The Price Of Pet Food Research
For some pet food companies that desire the “perfect” pet food to sell to consumers, they conduct research to find what works and what doesn’t. But there is always a price to pay for this research. And the ones that do pay are the animals.
Dr. George Fahey, a professor of animal and nutritional sciences, conducts pet food research experiments at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. In the basement of the animal-science laboratory, Fahey keeps a group of dogs to experiment on. But these dogs look different than your normal canine friend.
Each of the dogs have gone through a surgical procedure to string a length of tubing from its intestinal tract to a clear plastic spout that sticks out of the dog’s side. This was all done under Fahey’s orders. By doing this procedure, Fahey can open the spout by hand, fill a bag with what came out of the spout, and be able to calculate how much the dog had digested before whatever the dog had not digested could move down through the body. The plastic tubing was inserted in the ileum, where food absorption ends and fermentation by the microflora and bacteria of the lower bowel begins.
Fahey is able to analyze how much vitamin, mineral, fat or sugar would enter a dog’s bloodstream when the dog is given a sample of food. Fahey’s career has been focused on investigating the metabolism of domestic animals, and his research has been touted as an integral part in defining the nature of pet food.
He also supervises other nutrition laboratories in the University of Illinois Department of Animal Sciences. His largest lab is filled with jars of secret-coded dog and cat diets, and piles of commercial pet foods that are sent to Fahey to give to the animals in the control groups of their experiments. Fahey would not reveal any of the specific brands he tests.
Fahey does his research to help pet food companies find the “perfect” cat or dog food. With his academic status and independent financing, his research prevents pet food manufacturers from receiving negative publicity if they experimented on surgically altered animals themselves.
In contrast to the pet food companies, Fahey said dogs can be fine with simply eating corn and soybeans daily. It’s the cheapest diet that a dog owner can put a dog on, and it provides all the vitamins, minerals, protein, fat and carbohydrates a dog needs, Fahey explained. But, this kind of diet would not sell to consumers, he added.
“People buy diets on the basis of two things,†Fahey said. “The first is palatability. You put it on the floor and the dogs clean up the bowl.â€
The second factor is the appearance of the dog’s stool. “It should be half as long as this pencil, picked up as easily as this pencil, Ziplocked — and away we go. We have to have that if they’re keeping the dog in the condo on the 34th floor and they have a white carpet,†Fahey stated.
Throughout all of his research, Fahey realized what all of his investigations and experiments have come down to: the challenge of controlling a dog’s bowel movements. He said premium dog foods contain at least 30 percent protein and 20 percent fat. Dogs don’t need to be fed that much, Fahey added, but this way “you have a total tract digestibility of 88 percent, which is good if you don’t want that dog to go in your house when you’re out for the day. A corn-soy diet can’t do that. The dog can’t hold it.â€
A tour of Fahey’s research laboratory shows seven spotless kennels. Each has a short-haired, mixed-breed dog in the kennel, and each dog has a clear, plastic spout on their side. Fahey said his laboratories get inspected by the U.S.D.A.
Each cage for the seven dogs: Wiggles, Bo, Teeny, Dutchess, Flick, Shai, and Todd were described as immaculately clean. The floors sparkled, and the stainless-steel food bowls glistened in the light.
Fahey said all of the dogs were gentle and the ideal animals to work with.
The dogs live in temperature-controlled environments, and the lights turn on at 6 in the morning and turn off at 8 every night. They play with their toys and listen to AM radio all day. Fahey stated their kennels were bigger than federal guidelines for size. He also said the lab assistants took the dogs outside twice a week to exercise, play and get some fresh air. (emphasis ours)
Fahey said: “If you had this much money spent on you, you’d be happy, too.â€
One lab technician described the dogs as “spoiled brats.”
Fahey explained the spouts do not seem to bother the dogs.
“If it is put in correctly, it becomes part of them,†he said. “It heals very nicely, and becomes a part of their anatomy.â€
At the end of Fahey’s description of the lab’s procedures to his visitor, the room was extremely quiet. The dogs sat there looking as if they were begging for something. Finally when Fahey and the visitor left the room, all of the dogs began to bark, whine, howl, and scream. Their cries were heard throughout the hallways.
The visitor asked why the dogs were so upset.
“They thought you were going to take them out to play,†Fahey said. “Look what you did.â€
Source: New York Times (registration required)
(Thanks Maureen)
September 3rd, 2007 at 10:48 am
I found it very interesting that he stated that corn and soy diets were just fine for dogs, and he works for the premium companies to find the “right” mix for their diets. Is he trying to give pet owners a hint that we are spending more than we need to?
