Be Excellent To Each Other

Hi friends. I've been having a nice day today, despite learning of this, in regard to IAMS pet food.

First off - yes, I'm well aware that PETA are bat-shit crazy. However fucking hell, I don't think I was this bloated by moral outrage even when I learned of Nestle's penchant for murdering babies.

I shall add IAMS to my list of Companies To Incovenience Somehow Wherever Possible.

I think I was slightly more outraged by the harm to babies done by Nestle, but yes, this is quite unpleasant.

However, as an opening shot "Christmas the dog was found to have dirty ears" is hardly enough to get Outraged of Tunbridge Wells to break out his green ink...

That's because Outraged presumably didn't read that the dog's ears were sufficiently dirty to have started an infection. A dog sitting in a cage all day by itself. Outraged is a dick.

I'm not sure Outraged has read this yet, but I did indeed notice the fact he got infected. Well, in perspective, kids' ears get dirty enough to have infections all the time, so that's hardly up there with dropping acid in animals' eyes like bastard companies like L'Oreal used to do. And a dog being in a cage on its own all day? Well, again, not very nice but hardly up there with the sort of physical torture that has been inflicted on animals in the name of testing cosmetics.

Don't get me wrong, as I said in my previous post I think this is quite unpleasant, but to apparently suggest that it's worse than anything nestle's done to children's health is a bit of an exaggeration, surely?

And farmed animals get treated much worse than this all the time, too. I was muchly happy about the anti-battery farmed chicken thing recently on the telly. I was, however, massively pissed off by Jamie Oliver's cowardly climbdown when his employer flexed their corporate muscles.

That means nothing. Replace "dirty ear" with broken leg, and leave the scenario exactly as it is. Still no cause for concern?


I take it that you just read the first post before resuming your dinner.



A dog having experimental food tested on it on it all its life, in a cage with wide slats for easy cleaning away their vomit and feces, which causes the animals to regularly damage their legs if they try and walk around at all. So they just spend their live being tested on, infections building up around their body, their legs constantly injuring if they try to move about. Just lying down in a far corner all day, being sick 'as per projections'. Their only 'joy', being fed will (sometimes intentionally, which is not the same as maliciously) cause them to shit and puke themselves into an even more unhappy and terrified state. Most of them in darkness.


No, not at all. Nestle profited off a side-line product, as money-seeking opportunists with a casual disregard for life. Nestle staff never have to get rid of the bodies at the end of the day, before going home for tea. IAMS are showing zero regard for life, and the body clearing is an integral part of their core business. That's not simple greed, that's cold, callous slaughter.


Do they? Do they have surgery so the farmers don't have to listen to them screaming anymore, too?

Hmm. Ok. I had only read the first few posts about dogs on that site, and, to be fair, the PETA people's complaints seemed to be comparatively trivial when summarised on the front page. "This dog cowers at the back of her cage", "this dog has infected ears". Hence my fairly flippant first response, as these didn't sound anything like the abuses that have been exposed at other companies, and far less evil than murdering babies.

However, having gone into the detail, I agree that's all pretty horrific, and I'm as shocked as you are. I too will be adding IAMS to my list of companies to shun.



However, this is where I can't completely agree. What IAMS are doing is absolutely awful, but I value human life, especially that of children, over that of animals. Without exception. And therefore believe that those who harm or kill people are committing a greater evil than those who harm or kill animals.

Nestle have taken actions knowing full well that it will result in deaths of children. That they didn't clear the bodies away at the end of it is neither here nor there - they knew that what they were (and still are) doing was going to be killing children. That's far worse than anything anyone could do to animals. I would therefore put Nestle somewhere further along the scale of evil than I would IAMS, and would use my supply of hanging rope on them first.

I suspect that's something we may disagree on, though?

Having said that, moral Top Trumps isn't a great game to play. So - IAMS bad, Nestle bad.

In hindsight, I should perhaps have added a paragraph of explanatory text to my post.


Hoorah!


Ah, okay. My opinion differs from yours. I've known some amazing animals, but alarmingly few worthwhile human beings. I've also never had my life ruined by a dog, or been routinely told that entire countries of cat 'want us all dead'. I understand and respect your opinion, however.


That's cool, then I'll use mine on IAMS after. That's that problem neatly solved, eh?

Likewise. I appreciate that everyone has different views on these things. However, I've known some fairly evil Machiavellian dogs, you see...



But I do understand that other people have greater attachments to animals than me, and that some people have less strong attachments to other people than me. I've never had a dog or a cat, and I've never seen the need, so I guess I just find it hard to understand that level of attachment.

But it's horses for courses, as it were. Although I can't understand horse people. Brrrr.


Huzzah! Problem neatly solved indeed.

So, to add to the evil companies list then, I'd like L'Oreal up there too. They're also part owned by Nestle - two birds with one stone, eh?

There's something a bit weird about this though, they're testing dog food on these dogs, so the people creating the demand for the product are the supposed animal lovers. I'm not sure why that's significant, but it sort of seems like it should be.

"Iams - because only your dog is worth it"

Whatever organisation made that YouTube video needs to hire someone with an ounce of computer skills.

Erm. You've got a bit of a false syllogism going on there.

I should maybe point out that this video was only recently 'released' (October/November of last year) and it's still being looked into. It's not quite become a definite case of 'OMG NO!' so most potential consumers aren't 'aware' as yet.

On the one hand, Iams say the animals in the video (and written/photographed elsewhere) were "in the same facility but not a part of [Iams'] studies." Dubious IMO.

or

Naff off! I bet you eat Kit-Kats still.

mmm, Kit Kats.

PETA: A load of fucknuts. I propose we cease all animal testing, and use the PETArds instead.

I've never quite seen the point of testing cosmetics on animals. I don't care how much lipstick you put on a beagle, I'm not going to want to fuck it.

In other news, this is great.

F4GZ0r
\

Yeah I heard about this before CUS, a couple of years ago IIRC. It seems super-unnecessary.



Well, that's why you've got groups trying to let people know about it.



But apparently some people react badly to that.