Iams... not the demons we thought?

[Horsefeathers!]

WARNING~~~ POTENTIAL DEBATE MATERIAL.

Check out this thread on another board about Iams and PETA. I've heard all the horror stories about Iams as most everyone here probably has, but it never really meant a lot to me since I don't buy Iams products, anyway (just not crazy about the contents). About the PETA part of the thread... I'll have to admit that I'm vehemently anti-PETA, so I do tend to discredit anything they sensationalize until I see further CREDIBLE proof. I read this discussion with great interest (just because I'm nosy that way). I haven't researched it further, but I will. I'm very curious to dig a little deeper into this just to see what I come up with.

Anyway, see what you think. The threads on ebay are tricky and sometimes you have to scroll down and click on the option to view previous or following posts. The posts are all numbered, so that's how you can be sure you are viewing them all.
http://forums.ebay.com/db1/thread.jsp?forum=2&thread=2291302&modifed=20030823202645

[Guest Anonymous]

It looks to me as if IAMS APPEARS to have done everything they said they would do. Close their association with the lab and remove/rehome the animals. Whether they knew about the abuse beforehand we may never know. And I am COMPLETELY against PETA. You all know I am a diabetic.
In order to discover insulin, back in the 20's and 30's, they tested on both dogs and pigs, and found out that pig insulin was the closest there was
(at the time, they now use human DNA) to control the disease. And yes, some dogs and pigs died during testing. I cant thwart that or I would be dead today. I would never have made it past my ninth birthday.

My point is there are some diseases that require anima; testing to find the controls and the cure. Sad, but true. If PETA succeeds in stopping all animal testing, we may never find a cure for AIDS. West Nile virus will
get out of control, E-Bola will never be stopped. In fact, there are
still reported cases of Black Plaque (bubonic plaque) every year.
BP wiped out 3/4 of England in an extremely short period of time. It wasnt until we discovered antibiotics (thru animal testing) that any hope of
a cure was possible. And it has never been wiped out. It could come back again at any time, if we are not allowed the means to test to stop it.

[courtnek]

that was me :o

I wasnt logged in

[Guest Anonymous]

i don't like PETA either, but there are some things about this whole issue that just raise questions that IAMS has not bothered answering publicly so far, and i for one am not someone who chooses to look past those questions for convenience's sake.

sure, animal testing may be necessary for some medical products or procedures (be it for human or veterinary fields of medicine), but it is by no means necessary to do cruel and invasive testing for a DOG or CAT FOOD. i will not even go off on the other tangent about how many cruel animal tests are outdated and no longer required even for medical testing. procter and gamble is one of the megacorporations who don't give a flying rat's ass about that tho. you can find information on that in many non-peta affiliated places too, and even more if you speak more than one language. so no P&G products for me anymore, it's not like there aren't any alternatives and it gives me peace of mind. it's the year 2003 and i think people should be a little more concerned with what's going on on their planet, but i digress.

why should animals have to suffer and die for a FOOD product? ridiculous! i would say it's a given that good quality meat, grains, vegetables etc. that go into a food are not going to kill your pet. so what is this research about? "how can we put more cheap crap into our pet foods and spray it with grease so they will actually eat it and we can have a bigger profit margin"???

there are so many methods for research of pet products that do not require the use (use? how sick is that?) of laboratory animals. don't even get me started on how you can do any justified "research" on a pet food in laboratory conditions that are nowhere near what "real life" is for a pet. how significant can those "lab results" be? no exercise, no socialization, no exposure whatsoever to a normal environment with its positive and negative stimulants. personally i'd rather buy a product that has been tested by sled dogs, because if anyone needs to be in a condition to work and survive, they are the ones!

and ask yourselves, even IF animals have to be used for laboratory testing that does not have other, less cruel alternatives, can YOU support confinement without appropriate bedding or some toys, or any social contact? every time you educate someone on how they should treat their pet at home, what to do and what not to do and how it is cruel to leave a dog in a crate for more than x hours, i hope you think of the poor animals that are used for testing A PET FOOD and who do not know such a luxury even for a single day in their lives.

the next issue i find highly questionable is that these animals are not retired to loving homes of people who would like to adopt them, but are shipped to a commercial kennel somewhere to live out the rest of their lives in pretty much the same conditions they have suffered in all their lives. oddly enough, the doors of this "retirement kennel" were never opened to anyone to see for themselves how animals are treated there.

the bottom line is, no matter if PETA is exaggerating, or as some people claim, fabricating evidence - even if there is only some truth in there (and those cruel images had to come from somewhere, don't forget that), it's bad enough already. i am not a religious person by any means, but i do think that we have a responsibility towards all living creatures, and if i can make a difference by just taking a few little steps, as easy as spending my money on products of manufacturers that i trust instead of just traipsing through supermarkets and other stores, filling my cart with items and wasting not a single thought on what the effect might be that i am having on the world around me, i can rest a little easier and i can fill my pet's bowls without having to think "did some poor animals suffer for this?".

think about it.

