Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

Iams Cruelty

xFire Angelx
March 9th, 2006, 12:10 AM
wow ok well im not quite sure if this is in here anywhere but i just came across this link in a virtual community i am in its very graphic but also very very sad
watch this only if you have thick skin because it is heart wrenching... i could only watch a small fraction of it before i got so disgusted i had to close it
http://www.petatv.com/tvpopup/Prefs.asp?video=iams

Prin
March 9th, 2006, 12:53 AM
I haven't seen that one before. I watched the whole thing. Normally, I'm pretty sensitive to stuff like this, but I didn't find it bad at all. The dogs on the floor were fat, and? They had obviously been sedated- they just had surgery. They show a dog under anaethetic, belly up on the table with the gas "muzzle" on. So? How do you think the gas gets administered?

The way the vet carries the dog is a bit weird, but he doesn't go far.

And then of course, they show them waking up from the sedative. Dogs react very bizarre to the anaesthetic. They do stop breathing once in a while when they're on it. It's very scary to see, but it happens. And you have to get them breathing again. They also wake up with hallucinations, etc, which is why you aren't usually allowed to go get your dog after anaesthetic until a while after it has worn off.

And ok, one died. Out of the hundreds of dogs there, what are the odds that one has serious adverse effects to the surgery? Pretty high.

Dogs in cages? Sad, but that's a lab. She shows their feet on the bars-well, you have a choice: either have bars, or have paws burned from the acidity of the pee. The dogs looked clean and had a water supply. Pretty good for a lab, I'd say.

What bugs me most about this video is that this woman worked there for 9 months and not one dog is excited to see her. It goes to show that she is not an animal person. SHE has not taken care of these dogs. That was her job.

Don't get me wrong- I HATE Iams. They DO perform horrible tests on animals. But this peta person, and all the peta propaganda about this issue doesn't show anything other than PETA sent a woman there to take care of animals and she didn't. She did NOT do her job for the animals. It doesn't prove their point. All you have to do is find an article published by IAMS and you'll read in the "methods" section what they did to the animals. That's animal cruelty.

coppperbelle
March 9th, 2006, 11:47 AM
I am not a huge fan of Iams food although I did feed it for many years to my dogs.
These videos by PETA on the other hand really bother me. They are one sided and for some reason they have singled out the Iams company...again. Other companies that are just as guilty are sitting back laughing because they have paid Iams to do the testing for them keeping their names clean.

Prin
March 9th, 2006, 11:53 AM
It's also a context issue. I'm sure if you worked in a vet office for 9 months, you could make a montage of short clips and make a video much more distressing than this one. Scary stuff happens at vet offices- even the good ones.

LianneCatherine
March 9th, 2006, 02:28 PM
I agree with Prin. Labs are labs. Animal testing goes on every day in millions of labs across America (and the world I am sure). While as a website dedicated to our furry friends, we are quick to react to something like this - you have to realize that if we didn't perform animal testing, we would probably all be dead from "primitive" illnesses that we now have vaccines for.

And about the PETA "Spy," I doubt his/her job was to take care of the animals. Her job most likely was to investigate the lab and its procedures according to cruelty standards. That means, documenting, recording, taking pictures, etc. I don't think she would have fit in if she just sat there and played with the dogs.

The only way to feed your pet without using a brand that has been tested on animals is to make it yourself. There are many recipes online, I wish you luck!

technodoll
March 9th, 2006, 03:04 PM
my stand is: just because it goes on doesn't mean we have to turn a blind eye and shirk away from exposing the underbelly of the beast (pardon the pun). so what if PETA or any other organisation wants to put these monsters in the spotlight and reveal the horrible vivisection and animal torture they are perpetuating? i applaud them!! it has to end and somebody has to do it!! :mad:

it is NOT necessary to keep & exploit animals in labs in order to produce a pet food. it is quite absurd actually, after all these years of ripping animals apart and sumbitting them to cruel experiments, that this practice is still going on because [B]it is archaic![B] there are other methods to test pet food, adopted my innumerable pet food companies, that are humane and scientifically valid.

No matter who did this investigation, when i read horrors such as the below, it just blows my mind. And note that PETA was not hauled to court for slander - guess there must be some truth to the investigation after all.


Iams dogs dumped on cold concrete flooring after having huge chunks of muscle cut out of their thighs
dogs and cats gone stir-crazy from confinement; dogs and cats in windowless, dungeon-like buildings
a coworker who instructed her to hit the dogs on the chest if they quit breathing; another coworker who talked about an Iams dog found dead in his cage, bleeding from his mouth
a dog who limped in pain from Lyme disease
cruel studies done by Iams involving sticking tubes down dogs’ throats to force them to ingest vegetable oil
Iams dogs with such severe tartar buildup on their teeth that it was painful for them to eat
vet technicians with inadequate training and experience performing invasive procedures
coworkers who talked about a live kitten who was washed down a drain
coworkers who talked about how they had to go home because the ammonia fumes in the animal trailers were so overpowering that it made their eyes burn (try being one of the animals in those cages!)
cats kept in a cinderblock room with crude wooden “resting” boards that had nails sticking out of them; one of the boards fell on a cat, crushing her to death, while our investigator was there yet the lab director did not remove the boards when the cat was crushed—he removed them when he was told that the lab was going to be inspected because he knew they were illegal

technodoll
March 9th, 2006, 03:12 PM
more disgusting info on what went on behind the doors at Iams (from http://www.uncaged.co.uk/iamsexpress.htm). I can only hope the vivisection has stopped but... chances are it's status quo... :sad:

Details of the experiments are buried in obscure scientific papers uncovered by the Sunday Express and Uncaged Campaigns.

In one experiment, 24 young dogs had their right kidneys removed and the left partly damaged to investigate how protein affects dogs with kidney failure. Eight dogs were killed to analyse the kidney tissue. Dogs which became sick were not treated because it would have undermined the test results.

In another test, the stomachs of 28 cats were exposed so scientists could analyse the effects of feeding them fibre. The animals were operated on for at least two hours and then killed.

The research team sterilised 24 female cats, which were then over-fed until they became obese. They were then starved on a crash diet and when they had lost at least 30 per cent of their weight their livers were examined to investigate the link between weight loss and liver disease. The company also sponsored research in which 14 husky puppies were repeatedly injected with live virus vaccines and allergy-causing proteins for the first 12 weeks of their lives. They developed permanent illnesses in the test, which was designed to see how severely allergic they could become.

Twelve huskies, 12 poodles and 12 labradors were regularly given chest wounds to see if diet could affect fur regrowth. This was justified in the study on the grounds that "dogs are enjoyable to touch and look at... Dogs with coat problems are simply not handled as much."

Dr Dan Cary, Director of technical communications for IAMS said that his company cared about the welfare of animals. He justified the scientific studies as being carried out to save pets from illnesses and improve physical well-being. He said: "Our mission is to enhance the health of dogs and cats. We take their welfare extremely seriously during the studies and don't enter into research lightly. All our studies have to be valid science and we have to be sure they are never repeated as it is wasteful of animal time."

smells like BS to me! :thumbs up

technodoll
March 9th, 2006, 03:24 PM
last post on this... from http://www.bordercollierescue.org/the_dark_side/Content/Iams%20Tests.html.... documentation that these "tests" actually happened, should anyone doubt how Evil Iams is... and Hills...and Purina... they all do it: :sick:

This is a summary of 24 of Iams' reported animal experiments:

1. - 28 CATS' BELLIES WERE CUT TO SEE THE EFFECT OF FEEDING THEM FIBRE, THEN THE CATS WERE KILLED. Bueno AR et al. Nutrition Research, Vol 20. No.9, pp. 1319-1328, 2000.)
2. - 24 YOUNG DOGS WERE INTENTIONALLY PUT INTO KIDNEY FAILURE; SUBJECTED TO INVASIVE EXPERIMENTATION, THEN KILLED. - University of Georgia and The Iams Company. (White, JV, et al. Am J Vet Res 1991; Vol 52: No 8, pp 1357 - 1365)
3. - 31 DOGS' KIDNEYS WERE REMOVED TO INCREASE THE RISK OF KIDNEY DISEASE, THEN THEY WERE KILLED AND DISSECTED. - University of Georgia and The Iams Company. (Finco, DR, et al. Am J Vet Res 1994; Vol 55: No 9, pp 1282-1290)
4. - BONES IN 18 DOGS' FRONT AND BACK LEGS WERE CUT OUT AND STRESSED UNTIL THEY BROKE. - University of Wisconsin and the Iams Company.) (Crenshaw TD. et al. Proceeding of 1998 IAMS Nutrition Symposium.)
5. - 10 DOGS WERE KILLED TO STUDY THE EFFECT OF FIBER IN DIETS. - Mississippi State University and The Iams Company. (Buddington, RK, et al. Am J Vet Res 1999; Vol 60: No 3, pp 354-358)
6. - 18 MALE PUPPIES' KIDNEYS WERE CHEMICALLY DAMAGED; EXPERIMENTAL DIETS WERE FED; TUBES WERE INSERTED IN THEIR PENISES, THEN THE PUPPIES WERE KILLED. -
Colorado State University and The Iams Company. (Grauer, GF, et al. Am J Vet
Res 1996; Vol 57: No 6, pp 948-956)
7. - 8 DOGS' KIDNEYS WERE REMOVED TO STUDY THE EFFECT OF PROTEIN ON RECOVERY FROM KIDNEY REMOVAL. - University of Georgia and The Iams Company. (Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine, American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine)
8. - 28 CATS WERE SURGICALLY FORCED INTO KIDNEY FAILURE AND EITHER DIED DURING THE EXPERIMENT OR WERE KILLED TO STUDY THE EFFECTS OF PROTEIN. - University of Georgia and The Iams Company. (Proceedings of the 1998 Iams Nutrition Symposium)
9. - 15 DOGS' BELLIES WERE CUT OPEN; TUBES WERE ATTACHED TO THEIR INTESTINES, THE CONTENTS OF WHICH WERE PUMPED OUT EVERY 10 MINUTES FOR TWO HOURS, THEN THE DOGS WERE KILLED. - University of Nebraska-Lincoln and The Iams Company.
(Hallman, JE, et al. Nutrition Research 1996; Vol 16: No 2, pp 303-313)
10. - 16 DOGS' BELLIES WERE CUT OPEN AND PARTS OF THEIR INTESTINES TAKEN. - University of Alberta and The Iams Company. (1998 Journal of the American Society of Nutritional Sciences)
11. - HEALTHY PUPPIES, CHICKS, AND RATS HAD BONE AND CARTILAGE REMOVED TO STUDY BONE AND JOINT DEVELOPMENT. - Purdue University and The Iams Company. (Proceedings of the 2000 Iams Nutrition Symposium)
12. - INVASIVE PROCEDURES WERE USED TO STUDY BACTERIA IN 16 DOGS'
INTESTINES. - Texas A&M University and The Iams Company. (Willard MD et al. Am J Vet Res, Vol 55, No. 5, May 1994.)
13. - 24 CATS HAD THEIR FEMALE ORGANS AND PARTS OF THEIR LIVERS REMOVED; WERE MADE OBESE, THEN WERE STARVED. - University of Kentucky and The Iams Company. (Ibrahim WH. et al. AJVR, Vol 61, No. 5, May 2000.)
14. - 56 DOGS HAD THEIR FEMALE ORGANS REMOVED TO STUDY BETA CAROTENE. - Washington State University and The Iams Company. (Weng, BC, et al. J.Anim.Sci.2000. 78:1284-1290)
15. - 16 DOGS' BELLIES WERE REPEATEDLY CUT TO TAKE PARTS OF THEIR
INTESTINES. - Texas A&M and The Iams Company. (Willard, MD, et al. JAVMA
1994. 8:1201-1206)
16. - 6 DOGS HAD TUBES IMPLANTED INTO THEIR INTESTINES AND FLUID DRAINED REPEATEDLY TO STUDY CEREAL FLOURS. - University of Illinois and The Iams Company. (Murray, SM, et al. J.Anim.Sci.1999. 77:2180-2186)
17. - 30 DOGS WERE WOUNDED AND PATCHES OF SKIN CONTAINING THE WOUNDS REMOVED TO STUDY WOUND-HEALING. - Auburn University and The Iams Company. (Mooney, MA, et al. Am J Vet Res 1998; Vol 59: No 7, pp 859-863)
18. - 5 DOGS' BELLIES WERE CUT OPEN AND TUBES WERE INSERTED FROM THEIR INTESTINES TO THE OUTSIDE OF THEIR BODIES TO STUDY THE EFFECTS OF FIBER. - University of Illinois and The Iams Company. (Muir, HE, et al. J.Anim.Sci.1996. 74:1641-1648)
19. - PARTS OF 28 DOGS' LARGE INTESTINES WERE REMOVED TO STUDY THE EFFECTS OF FIBER. - University of Missouri and The Iams Company. (Howard, MD, et al. J.Anim.Sci. 1997. 75(Suppl. 1); 136.)
20. - PARTS OF 16 DOGS' INTESTINES AND IMMUNE SYSTEM WERE CUT OUT TO STUDY THE EFFECTS OF FIBER. - University of Alberta and The Iams Company. (Proceedings of the 1998 Iams Nutrition Symposium)
21. - 5 DOGS HAD TISSUE FROM LARGE AND SMALL INTESTINES REMOVED TO STUDY INTESTINAL TRACT NEEDS. - University of Illinois and The Iams Company. (Proceedings of the 1998 Iams Nutrition Symposium)
22. - 8 HEALTHY DOGS HAD TUBES INSERTED THROUGH THEIR CHESTS TO STUDY FAT ABSORPTION. - The Ohio State University and The Iams Company. (Proceedings of 2000 Iams Nutrition Symposium)
23. - SECTIONS OF 36 DOGS' SKINS WERE CUT OUT TO STUDY EFFECTS OF DIET ON FUR. - Texas A&M and The Iams Company. (Proceedings of 2000 Iams Nutrition Symposium)
24. - 14 PUPPIES WERE INJECTED WITH SUBSTANCES THAT GAVE THEM LIFE-LONG ALLERGIES, MADE THEM SICK, AND GAVE THEM DIARRHOEA. - University of Calgary and The Iams Company. (Proceedings of 2000 Iams Nutrition Symposium

....anybody still wanna buy anything from this company? :sick:

CyberKitten
March 9th, 2006, 03:47 PM
This issue has been raised often here before and you are preaching to the converted. I do not like Peta but do not buy anything from Iams either. The sad truth is that Peta and that group in the UK picked Peta but with few exceptons, all the pet food in your grocery store has been produced by a company that does the same thing. I do not understand why anyone buysb pet food at any grocery store - which does not mean I dislike grocery chauns, I buy most of my other food there, lol I mean you need to buy good food for your pet at the proper outlets - pet food or feed places. Like Felidae, Wellness, Hills Science. I cannot in good concience as a rsearcher who knows what goes on in labs across the country read any of the stuff posted (I have read most of it elsehwere and before) and I stay away from Iams but I do not but the other junk either (except for the occasional sinful Fancy Feast, not the best nutriotnally but YY likes it so when I buy a Happy Meal, she gets Fancy Feast - we can both eat junk food at the same time tho that does not happen often in all hoinesty, lol

PETA does these sensational things when they themselves acknowledged they stole pet cats and killed them. Make sense to you?? They do not believe anyone shoulf have a companion animal. Nor does letting out monkees and other aninals from cages when you don't do anthing to help them, assuming they can care for themselves in the wild. These people do not help the cause of true animal rights acivists and lobbyists!! Sighhhhhhhhhhhhh!

technodoll
March 9th, 2006, 04:05 PM
agreed with you cyberkitten :) totally. those big companies... they all do it to some degree or other. i think if more people knew about it, they would see their sales $$ drop and change their practices... but perhaps i'm only dreaming. however... not because "it's done" that we have to tolerate it, right? silent boycott is available to all of us (not purchasing any of those products), at least we get that small satisfaction! :thumbs up

Prin
March 9th, 2006, 08:44 PM
That's what I was talking about technodoll. The studies themselves say more than any peta video with all their clever editing. To me the videos show nothing. P&G's own published research affects me more. It's horrible.

happycats
March 9th, 2006, 08:52 PM
That's what I was talking about technodoll. The studies themselves say more than any peta video with all their clever editing. To me the videos show nothing. P&G's own published research affects me more. It's horrible.

By P&G do you mean proctor and gamble??
If so, I for one will make sure I don't support them in any way, and from now on will never buy a P&G product again!!
I have to go now,:) to check all the labels in the house, to make sure I don't have any of their stuff!!

Prin
March 9th, 2006, 08:55 PM
Yep. Of all the big ugly ones, they're one of the worst. I was going to say "the" worst, but there are others too. I'm told of all the nasties, Johnson & Johnson is one of the least bad. So if you can't find an alternative for a particular product, J&J isn't as horrible.;)

jawert1
March 9th, 2006, 10:20 PM
Anyone remember when Burke Breathed did an entire Bloom County/Outland set of strips called Attack of the Mary Kay Commandos? It forced their hand and outed them in the 80's (of all times to have it happen) for animal testing, cruelty within labs, and essentially caused a policy change within the company for years. I disagree wholeheartedly with PETA, a bad thing done for the right reasons is still a bad thing, and that they routinely "adopt" animals at shelters, kill them and dump their bodies in out of the way dumpsters just makes me ill. My ire is also directed at large companies who do the same, and pet food makers that still believe horses are a great source of protein. Wow, sorry gang, rant over! :D

technodoll
March 9th, 2006, 10:33 PM
My ire is also directed at large companies who do the same, and pet food makers that still believe horses are a great source of protein

horses... heh... try cats and dogs and roadkill... cleverly labeled "meat and bone meal". :yuck:

LianneCatherine
March 10th, 2006, 11:05 AM
Singling out random animal testing facilities, while shocking and upsettling, will likely not bring on any kind of change for the reason that I mentioned in my previous post and that others have also commented on. YES it's horrible, YES it's extremely upsetting, YES we wish it didn't happen - but that is life. To say that everything Technodoll listed below isn't cruel would be untrue, but what about the countless other labs infecting animals with disease and leaving them to die slowly and painfully? All I am saying is that you'd be appauled at how many of these facilities exist. And on a rhetorial note, is it possible to have UN-cruel animal testing? So they give them happy windowed homes with lots of love and play time - they will still be subjected to testing and likely die in the end. There is suffering either way. :sad:

Prin
March 10th, 2006, 05:15 PM
There will always be animal testing, IMO, because people suck and put the value of a human life above any other. We can try to be more ethical in our treatments, like abolishing toxicology tests, and abolishing redundant tests... Like Iams' test that involved starving kitties to see if they could get them to eat again. Well, cat lover or cat rescue knows that there is a point of starvation in kitties where there is no turning back, no matter what the treatment. Why kill a bunch of kitties just to prove what we already know?

technodoll
March 10th, 2006, 07:42 PM
eggggg-zactly, prin. if a test has been conducted, documented, proven true etc... why continue over and over again? :mad:

Prin
March 10th, 2006, 10:10 PM
About the waking up on concrete though... In the video, they have a blanket under them. Or maybe that was an optical illusion. I know one set of vets that leaves the dogs to wake up on plain concrete too... And they actually let you go in and see them like that, because they don't think what they're doing is wrong in anyway.:(