Things Iams Don't Want You To See

Ah, the great dog food debate, I see. ;)

Iams sucks. They are horrid people for doing this to animals, and they will rot in hell ..... IF they really did all that. I'm not saying they did or didn't .... I don't trust PETA to tell the truth, nor would I trust former (read: disgruntled) employees to tell the truth. And, of course, I don't trust Iams to tell the truth, either. The fact of the matter is, the public will NEVER know the truth.

That is, IMO, one of the problems with PETA - they could make a lot more headway and do a lot more good if they told ONLY the truth, and didn't embelish everything, and present everything in the most shocking, melodramatic and histronic way humanly possible. The public, for the most part, is developing a well-deserved "boy who cried wolf" attitiude towards PETA, assuming anything that comes from them is mostly untrue. Sad, because PETA could have done SO much good, had they taken a more middle-of-the-road approach and not alienated 90% of the population.

But I digress ....

I won't buy Iams. I don't like to buy cheap dog food. I live in a very small town. We have two small grocery stores, a Walmart and a Kmart. Period. So, we can pick from the major dog food brands ... and that's it. I checked out the Companion Animal Food Manufacturers list, and not one brand is sold here. It's a problem, to be sure.

I hate the things I have read about Iams, but I have yet to find another food formula that is BOTH light and hairball control. Can someone help me look? Also, how do you know if you've found a "good" food? I was looking on the chicken soup site, and it looks like a good food, but where is a good link to check out?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Nomilynn
Also, how do you know if you've found a "good" food?

---

Do you mean in quality? A good kitty food shouldn't have any corn, by-products, soy, peanut hulls, or harmful preservatives such as ethoxyquin or BHA/BHT. It should also be supplemented with taurine. Also, I'm not sure about cat food, but dog food should have animal protien for the first ingredient and one of the next two. I think cat food should probably have it in atleast the first two.

This is off of my site. I know it's for dog food, but these shouldn't be found in cat foods either.
LOOK OUT FOR:

Ethoxyquin - Ethoxyquin is a chemical preservative that carries specific toxins. These toxins have been known to cause itchy skin, lethargy, hair loss, thyroid problems, reproductive disorders, birth defects, epilepsy, cancer, and stillbirth. The chemical was developed by a company as a rubber hardener. It is also used as a herbicide and insecticide. In Canada it is illegal in human foods. in the US, over 100 ppm illegal in human foods.

BHA (Butylated Hydroxysanisole) & BHT (Butylated Hydroxytoluene) - Often seen together, these carcinogenic chemical preservatives have been known to cause cancer, tumors, epilepsy, kidney failure, and a number of other things. A dog who eats food containing one or both of these has a 60% chance of developing urinary stones.

Propyl gallate - Tendency to cause the blood disorder, methemoglobinemia.

Propylene Glycol - A chemical often used in antifreeze, engine coolant, cigarettes, oil, and wax. Used to keep food moist and so is most commonly seen in wet or semi-moist foods. It can cause skin problems, hair loss, dull coats, diarrhea, overweight and death.

Sugar Glycol - Mostly found in wet or semi-moist foods because it keeps foods moist. Dogs are borderline diabetic and too much sugar can give them diabetes. They can become addicted to sugar to the point where they won't eat any other food but a food with this in it. Also known to cause hypoglycemia, obesity, nervousness, cataracts, tooth decay, arthritis and allergies. Sugar can also drain vitamins and minerals from the body.

Sodium Metabisulphite - Preservative known to cause weakness, difficulty swallowing, loss of conciousness and brain damage in humans. No testing has been done on the affect it has on dogs or other animals.

Pentobarbital - Chemical that is injected into pets during euthanization. Also used to treat people with severe head trauma as a sedative. The dog food companies refuse to say how this gets into their foods, but we know it is there from testing. Pentobarbital is usually found in the foods where euthanized cats and dogs have been added in. Yes, that's right. Undercover agents have witnessed companies taking the euthanized animals from shelters and vets and adding them into the food. Scientists have done testing and confirm that there is, truly, dogs and cats in some pet foods. The editor has yet to find out which brands, although Iams/Eukeneba has been mentioned and is under suspicion.

Corn - Mostly considered a filler by the dog food companies, corn is the leading cause of allergies in dog food. Extremely hard for a dog to digest, it may sit in a dog's body for up to 16 hours. The protien, like most vegetable protiens, is hard to extract from the corn, and so a dog may not be getting the amount of protien that the bag says the food has. Because it sits in a dog's stomach for so long, the dog has a longer time to extract the fat from the food. This will not help an overweight dog. BEWARE of the dog food that has corn as one of it's main ingredients!