From personal experience, I have fed “cheaper” diets before and I can tell a difference in my dogs from the cheap stuff to the premium (and not all premiums are the same), from stool size (which he formulates for) and smell to the feel of my dogs coats. And after the recalls, it is difficult to find a company to trust, especially with the big corporations.
September 3rd, 2007 at 11:04 am
“The dogs live in temperature-controlled environments, and the lights turn on at 6 in the morning and turn off at 8 every night. They play with their toys and listen to AM radio all day . . . He also said the lab assistants took the dogs outside twice a week to exercise, play and get some fresh air. (emphasis ours)
Fahey said: “If you had this much money spent on you, you’d be happy, too.â€
One lab technician described the dogs as “spoiled brats.â€
Fahey explained the spouts do not seem to bother the dogs.
“If it is put in correctly, it becomes part of them,†he said. “It heals very nicely, and becomes a part of their anatomy.â€
At the end of Fahey’s description of the lab’s procedures to his visitor, the room was extremely quiet. The dogs sat there looking as if they were begging for something. Finally when Fahey and the visitor left the room, all of the dogs began to bark, whine, howl, and scream. Their cries were heard throughout the hallways.
The visitor asked why the dogs were so upset.
“They thought you were going to take them out to play,†Fahey said. “Look what you did.â€
No, Mr. Fahey, look what you’ve done. In an age of computers, computer-modeling, and CAD, experimentation of this kind is not only not necessary, it’s immoral. Your attitude re the dogs’ play (twice a week! oh, how generous!) is shameful enough. You simply do the dirty work of companies like Iams, Hills, and Purina. One can only hope in time . . . time . . . we can shut down laboratories like yours and put you out on the street where you belong.
September 3rd, 2007 at 11:05 am
“Fine” is not good enough for me. Yes, dogs can survive on corn and soy… but what kind of a life? I can’t begin to count how many dogs we have improved just on nutritional therapy alone (removing grains, increasing fresh portions), dogs that lived miserable lives with skin, ear and joint pain, not to mention IBD/IBS, allergies, etc.
It should be noted here that this man is not looking for the “best”, he’s looking for the “right”. Tiny stools, etc. No work is being done in regards to what can improve the field, simply the cheapest combination of the selected ingredients with appropriate results.
Hardly what I would term “research.”
September 3rd, 2007 at 11:07 am
Fahey said: “If you had this much money spent on you, you’d be happy, too.â€
I must have missed the part of this article that demonstrates how happy these animals are. I wonder how happy Dr. Fahey would be if he were put in a cage and surgically altered. Of course, we’d keep his cage very clean, he could listen to the radio and he would be taken outside twice a week.
September 3rd, 2007 at 12:11 pm
“The second factor is the appearance of the dog’s stool. “It should be half as long as this pencil, picked up as easily as this pencil, Ziplocked — and away we go. We have to have that if they’re keeping the dog in the condo on the 34th floor and they have a white carpet,†Fahey stated.”
umm, we shouldn’t be feeding dogs based on stool size for a white carpet!! shouldn’t these dogs be living normal dog lives so they can see how much a real dogs body needs?! how can you judge nutrition on inactive dogs for active dogs?
“Throughout all of his research, Fahey realized what all of his investigations and experiments have come down to: the challenge of controlling a dog’s bowel movements. He said premium dog foods contain at least 30 percent protein and 20 percent fat. Dogs don’t need to be fed that much, Fahey added, but this way “you have a total tract digestibility of 88 percent, which is good if you don’t want that dog to go in your house when you’re out for the day. A corn-soy diet can’t do that. The dog can’t hold it.â€
so they are developing dog food based on how long a dog is kept inside?! WTF?! should i clue them in that my raw feed dog only goes once a day average (and it’s a prefect size! lol!~) so maybe all pet food companies should be offering raw diets? ;) sounds like there is way too much waste on a corn and soy diet and all they are doing is trying to find what they can add to the cheapest ingredients so the dog won’t eliminate while you’re at work. now there’s some nutritional research . . . good to know they have the dog’s best interest in mind.
September 3rd, 2007 at 12:26 pm
This just absolutely disgusts me, not only the treatment and “care” of these poor dogs, but their research focus. I hope this man, and all others like him, are put out of business. This is just another reason to not trust the commercial pet food companies, particularly the ones who say “they” do no invasive animal testing. Heck no, they pay someone else to do it! This just stinks!!!
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:07 pm
Sorry, but EVERYONE WHO SUPPORTS THESE MEGA COMMERCIAL PET FOOD COMPANIES, SUPPORTS THIS TOO! I am just sick and tired of hearing about cruel treatment of animals, so all of us can have that “perfect” dog and cat food for our pets.
