Even with all the non-animal testing alternatives that are available
in the 21st century, Iams continues to conduct barbaric laboratory experiments
that are not required by any law.
Iams Experiments |
Cruelty
Exposed |
Validated Alternatives |
What You Can Do |
| Palatability, Discovery Phase, and Metabolized Energy Tests |
These are the same miserable tests that animals suffered
through at Iams’ contract facility, which we
investigated in 2002-2003.
In addition, dogs and cats in these tests are allowed only
a paltry 30 minutes of cage-free time per day, five days
a week, without any free time over weekends. |
Iams can use non-animal chemical analyses of its food
formulas to test for nutritional quality.
In addition, to study foods formulated to help animals
suffering from various diseases, Iams can conduct in-home and collaborative
veterinary clinic studies, in which animals who naturally have a disease
of interest and who have been volunteered by their human guardians
would be studied in a humane nonlaboratory setting |
E-mail Iams and
tell the company that there’s no reason to conduct these outdated
tests, since more than 40 of its competitors produce humanely
tested food.
Please also e-mail us to learn
how you can help persuade your local animal shelter to
drop Iams and switch
to food made by one of these compassionate companies. |
| Muscle Atrophy (Muscle Wasting) Tests |
To study the effects of nutrition in treating muscle
atrophy in dogs, Iams is funding an experiment by Purdue
University researchers to hang mice by their hind legs (which causes
their muscle
tissue to waste away). After being fed various nutrients,
the mice are killed and cut up. |
Bioartifical muscle technology (BAM) has been used successfully
by other researchers to study muscle atrophy in animals.
Iams should do the same. |
E-mail Iams to
demand that it immediately end its involvement (financial
and otherwise) in this
cruel experiment until the Purdue researchers agree to
use humane non-animal alternatives. |
| Protein Efficiency Ratio (PER) Chick Tests |
Scientists have condemned the PER test as unethical since
baby chicks may suffer from severe growth retardation,
not to mention that they are also killed at the end of the experiment. |
Non-animal models like FIDO and IDEA have
already been scientifically validated for use as alternatives
to the PER test. |
E-mail Iams and
insist that the company immediately end its live animal PER experiments
in favor of the more compassionate and accurate FIDO system
or accept
validation
data from the IDEA manufacturer (Novus International) and
start using that test method immediately. |
| Gingivitis-Induction Experiments |
In direct violation of its research policy, Iams is paying an experimenter
at the University of Mississippi Medical Center to induce gingivitis––a
painful stage of periodontal disease––in 21 beagles by
cutting and suturing their gums from November 2002 to October 2005.
After the experiment, the dogs are set to be “sold and transferred
to another research facility ” for years of more cruel lab tests! |
Iams should conduct collaborative veterinary clinic studies
that use dogs who naturally have gingivitis and who are
volunteered to the clinic for humane studies by their human caretakers. |
Please e-mail
Iams and demand that the company immediately end this experiment, release
the dogs to a reputable beagle rescue organization, and
use humane testing alternatives,
such as collaborative veterinary clinic studies. |
