3

[Cordelia]

Nestlé Purina Petcare

Nine beagle dogs were kept in single isolation for 15 weeks, during which time their diets were changed every three weeks. The dogs suffered from diarrhoea in an experiment which has no relevance to improving the care of pet dogs. In addition to the inevitable distress of social isolation, frequently changing dogs' diets can also be stressful as they do not have the opportunity to establish a dietary routine.

(Published 2003: Conducted by Veterinary University of Vienna, Austria; Hanover University, Germany; Nestlé Purina PetCare R&D, Nestlé Research Centre, Lausanne, Switzerland)1

Your point? Dogs coming out of the pound have the trots for a day or so while getting used to a new diet. 3wks is plenty of time to establish a dietry routine in typical cases (ie: where a diet is not establishing food based allergies etc).

Single isolation......... is that animal libbers terminology for "being in a kennel by themselves?? You know, like they do in boarding kennels every day! ;)

Forty-eight labrador retrievers were kept in a laboratory environment for fifteen years (unless death occurred sooner).

15yrs is a bloody good age for a Labrador even living in a pet home!!

Dogs were weighed weekly, x-rayed annually, had heart scans, ECGs and blood pressure taken.

You mean they did completely NON-INVASIVE veterinary procedures on those poor dogs??? ;)

Once a year the dogs were starved overnight then injected with glucose, before blood samples were taken from their jugular vein five times in two hours.

Once a year for a routine BLOOD SUGAR LEVEL TEST?? How barbaric!!

Taking blood from the jugular is the quickest and least stressful way to do it (from experience watching dogs fighting to get their leg out of the grip of the vet for blood tests ).

To get an accurate result it is essential they not be fed at least 12hrs prior to the test (same in humans).

Body weight of feed-restricted dogs was on average 26% lower than the body weight of litter mates. Adult body weights for this group were as low as 22kg; the ideal body weight for Labrador retrievers is up to 34kg.

34kg for a decent sized male Labrador that is edging towards chubbiness.

I also note that there is no explanation as to the reason for that particular test. Would you happen to know WHY that test was done? or don't they mention that on whatever site you got that from??

Eighteen dogs (6 German Shepherds, 6 English Setters and 6 Miniature Schnauzers) were kept in single isolation for 12 weeks and fed either dry or canned dog food. Four dogs either became ill or refused to eat the food offered during the study.

(Published 2002: Conducted by Nestle Purina PetCare Company, St Louis, USA)3

There's that single isolation again. read.. kennelled like any other kennelling facility that boards dogs.

Out of 18 dogs owned by DOLers currently living at home and fed either dry or canned food for 12wks I'll bet that at least 4 dogs refuse to eat whatever they are given or fall ill for some reason too.

C'mon Lily. What was the particular study trying to ascertain, WHY did the dogs refuse the food? Why did the 4 dogs become unwell and what was the diagnosis?

Are those quotes you listed from a the actual studies or were they picked out of the studies by the animal lib group and edited to conveniently shock the general public into believing that something more sinister was happening throughout the studies being done??

Note the wording they use..... it's all for shock or horror value to invoke a highly emotional response from people. They got you didn't they! ;)

Edited January 22, 2006 by Cordelia

[Tacoheki]

I agree with Cordy. How are they going to test a dog food other than by feeding it to them?

[Wiz's Mum]

Exactly!!

All I can say is that I have seen some of their facilities - have you Rusky?

And quite frankly if my dogs were as well treated when I place them in kennels on the odd occasion, as the dogs I saw were at the Friskies kennels I'd be well pleased!

[Rusky]

so you are saying you condone animal testing and vivisection on animals? including dogs? that these practices are ok by you? That all you have read is fine? That it is ok for dogs to be subjected to this kind of a life, a long life for the labs for the benefit of your dogs?

Well it actually isn't ok by me.

All I can say is that I have seen some of their facilities - have you Rusky?

yes I have

next question?

[Clyde]

Once a year the dogs were starved overnight then injected with glucose, before blood samples were taken from their jugular vein five times in two hours.