Just make your own pet food, I’ve been doing it since the recall started. My pets never looked and felt better because of it.
I even dumped the Evangers organic cat food, because of it’s poor quality. Also, all the commercial pet foods use synthetic supplements in it from China. Very few companies manufacture vitamins and mineral supplements here in the US anymore.
If more people made their own pet food, and it’s really not that hard, we could put a lot of these mega pet food companies out of business, or at least make them suffer for a change, like we did with Menu Foods.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:19 pm
Here is your “Pet Food Industry” for you. Right out of a Nazi concentration camp.
These people are pet killers and they don’t give a sht. They think animals are just disposables.
Dogs and cats were doing just fine before their “industry” came along.
September 3rd, 2007 at 1:53 pm
I’d like to know what happens to these poor lab dogs once they have gone thru months? years? of experimental living? Do they “patch” them up and find them good homes where they can be normal and loving pets? or is their job done and they get a needle in their arm?
Why can’t they analyze the end-product—THE POOP–and take the tubes out of these poor unfortunate lab dogs. We don’t put tubes into our (human) babies sides to analyze their formula or baby food. Why do they do this to the animals?
Every day I hear another story about the Pet Food Industry and it MAKES ME ANGRY. IT MAKES ME SICK.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:07 pm
Where is PETA when you need them? Where is the ADL? Where is the outrage from all of us? Or are we indeed worried about our white carpets?
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:16 pm
This kind of treatment is one of the things PETA has been targeting for years. (Animals are not ours to eat, wear or experiment on). If you think this is bad, you should read what is being done to animals by companies testing cosmetics and household products.
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:31 pm
and with all this high priced , exacting experimentation , minute analyses of poop, one supposes, how come we have no freaking idea what killed 1000s of pets? what, we didn’t painstakingly stuff their tubes with melamine to see what color crap came out the other end? who cares if it kills them when you can get an ‘ accurate protein analysis’ and cost cut with cheap goods at the same time?
the am radio -well that’s beyond cruel. i believe the geneva conventions outlaws that sort of barbarism.
we had pets in the 60s and 70s when i was a kid- i even found an old magazine c. 1966 that had an ad for one all meat pet food labelled for both dogs and cats- and they lived long relatively healthy lives without the candy coated dr. mengele routine this dweeb is pulling off.
may the jackles of anubis rip them to shreds in the underworld with ‘the music of our lives’ station playing in the background.
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:48 pm
I would give anything for someone to find out which companies this ***hole does his “research” for. Then publish it so I (and maybe others), can choose not to purchase from them anymore.
-Animal Foster Mom
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:56 pm
I don’t know if you all get the Parade in your Sunday paper, everyone around here does so you proberly do too. In it you will find “The right food for your pet” by Karen Halligan. She is a vet & is telling us to buy store bought pet food & that home made is not good. She contradicts herself with healthy treats. Some of you might want to visit Parade dot com, scroll down left side to healthy treats, if you want to read her article you can click on that from there. She already has 2 pages of comments & I think only 1 is good. Another way of getting to the pfi, vets who sell their food & our sick pets. If you want to leave a comment you have to register, no big deal. Just thought you would like to know.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:06 pm
This is horrible and should not go on. . . I feed my dogs real food.
However, PETA is not an answer. PETA wants to end pet ownership! PETA supports BSL, etc.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:14 pm
I’m sorry, when you scroll down it will say Ten treat recipes for your pet. Sorry.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:33 pm
So this man does the pet food companys experimental crap so they can put out these fancy ads saying feed our food ,your dog will poop less. That used to be a gimick Iam’s used . This aricle is just another good reason to tell the pet food companies to go to hell. I wonder if any of his expermental dogs with the faucets protruding from their sides were fed the poison pet foods? I wonder what pet food the university recommends to their clients? This is research that is totally uncalled for. This man is a licensed sicko!!!
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:43 pm
I hardly think going outside 2 x a week for less than 1/2 hour is “spoiled”. Also, how would you like an open gaping hole in your side for your entire life, Fahey?
You don’t deserve the Dr. in front of your name - you disgust me. We don’t learn about human nutrition this way - why should we learn about animal nutrition by barbaric means?
Sick, sick, sick - it’s Vicksonian, if you ask me.
September 3rd, 2007 at 5:45 pm
Unethical, immoral, inhumane - all in the name of small, stinkless stools.
Next time you take a big, stinky, wet, splattering dump on your terms (when and where you wish at the time you wish) - think about the F’up research you are doing, you BIG VICKSONIAN @#$hole…
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:07 pm
Here is Dr. George Fahey:
The university’s web site says his SPECIES INTERESTS include LAB ANIMALS. Are lab animals a separate species I don’t know about?