[courtnek]

i will not even go off on the other tangent about how many cruel animal tests are outdated and no longer required even for medical testing.

and I agree with that WHOLEHEARTEDLY!!!

Animal testing done for STUPID trials should not be allowed. Repetitive tests, for which the results are already known (like hairspray in rabbits eyes) should be BANNED completely. But I am concerned about this, because there is REAL testing, against REAL diseases, which needs to
continue. The bastards that just want to continue their grants have given
the testing a bad name....and PETA has contributed to that.

I believe that all testing should be evaluated, for it;s potential use as a
REAL cure, or is it just grant money.....I AM AGAINST GRANT MONEY IN IT'S CURRENT FORM!!!

Do I sound pissed off enough about this? The bastards abusing
the system are ruining it for the people who REALLY CARE!! and
really want to find the cures for diseases!!!

[Horsefeathers!]

I don't know, "Guest." I haven't researched it at all yet, so I'm not ready to offer an opinion. Do you have any links to share that offer insight? Sure, I can research it, but I would like to read exactly what it is that makes you feel the way you do in addition to anything I might dig up.

[Luka-pop]

Okay, now I'm confused. All this is too deep for my wittle brain. So is IAMS still the bad guys? Or are they okay now?

[Malamum]

I used to feed Eukanumba but switched when I found somewhere I could get Innova from. This choice was made mainly because of the ingredients/quality of the two foods.

However, I don't like the thought of cruel or unnecessary testing on animals and was wondering if there is any info out there on what type of testing all the other companies do. Are IAM's the only ones doing this ... or are they only the ones that got caught?

[Guest Anonymous]

"horsefeathers", i have formed my opinion mainly from reading what is on the PETA website and then comparing it to the information posted on the IAMS website.
http://iams.com/en_US/jhtmls/iamsco/news/sw_in_News_page.jhtml;jsessionid=DFZVIN0ETVEMNQFIAJ2IYCQ?pti=IN&li=en_US&bc=C&ai=12
http://www.iams.com/en_US/jhtmls/iamsco/news/sw_in_News_page.jhtml?pti=IN&li=en_US&bc=C&ai=27
there is always this hint of secrecy and no full disclosure. my gut feeling is that it wouldn't be there if they didn't have anything to hide. i prefer to be treated as a conscientious consumer, not like a 5-year old that needs the big corporation to hold my hand and tell me what my opinion should be. that is one thing i am absolutely NOT comfortable with when it comes to IAMS/EUK. just for comparison you may want to go visit http://www.naturapet.com and then tell me if you have a different feeling about that company. i think that type of feeling of trust is what is important to me.

- P&G lobbied to defeat a bill before the california legislature that would have banned the cruel draize eye-irritancy test. why would they do that if they were so concerned about starting to phase out animal testing for products that do not truly require them? (they have been claiming that since the 90s and yet are still animal testing PET FOOD in 2003?)
- P&G's stance towards legislation in europe that would have banned animal testing for cosmetics.
http://www.liberation-mag.org.uk/procter10.htm
- P&G's adamant refusal of PUBLICLY addressing the following issues:
* disclosure of the number of animals used each year in testing by P&G.
* disclosure of the names of outside contract labs used by P&G.
* development of a timetable for the elimination of testing for P&G products.
* disclosure of any tests already eliminated by P&G.

i'm sure you will find more as you research the issue. it is very important that people form their own opinion instead of just mindlessly following one group or another. "group mentality" can be a very bad thing just as much as it can be a good thing.

as for PETA, i am not very happy about their philosophy and course of action in many cases, but as much as i dislike them, in my opinion they do have the important role of at least shaking people out of being oblivious and getting them to think.

