Dear All

There has been a lot of discussion about this on another Board that I use so I thought I would put you all in the picture. Please take a minute to look at the on this website http://www.uncaged.co.uk/iams.htm. Please be warned though that it is not very pleasant and quite shocking.

Thanks for your time.

Dessie

Thanks for bringing this to my attention Dessie, I have fed Eukanuba to my dog in the past but after seeing these horrid things, I won't consider using it ever again!

I think this is disgusting and surprised to find the adverts were still being shown on T.V. after it was published in the paper Mum was reading out the article while I was trying to eat my breakfast and, as you can imagine, I lost my appetite! I would say that we will never use their products any more, but we don't use them anyway, not after feeding it to our cats and have them go TOTALLY hyper, and I mean TOTALLY. They were literally climbing the walls and running everywhere and Persians don't do that normally. Did Crufts actually take down their stand 'cause I know they were thinking about it?

The uncaged site admits that it is out to stop P & G and quotes some old information. There is a story in Dog World today.

I would be very reluctant to make any hastydecisions as to my mind newspapers are like politicians - they tell you the story that they think will be most effective in getting votes/selling papers!!

A very cynical

Christine

I have been boycotting Proctor and Gamble products for a couple of years because of their extensive use of unnecessary cosmetic testing on animals, so I stopped buying any IAMS/ Eukanuba products when they took over the company. I didn't realise that they tortured animals for pet food research as well, though.

Many people may not realise that, as well as pet foods, P&G also own a lot of other companies, many nothing to do with pet foods or cosmetics. Shopping now takes a long time for me as I have to check the 'small print' on everything I buy!

Some of the many products owned by P&G include: Daz washing powder, Johnsons baby products, Tampax, Olay, Max Factor, Pringles (my favourite crisps unfortunately, but not allowed!), Charmin loo roll, Head and Shoulders... I could go on but all their products are probably listed on the site above.

Totally agree with you about P&G, Alfie. I too have boycotted their stuff for years, the fact that they make money out of such suffering makes my blood boil!!!