My dogs are 'starved' overnight - too funny I feed them dinner, then dont feed them til morning ;)

Taking blood is really not that stressful. Five times in one year...... that whole spiel is funny. Change the dramatic wording and it's empty.

[Dog_Horse_Girl]

I agree with Cordy. How are they going to test a dog food other than by feeding it to them?

I have no problem with feeding dog food to dogs per se. It's how the animals are kept that is the problem...do they live in a home environment with regular human interaction? Do they have the freedom of a large yard to run and exercise in? Do they live with a human family and participate in family activities?

Would you volunteer your own pet to complete a feeding study for, say, Iams?

Well, would you?

Come on, let's be realistic. A laboratory cage is NO place for a canine to live out its life. I happen to oppose animal testing b/c it is inherently cruel and for those who are convinced that the "new improved" regime is just fine and dandy, again, why don't you volunteer your own dogs for these experiments?

I and others object to the manner in which these "feeding trials" are conducted. Dogs are housed in small kennels with minimal human contact and minimal contact with other canines. Is it acceptable to have dogs confined to a small concrete kennel day in, day out, for many years? Is that humane? Would your dog enjoy living like that? If there is nothing wrong with these feeding trials, why not offer your rescues to these corporations? After all, it's a better life than being on death row in a pound, isn't it?

To compare this to boarding kennels is a stretch, to say the least. The average boarding kennel stay is two weeks...the average laboratory stay is probably a *bit* longer than that. The average boarding kennel has the dogs out at least twice-daily for exercise in a grassed yard (sometimes with other dogs too!). The average boarding kennel provides human contact throughout the day...including play time. The average laboratory does not. The average boarding kennel includes activities for the dogs...such as swimming, agility courses, or kongs to empty. The average laboratory does not.

The lab dog doesn't have an average dog's life. Most dogs would be better off dead, IMO, than in a laboratory "participating" in a feeding trial.

I am not pro-PETA. I am pro-animal welfare. There is a difference.

Please remember that no company would freely admit that they treat animals in less than humane ways b/c the resulting publicity would be a potential death knell to its business. But also please remember that just b/c a company once admitted to such horrors, it didn't have any other option but to admit to it. There was irrefutable evidence. To say you believe that this company no longer conducts its trials in such a manner is possibly a little naive...it's not as if the company would readily volunteer such information again, in the absence of firm/concrete evidence, would it? :rolleyes:

[Rusky]

well Dru, Cordelia, Wizs and others it is obviously acceptable to you that animals are kept like this the whole of their lives. It is not acceptable to me.

It is acceptable to you too that vivisection was admitted to 2003 then they moved the lab.

I don't think 2003 is such a long time ago, obviously you do.

I do not think there is any reason for any dog to be kept in a lab to test ruddy dog food. I do not support companies who use this practice.

I will speak up at every opportunity I do what I am able to. I was active when young, I am old now, but I still have a voice.

I am sad that you find it so funny that you have little men rolling around laughing, that you laugh at the lab animals makes me very sad.

Would you donate your dog to the lab? why is your dog different to any other dog?

[Cordelia]

Would you donate your dog to the lab? why is your dog different to any other dog?

Aside from the fact that I think this is a completely stupid question as I wouldn't 'donate' or sell my dogs to anyone at all, IF I was to decide that I had to rehome my dog and was approached by a Lab that needed dogs for a food trial, AND I could go and visit their facility AND find out exactly what the trial entailed.... then I MAY consider it. But I'm not considering giving any of my dogs away to anyone in a Lab or otherwise so it is a positively idiotic question in the first place. :rolleyes:

It is acceptable to you too that vivisection was admitted to 2003 then they moved the lab.

Coming from a medical background.... vivesection has its place when all regulations and COP's are adhered to.

And what does moving the Lab have to do with anything?? Is it now in a Batcave somewhere where noone in authority can find it in order to do SPCA checks and the like??

I do not think there is any reason for any dog to be kept in a lab to test ruddy dog food. I do not support companies who use this practice.

So you feed BARF then I assume.