Professor
Department of Animal Sciences
University of Illinois
166 Animal Sciences Lab MC 630
1207 W. Gregory Dr.
Urbana, IL 61801-4734
gcfahey@uiuc.edu
Phone: (217) 333-2361
Fax: (217) 333-7861
Species Interests:
Beef, Companion, Dog, Lab Animals, Other
http://www.ansci.uiuc.edu/abou.....s.cfm?ID=9
Department Head:
Dr. Neal Merchen
116 Animal Sciences Lab MC 630
1207 W. Gregory Dr.
Urbana, Illinois 61801-4734
Phone: (217) 333-3462
Fax: (217) 244-2871
nmerchen@uiuc.edu
University of Illinois
College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences
Animal Sciences Laboratory, 1207 West Gregory Drive Urbana, Illinois 61801
For more information about Animal Sciences, contact us at AnSci@uiuc.edu
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:08 pm
Dr. ……………. you are cruel , immoral , you think , the dogs are happy ,
NO , you wouldn’t be either , if you had a plastric tube , sticking out , your side.
I pray ……….. PEDA…….. finds your expermential Lab ,& BLOWS YOU & YOUR CO. TO hell ………….. for what you did to theses ANIMALS ,
PETA blows up , places like your , because , you get away , with murder ,
Your nothing but a greed , money B….. , that gets away with hurt., pain , death , to God’s loving animals . I hope , Dr.George Fahey , you eat corn, soy , some one checks your shit , puts a tube in you, that what you need , I hope you rot in Hell. T.K.J. Thel
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:45 pm
I’m glad to see so many of you upset about animal testing. PETA and many, many groups and activists have been fighting animal testing for years. They’ve been trying to shut down Huntington Life Sciences Laboratories for years …and the protests have been working. Until our F—– up Gov’t intervened, passing AETA last Nov. 06, the Animal Enterprise Terriorism Act which now labels animal activists as ‘terrorists!’
We should all be worried about this.
Six animal activists are sitting in jail right now, some for up to 6 years all because they actively promoted protesting these labs on their website. Read about the Shac7 here - www.shac7.com -
The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) and the Equal Justice Alliance are fighting to get their sentences appealed and reverse this law.
Read this important report by Heidi Boghosian and the NLG, “Punishing Protest,†which surveys the state of civil liberties in a political climate that has become more and more hostile to dissent. Be sure to check out the section “Applying Terrorist Label to Activists,†with information on the SHAC 7 case, AETA, grand juries, local legislation and the “Operation Backfire†cases.
https://www.nationallawyersguild.org/NLG_Punishing_Protest_2007.pdf
Read about AETA here: http://www.equaljusticealliance.com/
Don’t forget to visit www.shac7.com - these activists sitting in prison would love to receive letters from like minded people so feel free to write to them!
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:47 pm
This was written by Ann Martin:
In early January 2002, I received a letter from a student at the University of Illinois, asking if I could make some suggestions as to what they could do about nine dogs that were housed in a windowless lab at the university. These dogs had cannulas (tubes) surgically implanted in their sides so that samples of digested food could be taken. The studies included feeding the dogs raw and rendered animal by-products including “poultry necks and backs and viscera, and ground-up poultry feathers”. Until 2002, this research was funded by the Iams company, but now is being funded by the soybean industry and the US Department of Agriculture.
Procter & Gamble (P&G) purchased Iams in September 1999 and issued a code of ethics. Animal People, an on-line organisation devoted to the health and welfare of pets, reported in June 2001 that P&G stated its intention to phase out animal testing as quickly as alternatives could be developed and approved by regulators.
Be assured that Iams is not the only company involved in such cruel research. Ralston Purina, prior to its acquisition by Nestlé, Hill’s Pet Nutrition, owned by Colgate-Palmolive, Pedigree Pet Foods, owned by Mars, and Alpo Pet Foods, prior to its acquisition of Nestlé, are just a few of the companies involved in animal experimentation.
http://siriusdog.com/articles/.....dering.htm
Does this sound familiar…… I don’t think it matters which PFI is conducting this testing they are all guilty….IMO.
Read her article and judge for yourselves.
