While I agree with you in part, particularly about PETA, I would still stay away from IAMS and the other brands mentioned. I would trust that website less than the Uncaged website as it's presented by IAMS parent company Proctor & Gamble so it's clear what they stand to gain from it.

PETA are animal rights not animal welfare, there is a vast difference between the two; animal rights often having lunatic policies.

it is not peta propaganda against IAMS,they are not endorsed by BUAV who are independant of peta , the experiments funded by the IAMS company & other companies are horrible & can be found here www.buav.org/pdf/H1PetFood.pdf

The testing being talked about happened prior to Proctoer and Gamble taking over Iams, (it was also not testing carried out by iams, but in the same lab, no longer used by Iams) yet Uncaged and PETA decided not to speak out about it until P&G took over the company. PETA/Uncaged have had a bugbear about P&G for a very long time.

I do not feed Iams as I think there are better ways to feed my dogs. however, ia ma ssuming all those against animal testing are rigourous about the other products you buy, so don't buy supermarket washing powders, deodorants, shampoo, conditioners and medicines then?

according to the information supplied by BUAV in the link i posted procter & gamble did own IAMS when some of the experiments were carried out, i'm very careful when buying household products, toiletries etc which i also personally feel strongly about, in our household you'll only find co op own brands which are all BUAV approved.

it doesn't matter whether we hate peta and any other organisations but everyone should still be for helping animals - don't get me wrong I dont like peta as much as most of you but we should still be trying to stop UNNECESSARY(spelling?) testing on animals??


then again maybe i'm wrong?

I don't think anyone is saying they agree with unnecessary testing, but simply that any information supplied by an organisation such as PETA is not reliable.

The BUAV are another extremist group. They campaign for NO animal testing. Ever, at all, not even for medicines, they don't feel it is needed or efficient, but those involved in developments for medical science clearly disagree. Their document may (or may not) be supported by sensible research, but I don't think using phrases such as 'we can only assume' is that scientific.

Obviously , as an animal lover, I do not want to see any animal suffer, for any reason. However, I do eat meat, and I do believe we are higher up the food chain than animals. I believe that a sensible view of the bigger picture is needed, and that sadly, sometimes, such as in medical research, animal testing is warranted.

Couldn't agree more, But still recall bad press regarding IAMS and like you and as many others would never buy Iams

[QUOTE=jackson;220381]I don't think anyone is saying they agree with unnecessary testing, but simply that any information supplied by an organisation such as PETA is not reliable. I didn't say anyone was, i was merely making a point something i know shouldn't on this forum site

The BUAV are another extremist group. They campaign for NO animal testing. Ever, at all, not even for medicines, they don't feel it is needed or efficient, but those involved in developments for medical science clearly disagree. Their document may (or may not) be supported by sensible research, but I don't think using phrases such as 'we can only assume' is that scientific.

Obviously , as an animal lover, I do not want to see any animal suffer, for any reason. However, I do eat meat, and I do believe we are higher up the food chain than animals.it doesn't matter if we're higher up the food chain we still shouldn't play god I believe that a sensible view of the bigger picture is needed, and that sadly, sometimes, such as in medical research, animal testing is warranted.again i said 'unnecessery testing' so just dont understand the points you're making[