Researching pet food: mainstream companies perpetrate cruelty

Over tire 13 years I've been investigating the commercial pet food industry, I thought I'd seen everything: the questionable feeding trials, the supposed analytical testing of particular brands and the rendered materials companies can legally use--including inferior ingredients from slaughterhouses, moldy grains and rancid fats. But it wasn't until early 2002 that I learned about another questionable aspect of this industry that truly stunned me--animal experimentation.

A student at the University of Illinois wrote to me expressing her concerns about nine dogs at one of the school's labs. Over the years, I'd heard of such laboratories using animals--primarily rats and mice--for research on human disease. This letter described a different scenario. These dogs were being used for experiments funded by a well-known mainstream pet food company. When the student questioned the purpose of the experimentation, the head researcher, an animal science professor, explained that he undertakes this research "because pet owners want dogs who defecate infrequently."

The experiment involved feeding the dogs poultry necks, backs and viscera, as well as ground-up feathers and bone meal. Lab technicians then implanted tubes in the dogs' sides to extract samples of digested food. The student wrote that the dogs were kept in cages in a windowless basement, deprived of toy's and forced to sleep on hard flooring with no bedding.

This situation is not an isolated incident. Before long, I found numerous reports of mainstream pet food companies--the same ones you see advertising on television and in pet magazines--experimenting on dogs and cats. This so-called research is, in most instances, too gruesome to describe, but I will say that the deaths of the puppies and dogs who were its victims ended their undue and unneeded suffering.

Indeed, after an investigator for the animal-rights group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) went underground to document on film what was happening to dogs at one research lab in Missouri, officials at PETsMART, the giant pet products company headquartered in Phoenix, said they were "absolutely horrified" by the mistreatment the film depicted. PETsMART's influence caused the pet food maker to terminate its relationship with the lab, although PETsMART still sells the company's products.

On June 10, 2003, PETA filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission against this same large, mainstream pet food company, claiming that its ads were false and misleading. According to PETA, the company "deliberately deceives caring consumers into believing that animals used for its research enjoy the same lifestyle conditions as the consumers' animal companions." Instead, the PETA investigator found that dogs and cats were subjected to horrific living conditions and deplorable treatment, often ending in the animals' deaths.

Many research projects such as these are documented in the American Veterinary Journal of Research, the Journal of Veterinary internal Medicine and the Journal of Animal Science, all funded by various mainstream pet food companies.

These experiments are taking place in laboratories throughout the United States in the name of better nutrition for our pets. But I question whether such research is necessary if other dogs and cats must endure distress, pain and even death. The situation is especially troublesome given that most of these projects are undertaken to study the viability of cheap ingredients--such as soybean meal, beet pulp and cereal flours--that are common in low-quality mainstream pet foods.

And despite what you may have heard, there are alternatives to these animal experiments. For example, scientists in the Netherlands have developed an artificial gut, the Techno Tum. According to the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection, the Techno Tum was created "to mimic the actions of the gut, and it can be used to study the absorption of certain chemicals and nutrients in the gastrointestinal system."

Even without new technology, ethical pet food research can be performed by studying animals who suffer naturally from diseases or conditions. Routine veterinary examinations can utilize non-invasive procedures such as ultrasounds, X-rays, and blood and urine tests. Necropsies can reveal a great deal about diseases and their relationship to diet.

Furthermore, Peter Wood, research associate with PETA, writes that instead of using research laboratories to conduct experiments on animals, they--mainstream pet food companies--should "rely on laboratory, analysis of formulas for nutritional composition and employ in-home palatability studies using dogs and eats whose human companions have volunteered them for such tests."

In a press release dated August 6, 2001, the Animal Protection Institute (API) asked the Food and Drug Administration's Center for Veterinary Medicine to adopt new pet food guidelines.

Alan Burger, Director of API, stated, "Like most people, we're appalled that pet food companies are torturing animals under the pretense of nutrition research and demand that they adopt stringent guidelines for future research to prevent animal suffering."

Consumers can voice their outrage by refusing to buy mainstream commercial pet foods. Last February, PETA sent letters to hundreds of pet food companies asking that they sign a statement of assurance that they do not test on animals. Some of the companies that responded include PetGuard, Halo Purely for Pets, Azmira, Dr. Harvey's, Canusa International and Holistic Blend. (See p. 66 for PETA's complete list of companies that do not test on animals.)

Perhaps some day people will be able to purchase mainstream commercial pet foods with the assurance that no animals suffered in the testing and production of them. Until then, be aware that suffering may be a hidden ingredient in some of the mainstream pet foods you buy.

Companion Animal Food Manufacturers

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has written multiple letters to hundreds of pet food companies asking that they sign a statement of assurance that they d not test on animals. The following list includes all of the companies that have signed such letters to date. Note that this list only includes manufacturers of foods. Companies that make pet supplements, toys and other products were not included in PETA's survey.

If you buy pet food from a manufacturer that is not included on this list, it means that either the company did not respond to PETA's letters or that it did respond but admitted that it conducts animal testing.

Alternatives 4 Pets, Inc. www.alternatives4pets.com

Amore Pet Services, Inc. www.amorepetfoods.com

Animal Food Services www.animalfood.com

Azmira Holistic Animal Care www.azmira.com

Burns Pet Nutrition www.burns-pet-nutrition.co.uk

Canusa International www.canusaint.com

CountryPet Pet Food www.countrypet.com

Dr. Harvey's www.drharveys.com

Dry Fork Milling Co. 1-800-346-1360

Dynamite Marketing, Inc. www.dynamitemarketing.com

Evanger's Dog and Cat Food Co. www.evangersdogfood.com

Evolution Diet, Inc. www.petfoodshop.com

Good Dog Foods, Inc. www.gooddogfoods.com

GreenTripe.Com www.greentripe.com

Halo Purely for Pets www.halopets.com

Happy Dog Food www.happydogfood.com

Harbingers of a New Age www.vegepet.com

Holistic Blend www.holisticblend.com

The Honest Kitchen www.thehonestkitchen.com

Know Better Dog Food www.knowbetterdogfood.com

KosherPets, Inc. www.kosherpets.com

Natural Life Pet Products, Inc. www.nlpp.com

Natural Balance Pet Foods, Inc. www.naturalbalanceinc.com

Nature's Variety, www.naturesvariety.com

PetGuard www.petguard.com

Pied Piper Pet & Wildlife www.piedpiperpet.com

Raw Advantage, Inc. www.rawadvantagepetfood.com

Rocky Mountain Natural Products www.rmtnp.com

Sauder Feeds, Inc. www.sauderfeeds.com

Solid Gold www.solidgoldhealth.com

Spirit Filled Foods, Inc. www.kumpi.com

Veterinary Nutritional Formula www.vnfpetfood.com

Wow-Bow Distributors Ltd. www.wow-bow.com

Wysong Professional Diets www.wysong.net

Ann Martin is the author off the newly revised and updated Food Pets Die For (NewSage Press, 2003) as well as Protect Your Pet (NewSage Press, 2001).

COPYRIGHT 2003 PRIMEDIA Intertec, a PRIMEDIA Company. All Rights Reserved.
COPYRIGHT 2003 Gale Group