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:59 pm
Who is Huntington Life Sciences?
http://www.kinshipcircle.org/f.....Scienc.pdf
Iams Experiements on Cats and Dogs:
http://www.kinshipcircle.org/f.....Kibble.pdf
More Animal Testing FAct Sheets found here: http://www.kinshipcircle.org/fact_sheets/
September 3rd, 2007 at 7:14 pm
Looks like Iams is one of the major companies who use Dr. Fahey and his barbaric tests. And it appears that these tests have been used on both cats and dogs and possibly other species since at least 1990. Those poor tortured creatures..my heart just breaks:
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/ro/www/StudentsImprovingtheLivesofAnimals/articles.pdf
September 3rd, 2007 at 7:22 pm
“Fahey explained the spouts do not seem to bother the dogs”
NOT what this resport shows:
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/ro/www/StudentsImprovingtheLivesofAnimals/murray.html
It is only because of outside agencies that the dogs even have bedding:
https://netfiles.uiuc.edu/ro/www/StudentsImprovingtheLivesofAnimals/labs.doglab.html
And this is being done so pet food companies can come up with “improved” poisons..totally criminal!!!
September 3rd, 2007 at 7:23 pm
I found this article on testing animals and was written by a PETA writer. As of 2006, when the article was published, P&G had not given up testing animals in the cosmetic industry. Yet in 2001, P&G said it would phase out the use of animals. Guess they weren’t meaning to phase animal testing on cosmetics only pet food.
Another company holdout is Colgate-Palmolive. Here’s the article:
http://www.americanchronicle.c.....leID=10278
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:00 pm
NOT BOUGHT BY BIG BUSINESS?? I don’t think so….follow the money trail…
Fahey Named U of I’s First Kraft Foods Human Nutrition Professor
Published: Sep. 21, 2006
Source: Sharon Donovan, (217) 333-2289, sdonovan@uiuc.edu
URBANA - George C. Fahey Jr. has been named the University of Illinois’s first Kraft Foods Human Nutrition Endowed Professor. The endowed chair is part of a recent $1 million permanent endowment from Kraft Foods North America to the College of Agricultural, Consumer and Environmental Sciences (ACES) Division of Nutritional Sciences.
In addition to the endowed chair, the gift establishes two Kraft Foods Human Nutrition Graduate Fellowships and the Kraft Foods Human Nutrition Undergraduate Scholarship Program within the U of I’s Department of Food Science and Human Nutrition.
“Dr. Fahey is eminently qualified to be the first Kraft Foods Human Nutrition Endowed Professor,” said Sharon Donovan, director of the U of I’s Division of Nutritional Sciences. “He is an internationally recognized authority on dietary fiber. His colleagues see him as one of the world’s leading experts in his research discipline.”
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:02 pm
He looks as if he himself could use a little dietary fiber - he looks pretty #$@%$% constipated, if you ask me…Maybe he should be eating more corn and soybeans.
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:03 pm
This makes me really sick! How long do they have to do research on a pet before they know what they need? They should know everything they need to by now. The way this sounds makes me wonder if the food get into the animal at all. It is really sick!
This does not need to be done at all. They already know from years of research what an animal needs. It is just another way for them to make an animal suffer for profit.
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:15 pm
Looks like his most recent research is trying to ascertain whether or not dog food can be made primarily out of corn husks….maybe he should feed his kids/grandkids the diet he would like US pets to be on….
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:18 pm
Why compete with the biofuel industry for corn waste? Maybe he should try and do research with cardboard or cement waste - Maybe his research is what motivated the Chinese in the first place!!
September 3rd, 2007 at 8:32 pm
3 years old but informative:
http://www.worldwild.org/PetFood.pdf
September 3rd, 2007 at 10:31 pm
Gee, if these experiments were done on humans too, it would help save the enviroment. We’d use alot less diapers on the babies and the rest of use would use alot less toliet paper. Maybe Dr. Fahey would like to to be the first one to submit to lab testing ( all in the name of science,of course) THE ABOVE COMMENT IS MEANT TO BE SARCASTIC
September 3rd, 2007 at 10:52 pm
Did Dr. Fahey use the adulterated products on his test subjects. He talks about only seven dogs. Where are the dead ones? Where are the autopsies on those poor creatures? Get real. He knew just how the PFI was trying to fake protein content. Dr. Fahey probably tested his animals with the crap that killed ours. Some greedy executives just took his findings and figured ‘more is better’ and that’s why so many pets are dead. Dr. Fahey says “If you had this much money spent on you, you’d be happy, too.†What a total idiot. Most people know money doesn’t buy happiness - well, Dr. Fahey, money obviously doesn’t buy good sense either, as he has proven with his interview . Maybe he thinks the money he receives from the PFI will buy his way to happiness. It’s no wonder he’s concerned with the size of stools - he’s full of it.
