just wondering if anyone has anything to say about the whole IAMS dog food- animal cruelty deal.

i'm not sure if i'm just asking a question that's been answered a thousand times but i'm hoping to get some new insight and maybe learn some new facts.

i'm bringing all of this up because i just learned of a rumor that IAMS is planning, this year, on expanding the labs that hold these experiments by making it twice as large- holding twice as many animals- torturing that many more.

if anyone has any info, please tell, i'm more interested in knowing if it's true.

My opinion on Iams is that it went from being a good-quality dog food to a poor-quality dog food after their company merged with Proctor & Gamble and started selling their foods in grocery stores. I think focus shifted from producing the best quality of food for dogs, to producing the cheapest acceptable quality food that they could still market falsely as high quality.



So, that's my opinion. I think pet owners should be buying their pets better quality food. As for the boycot, I think it's pointless--animal rights believers are already boycotting P&G products, and animal welfare believers wouldn't be feeding their pets inferior products. I don't think either side is presenting the whole truth on their websites -- www.iamscruelty.com and www.iamstruth.com -- but that the reality lies somewhere in between. But again, it doesn't matter as it's not a brand I support for other reasons.

Even though some of the worst abuses occured under a researcher no longer with Iams, it still isn't reason to rally behind Iams (as a few old-guard dog and cat groups have--apparently sponsorship dollars speak louder than animal-concerned constituents).

Iams seems to have a track record of promising to phase out invasive research, and then greenlighting yet another potentially invasive/harmful test. Like other product lines involved in animal testing, I see no reason to buy Iams when other products that do not perform invasive tests are available.

agree--even though changes were supposedly made...i wouldnt buy the products when other animal friendly choices are available...



peace and love



jenn

Last year, when I was buying cat food at a supermarket I saw a couple about to pick up Iams cat food, so I told them about the company and how they vivsect on dogs and cats. They were horrified and asked how I knew. I told them I was AR supporter and we have leaflets and tell as many folks as we can to avoid it. They said they would tell as many folks as possible about it. They put it back on the shelf and I steered them to a better product.



I also have stickers that I put on vivisect companies products when I shop.

What better product did you recommend that they buy at a supermarket? In all the supermarkets around here, Iams is actually the least cruel and best quality food available to choose from. But that's not saying much. Pet food is one thing you should never buy at a supermarket (at least around here), but it does show a fatal flaw in the boycott. It causes some people to buy products that are worse for their dogs and worse for the animals in labs.



Some people have the misguided assumption that because PETA is only targetting Iams right now, that they are the only bad company out there, but I can guarantee that once the Iams campaign is over they'll move on to Pedigree and Kibbles N Bits and Alpo and all the other store brands.

I find it esp. disturbing that Eukenuba sponsors the big dog show (IAMS and Eukenuba are owned by the same company I think).



I feed my kitties science diet. I have never bought an IAMS or Eukenuba product for exactly this reason.

What is disturbing about the big dog show? I like dog shows, and plan to enroll my mix breed dog in UKC trials this spring.



But yes, Eukanuba is owned by Iams. You may however be interested to know that Science Diet is owned by Colgate and performs the same Met tests as P&G.



http://www.buav.org/campaigns/petfood/facts.html

I don't like dog shows either. I agree with PETA:



"they promote dogs based on appearance, and many of the desirable physical traits can cause a variety of health problems in many breeds. In addition, many breed standards call for tail-docking and ear-cropping, which are unnecessary and cruel. Dog shows also promote purebred dogs (and therefore breeding), rather then rescuing homeless mixed breeds from shelters. "

any company which kills some animals to feed other animals poisons

is a blood soaked company



Start mixing rice, peas etc. in food for feral cats

Breeding purebred pets into an overpopulated world is troubling, but I think an even more troubling aspect with Iams is their choice to hold allegience to a minority of irate hunters rather than the humane community.

Iams used to sponsor a pet adoptathon-type event with the Humane Society. The US Sportsmen, a rather extreme hunting organization, threw a fit that Iams, which also sponsors hunting dog trials, would dare team up with an animal protection group. Iams chose to bow to the hunters' wishes over sponsoring a humane event.

Peace, animal rights activists threw a fit and started a letter writing campaign when the Humane Society took Iams as a sponsor. The Humane Society dropped them as a sponsor because of outcry from the animal rights community. We complain when the Humane Society accepts money from Iams, they stopped and so now we complain that Iams stopped giving money to the Humane Society. This whole Iams boycott just reeks of hypocrisy.

Who's we? Everyone who boycotts Iams? Because if so, I don't like to be told what I think/"complain about" just because I'm part of the boycott. Some people might do/think what you say they do, but not all of us.



I don't see what I think about Iams to be hypocritical

Yes, I am aware of the outcry from PETA, specifically, when the Humane Society and IAMS cosponsored the event. However, the Humane Society's response to PETA's complaints was to defend their cosponsorship. I looked for this position statement on their website, but it has since been removed.



According to PETA's Iams Cruelty website, the Iams and HSUS sponsorship only ended when the US Sportsmens' Alliance complained.

http://www.iamscruelty.com/iams-feat-hunters.asp



HSUS's current position on Iams is to oppose their invasive animal studies.

http://www.hsus.org/about_us/member_...l_testing.html



The ASPCA, an old-guard dog-and-cat welfare group, continues to support Iams. http://www.aspca.org/site/PageServer...iams_statement



It did not surprise me about Iams' targeting by the US Sportmen, because attacking companies that have ties with animal protection groups is part of this group's policies. Past targets have included Red Roof Inn and PetSmart.

I do agree that that PETA's relentless campaigning against Iams while other corporations continue to conduct similar or worse experiments does have the strong potential to backfire.