Wheat - One of the leading causes of allergies. 20% of the nutritional value escapes digestion, so the nutritional value on the food bag may be inaccurate. Sometimes contains a fungus that produces vimotoxin, a substance that can kill or sicken dogs (In 1995, Nature's recipe sickened many dogs,in 1999, Doane Pet care, aka Ol' Roy killed 25 dogs and sickened more -- due to wheat contaminated with vimotoxin). Wheat is not nessecarily bad when human-grade, but should generally only be used in a food for overweight or inactive dogs, and dogs without allergies.

Soy - Soy is mainly used as a filler, or as a protien source in vegetarian foods. Linked to gas in some dogs. Hard for dogs to digest, and can take away nutrients. Soy shouldn't be given to a deep-chested dog, such as a German shepherd, because it has been known to cause bloat. Not nessecarily bad for a dog, just make sure it's good for YOUR dog.

By-products - Mostly the parts of an animal that a human would not eat -- The tail, hooves, stomach, blatter, intestines, beaks, ligaments, fur, feathers, scales, etc. Mainly whatever doesn't have any meat. Depending on what kind of by-product, the digestablity varies.

Peanut Hulls - A cheap filler. No nutritional value.

Quote:

---

I have yet to find another food formula that is BOTH light and hairball control. Can someone help me look?

---

Here you go:

Hill's Science Diet Science Diet Feline Maintenance Hairball Control Light Formula $8.49, 3.5 lb. bag light formula is lower in fat and calories for obese-prone cats 1 to 6 years old. Hairball control formula has the same great taste and nutrition of other Science Diet foods, but is specially formulated to reduce hairballs in cats.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Twisterdog


Hill's Science Diet Science Diet Feline Maintenance Hairball Control Light Formula $8.49, 3.5 lb. bag light formula is lower in fat and calories for obese-prone cats 1 to 6 years old. Hairball control formula has the same great taste and nutrition of other Science Diet foods, but is specially formulated to reduce hairballs in cats.

---

Hill's Science Diet tests on animals too lol. :o

Thanks Jordan. I guess I was basically asking HOW to read a pet food label.

Twisterdog - I've heard of that, but I've NEVER seen it in any pet store around where I live. But I will keep an eye out.

People who live in small communities with limited choices in
shopping can still patronize cruelty free pet food companies. This
is the age of the internet which gives everyone many more
options in buying products. They even offer free shipping. A few
that I found in 5 minutes were;

http://petfooddirect.com/store/

http://www.allourpets.com/

I'm sure there are many more if we really wanted to find them.

I've also discovered that more pet food makers & suppliers also
are responding to consumer demand for pet food that doesn't
come from companies that torture animals.

Pet supply stores join the Iams Campaign

Joy Drawdy, owner of Earth Pets Natural Pet Market in Gainesville, Florida, was worried when she learned that Iams had been bought out by Procter & Gamble (P&G), a corporation with a history of animal tests. “When I found out that Iams had sold to P&G, we immediately pulled it off of our shelves. But we didn’t know how bad it was until we went to the PETA Web site IamsCruelty.com.”

We Felt Betrayed
For years, Drawdy had bought Iams for her own dogs and for the dogs and cats she adopted out. To learn that this trusted company had been involved in cruelty shook her faith in the pet-food industry.

“I think what shocked me most was all the lies. We so trusted that company. We really thought that we were doing a good thing for years. We fed that food to our dogs and cats.
We felt betrayed,” she says. “For so many years we sold that food. We told people it was a good food and a good company—and we believed it. Now that I know how Iams has deliberately hurt animals, I won’t even accept donations from that company.”

Growing Pains at the Store
Drawdy’s store went through some growing pains at first. She worried that she might not be able to continue her business in an ethical way. Like many consumers who want to find pet foods made by a compassionate company, she felt overwhelmed. “How could I sell the stuff once I realized what these companies were doing, when I realized what bad things go into these products?” she says. “We began to look into the industry. When we realized how evil it could be, we didn’t know if we wanted to stay in it.”

Drawdy’s customers—many of whom had purchased Iams for years—shared in her disappointment. “They felt so much guilt. They said, ‘I can’t believe I fed this food.’ People get very emotional.”

Supporting Ethical Businesses—and Succeeding!
Ultimately, Drawdy found her way. “We ended up closing our whole store when P&G bought out Iams, and we began to look into the industry. We decided we weren’t going to sell food from the companies that abuse animals. We opened a new store selling only products from ethical companies and are so much more successful now than we ever were,” she says. “After deciding we weren’t going to sell food from companies that confine dogs and cats to laboratory cages, we looked around and found some really wonderful companies, and we’re supporting them now.”

For Drawdy, change has been good. Patrons of her compassionate pet-supply store even include employees of major chain pet stores and veterinarians’ offices. “Customers love that they can count on us,” she says. “People are very appreciative of the fact that they can shop here without having to worry. They thank us for doing the homework for them.”

Thanks to Joy Drawdy and the many companion animal food manufacturers that don’t test on animals, consumers with dog and cat companions can rest easy knowing that their dollars are promoting compassion over cruelty. Great work, Joy!

Joy has formed a coalition of companion-animal professionals in her hometown who are speaking out against Iams' animal testing. See who's signing on to ACT Against Iams (Alachua County Together Against Iams Cruelty) at ActAgainstIams.com!

That is Terrible!! :mad: :mad: I will never, ever, ever use their products again!!! anyways we use purina.

I received an email response from the PETA info group on Weds.
11/26/03. It came to my work email after I had left for the day.
I almost never check work messages from home so didn't read it
until today. I included text of the email Logan had gotten from Iams. In fairness I thought I'd print the view from the other side.
My email to PETA group & their response:

Subject: Articles on animal cruelity iamsodead,com




A lady from our Pet group emailed Iams about charges that nothing has changed in their
animal testing procedures or inhumane animal treatment at the testing lab used by Iams since
last contacted ny PETA. This is a copy of IAMS email in response received tosay 11/25/03. Do
you have any comments on it's truthfulness? Thank you so much for your tireless work for all
animals. Liz XXXXXX.

PETA group response;


Thank you for your e-mail message regarding the Iams Company’s program of animal experimentation. If you are not familiar with this issue, please visit IamsCruelty.com for details of our nine-month investigation into the company’s “nutritional” experiments on dogs and cats. If you are writing with regard to Iams’ International Animal Care Advisory Board, please allow us to share with you our position on this matter.



Life for animals in laboratories is filled with days, weeks, months, and years of loneliness, suffering, pain, and fear. While a toy, a resting board, or a few minutes of “socialization” (if provided) may slightly ease the horrors of imprisonment, they do not make animal experimentation humane.

Therefore, Iams’ International Animal Care Advisory Board is in a predicament. While it can evaluate Iams’ program of animal experimentation and make recommendations, nothing that it can say or do—short of calling on Iams to stop experimenting on dogs and cats—will change this one simple fact: Iams’ use of animals in laboratories is inherently cruel and, for that matter, unnecessary. In addition, Iams and the members of this board have no way of knowing what is happening to the animals inside the company’s numerous contract-testing facilities at any given time.

No person, organization, or corporation that truly cares about animals would ever condone or support the use of animals in pet-food tests in laboratories. This is why we have asked the individuals who sit on Iams’ International Animal Care Advisory Board to call on Iams to stop conducting nutritional experiments on cats and dogs and, instead, rely only on laboratory analysis of formulas for nutritional composition, in-home palatability studies using dogs and cats whose human companions have volunteered them for such tests, and collaborative studies with private veterinary clinics that have patients who have diseases or conditions of interest to the company.



A review of the members of this board, which was created by Iams, reveals that it is not as “independent” as the company would have us believe and that it may be unwilling to heed the very reasonable call for an end to Iams’ program of animal testing in laboratories:



Michael Arms

Michael Arms is the president of the Helen Woodward Animal Center (HWAC) in Rancho Santa Fe, Calif. Like many facilities, HWAC has accepted the support of such corporate sponsors as Iams and the PETCO Foundation.



While the president or director of a facility cannot be faulted for accepting a check from a wealthy corporation (which is often hoping to build brand loyalty while improving its public image), we believe that having that same individual sit in judgment of the sponsoring corporation’s activities represents a conflict of interest. Arms’ characterization of PETCO (which has a deplorable animal-care record) as being a “responsible” corporate partner is just one example of what happens when a facility’s president tries to walk the fine line between advocating for animals and maintaining a cordial relationship with a corporate sponsor that profits from the exploitation of animals.



Kathryn Bayne, Ph.D.

Kathryn Bayne is associate director of the Association for the Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care (AAALAC).



AAALAC, which is made up of those who support and/or have participated in animal experimentation, was originally established to thwart the passage of the Animal Welfare Act (it did not succeed). AAALAC is widely considered to be a smokescreen used by the animal-experimentation industry in an effort to add an air of legitimacy where none is deserved.



The Iams laboratory that we investigated (please see IamsCruelty.com); the notorious Huntingdon Life Sciences, a frequent violator of federal laws; and the University of North Carolina, where we recently documented egregious cruelty to animals—live animals in the dead-animal cooler, cutting off the heads of mice and rats with scissors, and sick and injured animals languishing for days or weeks without veterinary care—are just a few of the facilities that are AAALAC-accredited.



The Reverend Kenneth Boyd

Kenneth Boyd is a professor of medical ethics at Edinburgh University Medical School and the chair of the Boyd Group. Boyd is particularly interested in studying the cost-benefit relationship of animal use to human benefit.



The Boyd Group, which publishes ethics papers concerning the debate about animal research, was founded in part by neuroscientist Colin Blakemore. Blakemore is best known for his experiments in which he sewed shut the eyes of kittens in an attempt to determine how the loss of vision in early development affects the brain.



Stephen Hansen, D.V.M.

Stephen Hansen is senior vice president of the ASPCA’s Animal Poison Control Center. Iams is a corporate sponsor of the ASPCA and sponsors the ASPCA’s Pet Nutrition and Science Advisory Service.



The ASPCA recently conducted an inspection of a contract-testing laboratory “to be used” by Iams. The following is some of what the ASPCA had to report:



The animals had names.
The cats “were reported to have 4-5 hours out of their cages each day.”
The dogs “were housed in short-fenced runs and had platforms up off of the floor.”
The dogs were provided with “socialization time.”
A study “scheduled for implementation on the day of inspection” was “designed to verify that the diet being fed would allow the animals to maintain normal health and body condition.”
“The findings from studies done at this facility are designed to prove complete and balanced nutrition for specific products. The information from this type of study is generally presented on the product label.”


Once again, there is a conflict of interest here because of the relationship already established between the ASPCA and Iams. Do the animals care if they have names? The Iams dogs at the contract lab that PETA just exposed all had names, too, and they were treated just as badly as those without names. We hope that the ASPCA is not justifying these experiments based on the fact that they are being conducted in order to properly label a product, because many pet-food manufacturers satisfy labeling requirements by doing a chemical analysis of the food, not by imprisoning animals in cages. Such a justification would be unconscionable.



Robert Hubrecht, Ph.D.

Robert Hubrecht is a member of the Research Defense Society—a corporate-funded pro-vivisection lobby group that has lobbied against the requirement for a cost-benefit assessment for animal experiments in the U.K. He is also assistant director of the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW). The following statement is posted on the organization’s Web site: “UFAW is a unique scientific and technical animal welfare organization. We use scientific knowledge and established expertise to improve the welfare of animals kept as pets, in zoos, laboratories, and on farms and of wild animals with which we interact.”



Irene Rochlitz, Ph.D.

Iams describes Irene Rochlitz as an “independent veterinary consultant in feline welfare.” Rochlitz studied the “effects of quarantine accommodation and environment” on cat behavior and found that “quarantine causes severe problems for cats with long-term effects on cat behaviour.” Iams’ program of animal experimentation has resulted in the “quarantine” of countless animals, some for years at a time.



Andrew Rowan, Ph.D.

Andrew Rowan is senior vice president for research, education, and international issues at the Humane Society of the United States (HSUS). According to the HSUS, “The primary aim of The HSUS’s Animal Research Issues section is to promote ‘alternatives’ to the use of animals in harmful research, testing, and education.” Rowan’s appointment to Iams’ advisory board presents the HSUS with the unique opportunity to help end an inherently cruel and worthless program of animal experimentation. However, correspondence between the HSUS and PETA indicates that the HSUS is not taking the position that dogs and cats should not be caged in laboratories for use in nutritional experiments—Rowan has only indicated that his interest is in reducing pain and distress.



Iams supported the HSUS’ Pet Fest America, which featured “The Iams Superdogs.” Unlike the dogs imprisoned for use in Iams’ nutritional experiments, these “canine acrobats” were free to run, jump, and retrieve.



We hope that this information proves useful. Thank you for your efforts in behalf of animals.



Sincerely,



Peter Wood

Research Associate

That is a shame , as I have always fond Eukanuba to be a food that the Cats like , especially JJJ3 , Moose and Sam. But I will switch to the mixed Premiun Food , 20 pounds for $10.00.These are bags that have been ripped in transit , and sample food , all mixed together. And you cant beat the price.

Catmandu,

Yes it is a shame & I know how hard it can be to try switching
cat food on our finicky kitties. I just think of the cats & dogs who
have to endure this gross mistreatment & then die. Never having
lived a normal life like our pets. Does this little one look happy to
you?

http://www.iamsodead.com/page/scene/21l.jpg


or this dog who'll never have the joy of running in grass, ever?


http://www.iamsodead.com/page/scene/16.jpg

Maybe we can't help these particular animals, but together we
may be able to stop this horrible company policy.