I will speak up at every opportunity I do what I am able to. I was active when young, I am old now, but I still have a voice.

Everyone has a voice and the right to express their view.

I am sad that you find it so funny that you have little men rolling around laughing, that you laugh at the lab animals makes me very sad.

And I too am sad that you didn't notice that I was laughing at comments, NOT at the dogs in laboratories. But he's another little man rolling around just because he is amusing to watch...

And Lilly,

do they live in a home environment with regular human interaction? Do they have the freedom of a large yard to run and exercise in? Do they live with a human family and participate in family activities?

Ok, so anyone who lives in an apartment with NO yard, or lives on a block that is small ..... their dogs don't have a large yard to run around in now do they??

How many dogs live in the yard with less human interaction and don't participate in family activities??

Would you volunteer your own pet to complete a feeding study for, say, Iams? 

Well, would you? 

Stupid question and already answered it even though I found it mentally painful to do so.

Come on, let's be realistic. A laboratory cage is NO place for a canine to live out its life. I happen to oppose animal testing b/c it is inherently cruel and for those who are convinced that the "new improved" regime is just fine and dandy, again, why don't you volunteer your own dogs for these experiments?

I agree that living in a kennel is not an ideal situation for any dog. BUT..... there are ways to prevent certain behaviours etc with special programs being devised and implimented as diversional tactics.

Any company or university performing testing must comply with Codes of Practices for their facilities that are NOT just made up by them, they are standards of care and animal welfare that are devised by specific Animal Welfare committees ie: SPCA (and out here it is the Dept of Agriclture and the DPI) etc.

They are inspected regularly to ensure compliance with the codes and in this day and age, none of the huge companies would dare fail in those..... one thing PETA and the like have done well.

I and others object to the manner in which these "feeding trials" are conducted. Dogs are housed in small kennels with minimal human contact and minimal contact with other canines. Is it acceptable to have dogs confined to a small concrete kennel day in, day out, for many years? Is that humane? Would your dog enjoy living like that? If there is nothing wrong with these feeding trials, why not offer your rescues to these corporations? After all, it's a better life than being on death row in a pound, isn't it? 

Actually, if a dog is on death row in a pound...... there is no life. Well, not after a week or so anyway. Can't compare the 2 as one is certain death, the other.... high potential for a life AFTER the trial has finished. I know which I would prefer to have dogs in.... and it isn't sitting in a pound waiting to die.

To compare this to boarding kennels is a stretch, to say the least. The average boarding kennel stay is two weeks...the average laboratory stay is probably a *bit* longer than that. The average boarding kennel has the dogs out at least twice-daily for exercise in a grassed yard (sometimes with other dogs too!). The average boarding kennel provides human contact throughout the day...including play time. The average laboratory does not. The average boarding kennel includes activities for the dogs...such as swimming, agility courses, or kongs to empty. The average laboratory does not.

You talk about the average Laboratory....what about the average boarding kennel? They DON'T get the dogs out for exercise.

Apart from anything else... people pay for the privilage of having their dogs played with at many of the boarding kennels.

Again.... COP states that the dogs in Labs must have play time and mental stimulation of some descrition and they DO get quite a bit of human interaction. Just because it isn't done sitting on a lounge watchin tele doesn't mean it isn't done.

The lab dog doesn't have an average dog's life.

But it doesn't mean that they would be better off dead imo either. Each to their own.

Please remember that no company would freely admit that they treat animals in less than humane ways b/c the resulting publicity would be a potential death knell to its business. But also please remember that just b/c a company once admitted to such horrors, it didn't have any other option but to admit to it. There was irrefutable evidence. To say you believe that this company no longer conducts its trials in such a manner is possibly a little naive...it's not as if the company would readily volunteer such information again, in the absence of firm/concrete evidence, would it? 

The IAMS facility has employees who are members of PETA. They knew that at the time of employment too. Why would any company doing animal testing of any description, employ anyone who is known to have an affiliation with the largest, most aggressive (and most psycho) Animal Liberation movement in the world if they weren't being honest about their Animal Welfare Practices.

Common sense dictates sometimes.