This was a response from P & G. (some of the setting out has been lost during copying.
Christine
~~~

A written response from IAMSA response from IAMS on the British A/R Group attack because someone hastostand up for the good guys: From: "Iams Customer Service" <Customer.Service@iams.Internet Mail Service

Thank you very much for taking the time to forward the link to this horrible website. It positively sickens me, and is a gross misrepresentation of TheIamsCompany and the research we have conducted!

We sincerely appreciate loyalcustomers like you who make the effort to investigate the truth aboutthesehorrible accusations. Uncaged Campaigns is an animal rights group in theUKthat has connections with a tabloid in London that "broke" this story onSunday.Here is our official response: An article published by a British tabloid newspaper (SundayExpress, "Pet Food Cruelty," May 27) contained inaccurate and misleadinginformation about Iams nutritional studies.

The Iams Company is appalledbythese false allegations of animal cruelty. More than two years ago - well before our acquisition by Procter& Gamble (P&G) - The Iams Company independently made a firm and bindingdecisionthat we would not consider or sponsor any studies that required theeuthanasiaof dogs and cats.

We determined that we could continue to make crucialhealthadvancements without such studies because certain key findings had alreadybeenmade, and new alternative research methods had been developed (forexample,advances in MRI technology can now be used to examine the condition ofbonesandjoints without using invasive procedures). Early in our efforts to develop nutritional innovations, wesponsored university and veterinary school research in North America thatidentified important questions. The answers to those questions couldpotentially save and enhance the lives of millions of dogs and cats, butcouldonly be determined through studies requiring euthanasia. We exhausted allotheralternatives and made choiceful decisions in our research methodology. Inthosefew instances, researchers used the minimum number of animals possible,andtheresults have benefited dogs and cats world-wide. For example, our studies of canine and feline kidney disease - achronic and fatal illness affecting millions of pets - resulted in newrenaldiets that make a significant difference in the lives of dogs and catswithchronic renal failure. Our research into healthy skeletal development hasmadea big difference for large breed dogs, where painful and debilitatingdevelopmental bone problems can occur in up to 40% of puppies. Despite these facts, the story in the Sunday Express portrayedour published research findings in a sensational, negative, and misleadingway.

The article repeatedly described ordinary veterinary health practices inunnecessarily horrific terms. For example: * A skin biopsy - which is a common diagnostic test in both human andveterinary medicine - was described in the article as "giving the animalchestwounds."*

Giving an animal a routine vaccination was described as "injectingwithlive virus vaccines." Clearly, this type of language is deceptive andcounterproductive.

Other leading pet food companies sponsor or have sponsoredsimilar studies to those undertaken by our company. Unlike most of ourcompetitors, Iams openly presents and publishes our findings (for example,veterinary conferences, peer-reviewed veterinary journals) so that otherresearchers can help improve the health and well-being of dogs and cats,withoutrepeating research projects.

This raises an important question: If our research has beenpresented, published and part of public record for more than ten years -andifother leading pet food companies sponsor similar studies -- why was TheIamsCompany singled out now? To answer that question, it is important to consider the sourceof the allegations: This story appears to have been sparked by UncagedCampaigns, a UK-based animal activist organization that has long calledforboycotts of P&G products.

To sum up, our research efforts have always been guided by astrict code of ethics that exceeds the highest standards established bytheAnimal Welfare Act of the US and the US Department of Agriculture. Today,andin the past, all of our feeding studies have been required to meet veryspecificcriteria, namely: * The care of animals is of paramount importance, and animal well-beingisalways our top priority.* The results must help veterinarians and pet owners nutritionallymanageimportant pet health conditions and give real benefits to dogs and catsworld-wide.* The studies must be unique, relevant, and truly pioneering - in otherwords, no existing research could answer the questions raised.

At Iams, we stand behind our research, and are proud of our55-year track record of enhancing the well-being of dogs and cats byprovidingworld-class quality foods. That is our mission, one that we live by everydayin every corner of the company, starting with our Research andDevelopment. or contact us anytime through our "Talk to Us" page atwww.iams.com <http://www.iams.com . The negative Iams information that is flowing through the Internet rightnowisa distorted view of our research.

Unfortunately, this type of sensationalism is at the expense of a company made up of people that are passionate abouttheirdogs and cats, as well as their company's mission (to enhance the wellbeingofdogs and cats by providing world-class, quality foods).