September 3rd, 2007 at 11:40 pm
Fahey is making a living torturing and killing animals, mainly dogs it seems. Those dogs wailing like that….They were begging to be rescued and saved from their exsistence of living HELL. There is no need for these experiments to be done any longer. It is only an excuse for Fahey to get away with torture and get paid for it. And where do these poor animals come from? The so called Animal shelters? WHY IS THIS LEGAL? WHY IS THIS HAPPENING AT ALL? The people who support and work for any of these operations. May they burn in Hell for eternity.
September 3rd, 2007 at 11:53 pm
now that we are chem free on our yard, we found that in mid April we should treat the lawn with corn glutin to treat/prevent broadleaf weeds. good to know that feeding corn glutin to pets will prevent them from weeds?!!? Just to be sure maybe we should insert a tube into them and see if the food that contains glutin kills the weeds we inserted into them previously. Or, should we feed the lawn with pet food and inject it with weeds to see what takes hold? so confused. better living thru chemisty.
September 4th, 2007 at 2:32 am
Does not this count for animal cruelty? I mean suturing tubes into a dog’s stomach… something should be done about this kind of experimentation. I am very upset about this.
September 4th, 2007 at 6:42 am
“The studies included feeding the dogs raw and rendered animal by-products including
“poultry necks and backs and viscera, and ground-up poultry feathersâ€.”
To be realistic, wild canines eat this stuff all the time. Coyotes will raid a harvested corn field for corn waste and fill their bellies with it. They eat raw berries, carcasses, etc. You can tell by their stool , which we have in abundance and as a tracker I can tell what they ate. Their stool is always small, hard, and breaks down in a day. I know it is kind of gross, but when you live in the wilds you sort of have to know what lives close to you.
Now as to our pets, they are not wild animals and their digestive systems are not the same. Could they eventually eat off the land like their wild ancestors, well sure SOME of them could. I don’t think you’d be able to see a pug or other short nosed dog munching around inside a deer carcass but a longer nosed GSD could.
As to animal use in products. there are labels on the ones who do not do animal testing. You the consumer MUST purchase these and only these products if you want to have any say in whether animals are tested or not. Read the labels, write the companies of your current favorite products if you find they DO NOT have the labels on them, and DO something.
We went chemical and animal testing free several years ago. Our skin and health improved dramatically. Sure it does cost more, but a lot of the not tested products are very concentrated and you use less.
We could care less about the perfect English lawn and have removed most of it in favor of native plants that use less water and provide habitat for the animals that live near us. Our bonus include less gas usage mowing useless grass, less waste of water, and a huge photo catalog of our fellow creatures. Living in the city, you can plant lots of flower gardens instead of lawn. Use trees and shrubs to take out lawn areas and make places for birds to nest and reproduce. This will have an added affect of lowering your bug population.
September 4th, 2007 at 8:01 am
How a person treats an animal is a good indication of what he is capable of doing to another human being. Maybe if this researcher had a tube sticking out of his side, he might have a better understanding of how these dogs feel. Being in a cage is pretty much like being in a cell, perhaps he could try that as well. There has got to be a better way to see if an animal even likes the food. Perhaps if they were not trying to perfect food for the profit motive, the horrible stories would not take place.
September 4th, 2007 at 8:16 am
I couldn’t get this story out of my mind. I will be writing to the manufacturers of the pet food I use to see if they are “clients” of this man (or others like him). Don’t expect an honest answer, but I’m gonna ask anyway.
I agree with all that Gindy wrote ~ and I, too, use only products that DO NOT do animal testing. The products are out there and readily available.
September 4th, 2007 at 9:18 am
STOP BUYING COMMERCIAL DOG FOOD!!!!!!! HOME COOK for Gods sake.
September 4th, 2007 at 10:03 am
The description of Dr. Fahey’s testing lab is very hard to read. However, that’s only one aspect of the NY Times article from which it came. There’s more to the article than this.
Note that you have to register to read the NYT online, but it’s free. However, articles are only available for a week. This was published on 9/2.
Nora’s message above says it all.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09.....mp;ei=5070
September 4th, 2007 at 11:29 am
You don’t have to test an animal to find melamine in the food. Test the food!!! Testing these poor animals did not help anyone when their pets died! So what good does this guy do? No good just more suffering!
These companies already know what is good for a pet to eat. They do not need to test the food for that but they sure need to test their pet food for chemicals that should not be in the food in the first place!! This is what they should have spent their money on!
For the price they are paying this guy to murder dogs they could have in house testing of their pet food and our pets may not have died.
