Boycott IAMS and Proctor & Gamble!!!

Nacht · Queen of Darkness Gender: Joined: 25 Dec 2002

all of my information can be verified here:

http://www.iamscruelty.com/

timeline of events fighting iams:

http://www.iamscruelty.com/timeline.asp

iams/eukanuba have been bought by proctor and gamble (who have always tested on animals). please don't buy anything made by these people! cascade for example is made by proctor and gamble.

iams has been testing on animals for years! peta first started pleading with them to stop on 2000. they lied over and over again, telling peta that they stopped this or that test, when they were actually farming out to the work to universities like Purdue university, mississippi state university, university of mississippi medical center, and university of kentucky. they denied time and again that they had anypart in the tests outside of iams, so peta asked for their records. iams refused to give up the records, so peta sued them for witholding PUBLIC records. if they had nothing to hide, why not give up the records?

peta has gone undercover into their laboratories and got it all on video if you would like proof (go to link at top of page). they said they would stop most of the tests by october 2006, but how can we believe them? they have lied so many times before. and MOST isn't good enough!

just be safe and do not buy from them! tell everyone you know including your vet and local animal shelters.

thanks for reading and spread the word. together we can force a change!

Ming · DOOM! Gender: Joined: 13 Jan 2003

That is very sad indeed, and very unexpected from a company that is supposed to be about the well-being of animals. I do, however, have a couple of concerns with that website.

First, they give a list of animal products that are not tested on animals. While I think it is wrong to test human products on animals, where do you draw the line? I would assume that a lot of research and work goes into formulating special food for dogs and cats, so wouldn't it make sense that you would want to make sure that said animals actually like said food? I understand that taste tests/research on whether or not an animal's health improves as a result of food can be done sans cruelty, but knowing the way that PETA operates, I wouldn't put it past them to say that even humane testing/research is wrong. And to me, that is nothing but sheer ignorance. If (insert pet food company) develops a new kind of food, who's going to taste it? Pamela Anderson?

Second, they seem to be pushing vegan alternatives for your pet, and again, this is sheer ignorance. Animals (particularly dogs and cats) are designed to eat meat. Feeding your dog or cat a vegan diet is ludicrous, bad for the animal, and potentially cruel. Just because you don't believe in eating meat doesn't mean that you should force your beliefs on your pet, who has no say in the matter.

FawkesFyre · Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 4:26 pm Post subject:

I don't use Iams, so at least that's good. But I'm not a big fan of PETA either. They're kinda extreme. I've been signed up on their magazine for years...some odd stuff!

I agree with Ming in where do you draw the line. Animal testing should be done in the pet food industry. They are the ones who use the product. But the methods used could certainly be different. The dogs that they list on the site lead a sad life but they could always be in worse situations.

Doot · Posted: Fri Jan 26, 2007 5:09 pm Post subject:

PETA scares me just as much as some of the stuff they "expose". I don't use IAMs. I either use the local organic Red Bandana raw meat food they put out or Bil Jac for my hound.

Sometimes I think PETA will find a reason to boycott air for pets/animals.

Ming · DOOM! Gender: Joined: 13 Jan 2003

Buda · Maille smith extrodanair Gender: Joined: 30 Sep 2004

im sorry, but i have to say screw PeTA. The belive that having a pet is animal slavery so i dont realy give a crap about whatever they say.

PeTA has no business going into reaserch labs, and probably spliced togeather everything they saw that they could put a negitive spin on. I do belive that there are labs that ignore federal laws, but i also think that they number far into the minority. I belive all labs should be monitered by an orginization like the one that oversees animal testing in the UAB labs(The Animal Resources Program). most people are supprised by the sheer number of laws and regulations that must be followed when using animals in the lab, and the penalties are very harsh for breaking those regulations.

Graillik Tur · Renaissancetaku Gender: Joined: 09 Jul 2004

Here's the question.

Is it worth one animals life to save one human? Hundreds of humans? Thousands of humans?

If not is it worth 1 human's life to save another? Hundreds? Thousands?

These products and others, like medicines and vaccines need to be tested. And animals can't sue. You want to stop animal testing? Talk to your local congressman or woman about changing the federal health code so bum lawsuits against doctors become nil and said doctor's insurance stops being half of what he earns.

Licensed practioners and specialists, like my uncle, take home 1/4 of thier money after taxes and insurance. That is pathetic.

Al the DLOE · Posted: Sat Jan 27, 2007 2:26 am Post subject:

the only PETA i trust is People Eating Tasty Animals. i have documentary proof PETA has no ideas but emotion about animals and should be defunded and abandoned. the are just another on the /ignore list. Animal testing is a GOOD thing. imagine if i had to test new meds or procedures on humans only. imagine the media response to my body count. it is because of testing on rats we know that with a cartlige replacement placed under living flesh can be used to re grow an ear or a blood substitute works. it is from experementing on pigs welearned how replace organs and that we can use their flesh & organs as replacement for ours. i have more but my link resource is down so i cannot back up much more in my claims but i think the point has been made

Gryph · Pocket Convoy Gender: Joined: 26 Sep 2002

Yeah, sorry Nacht. Nothing personal, but the fact that PETA's involved really takes away any credibility of those claims. It's usually a good idea just to ignore them. They give you guys a bad name.

Nacht · Queen of Darkness Gender: Joined: 25 Dec 2002

so all of you think it is a necessary test to slice open dogs' gums to GIVE them gingivitis? to hack parts of dogs' legs off and leave them in piles by the wall? that is a necessary test that helps humans?
the dogs in these labs only have concrete cells to sleep in. no bed, no toys, no companionship. i bet none of the "scientists" perform any of these test on their animals.
testing may be necessary to create new drugs for humans, but to make DOGFOOD? here'san idea, how about putting GOOD ingredients in the food in the first place?
regardless of what peta has or has not done, was you are all missing is the part where they forced msu to give up their public records of all of the tests they were doing. with written documentation, how can you still say that peta "spliced tape together".
what i am here doing is informing people. we all need to make informed decisions to base our lives upon. do with it what you will, but at least know the truth. of course it isn't ADVERTISED that they are doing this; they want you to buy their product.
do we really need to test on animals to have dish detergent? to have toothpaste? don't support unecessary cruelty.