I wish I couldsharewith you all the thousands of contacts we've had from dog and cat ownersreporting on the impact our foods have had on their pets' health. My owndoghas experienced terrible allergies that were greatly soothed by feedingher aEukanuba Veterinary Diet. I hope that I've been helpful in addressing your concerns. Please feelfreetoshare this e-mail with your friend, or anyone else who is interested. Ifyouhave additional questions, please call us at 800-863-4267 Thank you again for your loyalty to our products. We deeply appreciate it.
Sincerely
Bev,
Consumer Relations
The Iams Company

Thanks for sharing that, Christine. Just goes to show that there are two sides to every story -- emotive reporting does no one any good but the newspapers that it sells.

Thanks for giving us the opportunity to see the situation "from both sides of the fence", allegations like these plant doubt in my mind about whether I have have the confidence to buy these products, as I would hate to think that I may be unwittingly supporting any kind of cruelty.

This is always the big problem isn't it! There is always someone with an axe to grind when it comes to big business. But at the same time, Is big business going to hold their hands up and say, "It's a fair cop guv!". In reality, we are still none the wiser.

John

Hmmm...interesting . But gosh, I am almost more comcerned now than I was before.
Animal research in America ...The jWelfare Act for laboratory animals in all countries is not worth anything. A recent example...The huntingdon beagles where the pups were filmed being punched andkicked by lab workers. and that was just the one which happened to be filmed.

They openly admit that the did indeed sponsor animal experiments on dogs etc in America - did they say for the sake of our own dogs' health?! More likelly for profit frankly, as with any big business. Many of the people involved with the company probably don't even own dogs!!

It is not ethical for SOME dogs to die so that others may live...it is ironic that the renal problems of dogs etc has in fact been blamed by many on the unnatural modern foods we give them. The tests in America would certainly have been horrific.

I am sorry but several years ago, Jeff Banks (a great animal lover) agreed to be linked with P&G's washing powder (Ariel?) as he had been told by them that they were trying to research non-animal methods of testing. This was about 10 years ago, and yet as far as I am aware, they are still using animals!

Anything todo with P&G has me curling my lip with suspicion. thye have previously had no qualms about animal experiments, I don't feel thay have stopped, it is all for profit, and with their history, even if theyHAD stopped, would any reputable animal lovingcompany actually want to be involved with them!!?

I will never buy Iams or Eukanuba.

John - do I sound a bit cynical!!!? As you say we are none the wiser.

I must admit to being cynical about most advertising/newspaper stories/politics/ not quite life in general but if someone wants you to do or buy (or not do or buy) something there is normally some kind of exaggeration involved.

Totally off topic but that tv programme - survival - were they trying to brainwash us for weeks before hand by showing that burning heart with survival written underneath for a second or so every few minutes. Didn't work as I have never watched it tho' !!

I try to buy products that I consider are safe for the humans and animals in my household and leave it at that otherwise I would spend my whole life shopping.

Christine

Hi all
Procter & Gamble are a multi conglomerate company, as well as a lot of others. They ultimately have to answer to their shareholders, so profit comes high on the agenda, well lets go the whole hog & say top of the list. Yes, the majorty of these firms use animals to test new products before they reach the public, we all know that, but maybe don`t think hard enough about it.
What is not acceptable to me is the animal food companys, who are telling animal owners that "their food" is the best they can give! And then go on to give you "new improved recipe", time & again. Surely after all the research they do it doesn`t need improving?? Drug manufacturers that don`t give us the whole truth & absolve themselves of any responsibility by saying " it happens, its down to your dogs immune system", ah well, sometimes it doesn`t work! Vets who receive commission for selling certain dog foods & of course vaccines & drugs. Take boosters as an example.
Profit is the name of the game for a lot of them, & while I have no problem with making profit or a living, I object to being taken to the cleaners! As for as I am concerned a lot of them have so much to answer for & hopefully that time won`t be long in the coming.
Oh by the way, take a look at who has interests in these company`s you may be surprised!!!
Christine2

Please get your facts straight before printing, P&G have nothing to do with Johnsons baby products and do not test cosmetics on animals it's people like you who give companies a bad name.
P&G only test medicines on animals and even that is extremely limited and carried out by another company.
If you are that against it I hope you never need to go into hospital as most medicines and anesthetics are made by them.
It makes me so cross that people believe what is printed in papers, most of it is made up and blown completly out of proportion.
P&G lead the way in developing new testing facilities for cosmetics which did not include animals and shared that information with other companies. Also any research carried out for medicine is also shared so that no other animals need suffer for the same research, medicine HAS to be tested on animals it is against the law to release any drugs before testing has been completed.
And before everyone says it no I do not work for P&G I just feel very strongly that people are being mislead.

I am an animal lover, but I do see the need in animal testing of medicines. Seems to me that P&G are doing this in the most publically open, and ethical way possible. I could not personally do that job, but someone does have to do it for the benefit of all. I am grateful for the studies and advances that have been made to keep my family and pets as healthy as possible. The fact that P&G are publishing their studies for others to see and use in order to prevent other companies from having to repeat them says a lot to me. I have to be realistic about it and I wish some others would wake up and take a reality pill too. Hope I didn't offend anyone, it's just my opinion.

Carissa

Hi Carissa,
I think you read my mind... What you wrote is spot on.
This is reality. In my perfect, utopic world, no animals would ever be touched or tested. P&G are owning up and allowing all of us to understand(or at least TRY to) the real issues of science.
Sometimes life just isn't nice.
Best,
Megbel

i have always understood that most companies who test on animals DON'T share their info - because at the end of the day they are competitors.

Perhaps it does depend on what they discover.

If they don't, it means that more and more animals are tested on for the same or similar experiments. That to me is not justifiable.

Also, has anyone hear of the recent furore surroundign Sunny Delight, made by P and G?

They run a very cynical advertisign campaign to get kids as young as possible to drink the stuff, and a small baby ended up in hospital because her mother put a small amount in her bottle.

I don't agree with targeting children in this way. Its not as if it is a healthy drink.

JMO
LIndsay

I agree targeting young children is bad. I try to only let my kids watch pbs where there are no commercials. But in the case of the mother giving it to her baby.....she should have known better, I assume she can read the ingrediants, and hopefully also a baby/child rearing book or two. Some people need to take responsibility for their own stupidity. Was the baby allergic to one of the ingrediants?

Carissa

Hi Carissa

Yes, I agree the mother was a bit silly - I don't think the baby was allergic as such, it was just that the drink had a bad effect because the baby's system was just unable to cope with it if you see what I mean.

I was amazed to discover it had corn oil in it - I mean, corn oil in a drink!!! Er, splurgh, yuk!!!

Give kids proper fruit juice, that's what I say...or even good old Robinson's or something. (And watch out for the teeth)

JMO as always :)

LIndsay

Re. the P & G issue. If the article printed in the newspaper, Express?, was so patently untrue, why have the company not sued ? Would have thought that if they could refute the claims completely, and so keep their good name, they would have the financial resources to hire a crack legal team and seek redress. Or is there a case pending ? Pardon my cynicism.
Jackie

It was printed well over a year ago and if my memory serves me well the artical refered to something that took place some while ago before the present company took the manufacture and marketing of these products over. It was in the paper at the time of Crufts 2001 aparently because the P & G were sponsors at Crufts. Just a bit of stirring by the paper using something that was way out of date. JH

After reading this, and looking at other websites, I was wondering if anybody could give me a list of companys that test on animals? Or any links? Thanyou for your time.

Hi Vana,try this link.

http://www.navs.org/testing/whois.cfm?SectionID=Testing

Christine2

Thanks Christine :).

i also boycott Pand G products and do not feed iams as made my bitch hyper than what she already was, i tend not to go for the real high protein food. regards tina

i'm not surprized at all by this post......i used tofeed it but not for long only about 10 weeks i was surprized i fed it for this long..my dog had increased acivity after feeding euk jun large which was absolutly abnormal...her bowel movement were also abnormal....i came off it and switched to pedigree puppy...the difference within that week of changing was a sure thing ....this food was no good at all

I feed mine Eukanuba/Iams Lamb and Rice and they are doing great on it. I did have them on purina and all they had was the poops. This seems to be what agree's with mine,now that I put them on this food and their coat is shiny,stool firm,and the ideal weight, and they look great. Is there anyone else that does feed their dog Euk/Iams food on here?

yes, im feeding the lamb and rice too-my dogs are doing just great on it, :)

There is an excellent new book available called the "Good Shopping Guide", available on Amazon for £8, probably elsewhere too. It deals with ethical shopping, everything from soap powder to mortgages. I haven't bought it yet but am planning to, your article has seen to that!

My veterinarian recommended that I switch my two 9-year-old cats from Hills (Science Diet) T/D dry food to Eukanuba Senior dry food. The Eukanuba food made them so sick that they were vomiting, not eating, not drinking, and I had to take them to the vet for dehydration and appetite stimulants. The vet and YUKanuba both said that these bad reactions are very very rare. YUKanuba said they mailed me a pre-paid return-package so they can analyze a sample of the food. Hmm, a YUKanuba lab testing a YUKanuba product to see if there's anything wrong, hmm, sounds like conflict of interest to me. I will never use Eukanuba again. I was not aware that Iams/YUKanuba is a Proctor&Gamble company, and the stories about cruel animal experimentation on the web site above are sickening!