September 4th, 2007 at 12:24 pm
Sorry, but cooking for my five cats isn’t going to work. One has ARF and IBD, none of them even like wet food (except for fancy feast ~ not a choice) and they will not eat home cooked anything! Believe me, I have tried to give real food as treats to get them interested and it does not work. So, there are some of us for lots of reasons who will continue to buy commercial pet food. We deserve to have safe, healthy food available!
September 4th, 2007 at 12:27 pm
This is probably how they were able to sneak in all those toxins and low grade vitamins in the pet food by this type of experimenting. See how much you can add before it kills an animal! I am sure some of the original test animals are not around today.
September 4th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Personally, I don’t care if my puppies have stools the size of mastadon stools and need to be wiped with a full roll of triple-ply paper towels (no longer buying Bounty!) each time they have a bowel movement! My puppies’ stools on homecooked human foods are beautiful — small, low odor, etc., and my female is no longer suffering from flatulence once I started homecooking. Their little fannies are sparkling clean every single time they go.
Aren’t prisoners in solitary confinement even allowed one hour of exercise per day? Those poor dogs… going outside only twice per week.
For a supposedly erudite man, Fahey’s quotes do not seem to match.
From his quotes, it’s FAHEY’S GLIB ATTITUDE TOWARD THE ANIMALS that irks me. And, if these quotes are his puerile attempts at humor, I fail to see ANY humor when I picture dogs with tubes hanging out of their sides.
Fahey said: “If you had this much money spent on you, you’d be happy, too.â€
…
The visitor asked why the dogs were so upset.
“They thought you were going to take them out to play,†Fahey said. “Look what you did.â€
And this guy is the golden child of the division????????????????????? With that attitude?
He may have published and presented his way to the highest academic rank and received awards, but this guy appears to have become so callous toward his invasive research on animals that he makes jokes about it.
This article was in the New York Times. I’ll bet the chancellor of the entire IL University system will be getting a lot of feedback about what Fahey said, and I hope he/she does.
…………………………………….
In academia, it’s the game of pulling in the research money for prestige, publishing results, and presenting at conferences. Fahey’s been at it for 31 years. Does anyone know if the state of IL is going to offer an enticing round of retirement incentives? Who knows how many lab animals he’s “worked” on. He’ll probably just move into a high paying human food research position next.
SOME RECOGNITION GEORGE C. FAHEY RECEIVED:
Corbin Award in Companion Animal Nutrition (Am. Soc. An. Sci. and The IAMS Co.)
2003 George C. Fahey, Jr. (NOTE: the IAMS connection)
American Feed Industry Association Award for Research in Ruminant Animal Nutrition
1990 George C. Fahey, Jr.
Co-authored Publication: Nutrient Requirements of Laboratory Animals, Fourth Revised Edition, 1995 (1995)
Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (ILAR)
- by several authors, one being Fahey.
Grant from Bristol-Myers Squibb Foundation on BABY FORMULA research. Division of Nutritional Sciences Receives $500,000 Freedom to Discover Grant
- Fahey is one of the researchers
Many of Fahey’s publications are sited by www.bioplastic.org
Looks like a lot of similar research on altering the ph level of hydrogen peroxide on corn stalks, corn cobs, etc. to increase their breakdown to release every last carb that’s possible.
If an animal can’t digest a by-product in its natural state without altering the “food” chemically first, turn the corn cob into the soil for compost!! Remember Upton Sinclair’s “everything but the squeal.” Remember the bio-fuel industry/animal feed manufacturers looking for a way to use the by-product, glycerine, in chicken and swine feed to see how much they can add before the animal’s appetite is hindered and slaughter weight is affected. Is this another cheap solution for waste products of agri-business?
Article Published: “Alkaline Hydrogen Peroxide Treatment Unlocks Energy in Agricultural By-Products”
Abstract here: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/.....0/4727/820
According to the UIUC website, Fahey has enjoyed an “enviable” record of industry funding…
Yup! WHAT A LAUDATORY CAREER! Reading about Fahey makes me ill.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:25 pm
I was glad to see the posts on the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. This act was pushed by some farmers , agri businesses , farm groups and their well paid lobbyists . I t further errodes are constitutional rights. This act protects experimental research such as Fahey is conducting and makes those of us who oppose it terrorists. This act needs to overturned and declared unconstitutional. I ask everyone who are the real terrorists the people who care about animals or the ones who would take away our constitutional right .
In the area where I live a farmer claimed after his milk tested positive for an antibiotic that he saw people driving away from near his milk tank and felt they had tainted his milk. This story was headline news for several days . The federal .state and local police were investigating this so called terrorist act. I have often wondered if this incident wasn’t used to help get AETA passed. Over a year latter and after AETA passed in the inside section of the paper was a story in small print, the farmer had been arrested for falsely reporting an incident. He had mixed contanimated milk with his good milk and made up the story about terrorists (in this case people who care about animals doing it). the truth came out after AETA passed.
September 4th, 2007 at 1:41 pm
I’d be more fearful of the garbage (chemicals, antibiotics, growth hormones, industrial waste products) we allow and feed our animals for human consumption than I would be of any possible “outside” terrorist attack to our food supplies! If you ask me, the garbage that’s allowed in food IS terrorism!
September 4th, 2007 at 2:48 pm
I don’t know what to say about Dr. Frankenstein, er Fahey…….I couldn’t even finish the article because I was getting sick & angry all at the same time.
This is horrifying.
I agree with all of you……I think Fahey needs to be “surgically altered” with a plastic tube sticking out his side, put in a cell for 24 hrs a day, his poop sampled & let out to exercise twice a week. We can feed him MF canned pf & pouches w/a little dry mixed in & see how long he survives on this “wholesome & nutritious” food……you know, the one that extends lives.
September 4th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
This kind of thing goes on every day in the Animal Science departments of all the Land Grant universities in the United States. What has changed over the years is money that colleges and universities take from industry to do their bidding. When educational institutions were free from this kind of thing, college students actually received a good education and went on to be productive members of society. Our colleges and universities have become corrupt because they have become politicized. If you examine what has happened to student loans you will see the same thing. I hate Republicans and what they have done. They have ruined our country in every way. There isn’t anything or anyone that can’t be bought.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
The corporatization of academia…it sux and so does Fahey with his biased enviable industry funding and thus his suspect (read: invalid) research findings. Whatever. Every institution in America is corrupt. None of which deserve any trust or respect.
September 4th, 2007 at 4:48 pm
Of course, I found this story just awfully depressing, eye opening, and sickening.
I have to comment on some of the posts that I too am horrified by the passage of the AETA. I called all my reps/Senators to oppose it but in the end it was passed at night on voice vote with almost no one there. It was cosponsored by a list of people who shocked me. It is horrible, and must be overturned.
Let me know what I can do on this score. I know it just probably has to be challenged up to the Supreme Court at this point, but the lack of outrage and coverage on this has disturbed me greatly. We have truly gone crazy in this society when the word “terrorist” can be used to describe someone who, through effective protest actions, convinces a company to sever a contractual relationship with a vivisection lab.
The word “terrorist” has lost all meaning.
Stefani
The Toonces Project
http://www.TheTooncesProject.com
“Is Your Pet Safe at the Vet?”
September 4th, 2007 at 5:51 pm
I agree with everyone especialy Sharon. It is done everywhere & they are getting away with it. I didn’t know about aeta, learned something new. Is their anyway we can get it changed. We talk about other places & look what all is going on in our America. I hate it. The poor, sick, old, kids & our animals. I will promise one thing, no one is getting even a dollar from me anymore who gives or uses animals for research.
I do use animal free testing products but from what I read the ones who say they don’t test on animals just use a third party. I’ve read that a lot of times, I think the last time on consumer products. Cage an animal & do with it what ever you want & call yourself a good caringing person & a gift to the world. Hell is a good place for them.
September 5th, 2007 at 12:55 am
I quit med school because of the research. I was in a PhD/MD program. My undergrad degree was in molecular biology and that is also what I planned on doing my grad work in. Not once as an undergrad was I exposed to animal research. Imagine my surprise when I started grad school and it was everywhere. I refused to participate in anything involving animal research. My professors agreed, but it was everywhere. I would walk into a lab to find animal limbs everywhere. They were blatantly disregarded with no respect. They would treat these animals awfully, and say you really have to be a person that likes animals to do animal research. What sense does that make? I would say that 99% of the research was done for grant money. There was no scientifically significant research being done, and if you questioned the neccessity of it you got no answer. I remember one thing that really upset me and I remember this five years later. One class had to test for proteins in brains of rats. There were five rats in a small cage. I saw the rats before the so called experiment. I refused to take part or be present. To make a long story short, the rats were killed and the brains removed. The machinery used to test protein levels was broken. No one tested that before the rats were killed so they were killed for nothing, and scientist are supposed to be intelligent. I know a degree of research is needed in medecine, but I thought things had changed. I thought we advanced. I quit after one semester. I came home depressed everyday. My breaking point was when I was to be enrolled in a class that used over 300 dogs. I did not stay for it, but I heard from people in the class the dogs were used for things like just to see the heart beat and killed shortly after. Not humanely either. Many would seize badly right before. Sorry for the long post but I just wanted to get that out there. I suffered for two years with depression after going to school for one semester.