as far as that discussion on that ebay forum goes, boy, what a bunch of ignorant people. i know that kind, they all try to keep the idea that a cow has to die for their daily hamburger or a chicken for their chicken sandwich pushed back in a far corner of their brain. nothing against americans, i live in the U.S. at the moment too, but that attitude of blissful ignorance and forcing-oneself-not-to-think-of-the-bad-side is very prevalent here. 75% consumerism and 25% ignorance. they don't care if that cow or chicken was dead already by the time it got strung up on the processing chain, or under which conditions it had to live. how much skin off their nose would it be to get off their lazy asses and at least demand more humane slaughtering and farming practices? but oh no, OMG - that could mean that that hamburger might cost $1.99 instead of just $0.99!!!! horror of horrors! (but in a completely unrelated matter they do seem to care what's in the dog food they feed fido, ignoring the quality of ingredients that must be in such a hamburger/taco/[insert reconstituted garbage food here] if it can still cover costs AND a profit margin at a sale price of 99 cents a piece.) yuck.

i am not a vegetarian and enjoy a nice steak or piece of chicken, but i stay away from all those chain restaurant fast food places mainly because that food is poor quality and unhealthy, but also because i do think that the way they operate supports a lot of cruelty and suffering in farmed animals - and they don't get MY money for that. i'd rather eat meat a couple times less often a week if i can instead buy a cruelty free, hormone free, healthy product.

boy this time i did go off on a tangent of a couple miles, didn't i? as long as it at least made some people think, all is well i guess. :)

[Horsefeathers!]

Thanks, Guest. Food for thought, for sure. You seem to have done a lot of reading on this, yourself. I just never really gave the whole Iams thing much thought before since I didn't support the company financially by buying their products. I knew they were a subsidiary of P&G who I've also heard rotten things about. It's just very difficult sometimes to know who to believe when reading about things like this. I, too, do not care much for mob mentality and I like to keep an open mind, but not so open that my brain falls out. It's just SO difficult for me to take anything PETA says at face value. I've seen so many things coming from them that weren't just misleading, but outright lies and deception and some of their terrorist tactics and affiliations just take away any credibility I could otherwise give them. That's just me, though.

Anyway, thanks for the insight. Definitely stuff to ponder. You sure seem to have done your homework. I came across that thread on the ebay boards and I just can't stay away from a good debate, though I never participated in that one (I had nothing to back up any opinions). :oops:

[Guest Anonymous]

you are quite welcome. :)

i will freely admit that i thought IAMS is a "good food" at some point in the past. i also believed the same of science diet. up until the point when i started looking at ingredient lists - it all started out with cat food though, since i did not have a dog at the time i got interested in researching pet foods.

as some of you may know, unlike dogs, cats are TRUE carnivores and more prone to suffer serious problems from a diet that does not give them the additional essential nutrients they need.

when i got a dog again after a break of a couple years, i applied the same principles i had learned about cat nutrition and found out that due to dogs being far less sensitive and more able to subsist on a mixed diet of meats and grains, i found out that many commercial dog foods are of even lesser quality than their cat food counterparts.

i still do not believe that any and all commercial pet foods are evil and should be avoided, but as far as i am concerned it takes a lot of work on the side of those manufacturers to convincve me that their product is "worthy" - and not just with pretty catchphrases, but with facts. :)

[bk_blue]

I wholeheartedly agree with Guest and Courtnek on this! Testing on animals (though I do not like to think about it, and could never personally do it) for what I would term necessary means ie. finding a cure for cancer, AIDS, etc. is acceptable to me. Testing shampoos, makeup, dishwashing liquid is NOT. :evil:

If anyone is interested here's a link to a list of companies who do test on animals:
http://www.allforanimals.com/cruel1.htm

Here's a list that don't:
http://www.allforanimals.com/cruelfree1.htm

ps. I don't know how current these lists are. :wink:

[Rowie-the-Pooh]

I was just readint he Ebay thingie and I hafto say my daft mind didn't understand a thing.... :oops:

What I understand is, they think it is the owners chioce as to what they feed their dogs, and what brand, but they are against PETA? AND they say that IAMS is okay because they didn't know or whatever?

I lost it there... :oops: I couldn't read anymore...

Well I say I have to agree with Guest! :D (A good guest for once guys! :wink: ) I find your views are exactly like mine. I am also against IAMS. I find it hard to believe they didn't know anything? But I am STILL anit-PETA. I never knew PETA had done such things until a few weeks ago. And this thread made it clearer.

Oh just a sec, mom told me to get off the comp.... see yah all tomorow! :wink: (Aniversarry BTW)

Guest, you are very welcome to join by the way, please do! :wink: :D :angel: