PETA: FDA Likely Wrong About Wheat Gluten as Sole Source of Pet Food Poisoning

[Purveyor]

PETA Demands FDA Refocus Investigation: Are Toxic Levels of Vitamin D,
Other Agents Killing Dogs and Cats?

NORFOLK, Va., April 3 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- Although the Food and
Drug Administration (FDA) continues to blame tainted wheat gluten for
recent cat and dog illnesses and deaths, a mounting number of complaints
about sick and dying animals who ate only dry food that did not contain
wheat gluten strongly suggests another source of contamination. Evidence
from reputable laboratories indicates that an excessive amount of vitamin D
in pet food may be to blame. Vitamin D overdoses produce symptoms similar
to those seen in animals who recently have become sick or died after
consuming only dry foods.
This morning, PETA Vice President Bruce Friedrich made an urgent appeal
to Stephen Sundlof, director of the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine,
asking the agency to refocus its investigation beyond wheat gluten -- which
is used almost exclusively in wet foods -- and consider other possible
contaminants. In his letter, Friedrich points out the following:
-- Last year, a manufacturing error in the production of Royal Canin pet
food resulted in excessive amounts of vitamin D-3 in the food, causing
hypercalcemia, an abnormally high level of calcium in the blood that
caused animals' kidneys to malfunction.
-- Research in endocrinology at Cleveland Clinic has confirmed that high
levels of vitamin D-3 in animals' blood causes kidney malfunction.
-- Symptoms associated with excessive vitamin D-3 intake appear identical
to the symptoms that are being reported in dogs and cats now, leading
PETA to believe that vitamin D-3 may be implicated in the current spate
of pet food contamination.
On Monday, PETA called on FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach to
resign over the agency's mishandling of the pet food crisis.
"The FDA is feeding the public a line, and the American people's faith
in the government is dying along with dogs and cats," says Friedrich. "The
agency's failure to pinpoint the cause of death for animals who have eaten
only dry food is cause for the commissioner to resign or be fired."
Friedrich's letter to Dr. Stephen Sundlof is available upon request.
For more information, please visit http://PETA.org.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/04-03-2007/0004558929&EDATE=

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. Yeah, PETA's got some top notch laboratories.

Of course, they don't do animal research, so they rely on highly accurate magic 8-balls.

[Critters2]

2. Whereas Menu Foods does animal testing

and found out animals died from eating their shit. Didn't find out why, but they knew the critters stopped breathing. That is some pretty impressive science you got there.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

3. You're right.

They probably didn't even do a double blind study by testing chemtrails as a control.

:eyes:

[mhatrw]

72. What the hell is that supposed to mean?

We have been fed a line of crap on this from the FDA from the start. Do you agree or disagree with statement?

[TZ]

4. and PETA is the expert

in dead pets, considering how many they like to euthanize and dump illegally. Looks like they are taking advantage of the situation to make themselves look good. This PR (and thats what this is) is as nauseating to me as anything Menu Foods is doing. Nice agenda guys.:puke:

[catgirl]

8. Right. Everyone should just keep quiet about this whole thing.

Nice way to skew the story of the suffering animals the 2 PETA
people euthanized. How see through-these posts that pop up
when this topic (pet food deaths) comes up. The pet food industry
is going to need more help than that.

[TZ]

14. oh yes people who threaten violence agaisnt

those whom don't believe as they do are always to be trusted. Why don't you see they have an AGENDA as much as MENU foods does. I think this is bad but I would trust the vets or doctors at Cornell Medical school before I would trust a POLITICAL organization. Science not propaganda is called for.
Never said we shouldn't be outraged but lets not go off the deep end.

[catgirl]

19. Asking questions=propaganda?

PETA contacts the FDA and asks them to look into possible additional
causes. Propaganda? I WANT THEM TO INVESTIGATE. I don't care who
prods them to look into this. Obviously the FDA is clueless and incompetent.

[ronnykmarshall]

7. Ask the magic 8-ball!

http://8ball.tridelphia.net/

[catgirl]

5. I'm glad Peta thinks outside the box

they certainly know more about animals and their diets than these
fat asses at the FDA. Why isn't the FDA revealing the true numbers
of sick and dead pets? Why all the delays? Because they're in bed with
the pet food industry! This is a huge money industry with no standards
(intentional on the FDA's part). I'd love to know who's "buddies" with who
here. This is a huge scandal and Congress needs to address it as such.

[magellan]

10. Yes, at least they're asking questions and demanding action

People are questioning whether it's really the wheat gluten that's at fault since there are reports of dry food problems. The FDA should acknowledge that rather than letting owners make guinea pigs of their pets again.

[TZ]

11. PETA has a phD in biochemistry?

funny I never heard that. It's the CORNELL VETERINARY school that found the toxin. I would THINK they know just a little bit about nutrition and chemistry with pets.

[catgirl]

12. Did you even read the OP?

This is about dry food making pets sick. Sheesh!

[TZ]

17. well if they can get the Cleveland Clinic to cofirm the dry food problems

as they cite as someone supporting their POV, I will believe it. Scientists, not a special interest group whom I distrust immensely.

[magellan]

18. But the FDA DIDN'T find that toxin

They found another.

Bottom line, no one knows for sure what the source is, or even whether it's found in the wheat gluten. Until the FDA can identify the problem, and I mean including some dry foods that don't contain wheat gluten, then searching other avenues is beneficial.

[TZ]

21. I agree

But lets let the SCIENTISTS make judgements. You don't think there are tons of labs working on this right now? PETA jumps to conclusions way to quick.

[Beaverhausen]

22. And good for PETA for doing it

someone has to stand up for our pets - the FDA couldn't give a crap.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

24. Right.

Because spreading rumors and fear-mongering will certainly help things.

:crazy:

[magellan]

31. Do you think pet owners don't already know something else is wrong?

There've been plenty of reports of pets eating dry food not containing wheat gluten and getting sick/dying. The FDA is completely ignoring this and people are panicking anyway.

Best to get all the information out there. That's better than finding out the dry food you switched to was also bad but the FDA didn't say so and now Fifi/Fido's dead, isn't it?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

32. I think pet owners, myself included, don't know anything...

anymore than the FDA, PETA, or anybody else does.

[magellan]

35. Obviously. So what's the problem with being clear about that to the public?

I think it's fair to call out the FDA on this. They haven't exactly been forthcoming or prompt.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. "They haven't exactly been forthcoming or prompt."

And how would you know?

[magellan]

54. The AP had the original story on March 16th

The FDA did not enter the discussion with a press release till the next day. It ought to have been the other way around.

The FDA also withheld the name of the Chinese firm the wheat gluten came from for a time, and is still withholding the name of the US distributor.

The FDA has still not acknowledged the dry food problem.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

56. That not any indication of any wrong doing.

The FDA hasn't named names because they don't know what the culprit is yet. Neither does anybody else. In fact, according to PETA's own self-contradictory releases, gluten might not even be the problem.

You know, this is real life. It's not like C.S.I. where somebody sticks a sample in the machine, and forty five minutes later you find out who the culprit is, just in time for the closing credits.

[magellan]

60. Hmm, did I say it was an indication of wrong doing?

I said they've been less than forthcoming and prompt, and I backed it up. You just seem to want to rip PETA apart. Sorry, but I've got no dog in that fight. I'm for being better informed by our government, no more and no less.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

64. Being less than forthcoming and prompt is wrong doing.

And you didn't back it up.

What PETA's doing is engaging in a witch hunt. They want somebody to be guilty, and if the FDA's not going to name names, then they're guilty too.

Maybe it was easier to spot when Joe McCarthy did it, but it's no less rotten.

[mhatrw]

77. The FDA owes it to the public to tell us whatever they know or

suspect about this. Pets are dying by the hundreds and people may be next. How can you justify withholding this information for weeks? You do realized that we are many weeks into this crisis. Right?

Did you back the EPA when it said Ground Zero was safe as well?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

78. Yes they do.

And the FDA doesn't know what's going on yet, so their not going to go speculating. That would be ridiculous.

[mhatrw]

103. They knew a LOT more than what they've told us a LONG

time ago:

http://www.chemnutra.com/pr.pdf

[magellan]

93. Whatever

We aren't going to agree. Nice chatting with you.

[mhatrw]

76. You haven't been following this at all. Have you?

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/16942953.htm

The Food and Drug Administration said late Tuesday that it had identified 13 cats and one dog that had died after eating pet food made by Menu Foods at a plant in Emporia, Kan. A plant in New Jersey also stopped production as a precaution, but so far it is food made at the Emporia plant that has been implicated in the deaths. ...

The FDA is focused on wheat gluten because the Emporia facility started using a new supplier of the binding product at the same time the problems surfaced. Tuite confirmed that the timing of the problem coincided with a switch in a supplier of an ingredient, but declined to name the ingredient.

Stephen Sundlof of the FDA — who repeatedly referred to Menu Foods’ plant as being in Kansas City, Mo., rather than in Emporia, which is about 90 miles southwest of Kansas City — said the agency had identified the wheat gluten broker, which was tracing its various sources. “We have a name of a broker and the broker gets shipments from various places,” Sundlof said Tuesday in a conference call with the media. “We’re trying to identify all the sources that came into that plant.”

Neither Tuite or the FDA would identify the supplier.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

79. I have. Have you?

First they thought it was the rat poison aminopterin. Then that didn't hold much water. Then they were thinking it was the urea derivative melamine, then that hypothesis didn't pan out. Now they don't know what it is, and it might not even be the wheat gluten. So why would they blame somebody if they don't know what's going on?

Now in the mean time, they've recalling every food item linked to the sick pets to be on the safe side.

[mhatrw]

118. So a month later they know nothing?

How hard is it to tell what killed Menu Foods' test cats a full month into the crisis?

Is Rummy now running the FDA? Or is it Brownie?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

130. Do you know what it is?

Well then, by all means tell us. If you don't, then how long do you think it should take? What, you think they can just scan it with a tricorder?

[mhatrw]

136. Ever heard of gas chromatography or mass spectrometry?

The FDA has had samples of the food that caused renal failure in both dogs and cats for over a month now as well as samples of all the raw ingredient components. Yes, it's a labor intensive process. But come on. The technology exists. It's patently ridiculous to pretend that it requires science fiction to figure out what's in a pet food sample that is not on the ingredient list. But that seems to be one of your strong suits.

[magellan]

28. Amen.

[Zhade]

115. Just so long as PETA's wild-ass guess doesn't lead real scientists away from the cause.

(Not intentionally, of course, but even by accident it would hurt more than help.)

[catgirl]

27. Just make sure they (scientists) aren't in bed with Bush and the FDA

Remember, scientists being paid to keep quiet about global warming?

[flvegan]

30. How is this a "jumps to conclusions"

"This morning, PETA Vice President Bruce Friedrich made an urgent appeal
to Stephen Sundlof, director of the FDA's Center for Veterinary Medicine,
asking the agency to refocus its investigation beyond wheat gluten -- which
is used almost exclusively in wet foods -- and consider other possible
contaminants."

Looks to me like PETA is requesting they also look in another possible direction.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

34. Yesterday they were asking him to resign.

That's jumping to conclusions.

And exploiting the deaths of animals, I'll add.

[flvegan]

38. No it isn't.

"PETA President Ingrid Newkirk has called for the commissioner of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to step down from his post after revelations that the FDA refused to name the maker of a dry pet food believed to have received the suspected contaminated ingredient. Now, two independent laboratories are claiming that the FDA was wrong when it determined that the agent causing kidney failure in cats and dogs was wheat gluten contaminated with a chemical called melamine found in plastic. The FDA has yet to recall brands of dry food that are reportedly killing dogs and cats. The FDA has deceived the public and media, both about the nature of the recall and about the FDA’s oversight of the pet-food industry. Dr. Stephen Sundlof, director of the FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine, has claimed to the media, “There are really no differences in the regulation of animal food and the regulation of human food. The same people that inspect human food plants also inspect pet food plants.” However, the FDA’s own Web site verifies that the agency has left “regulation” of the pet-food industry to the Association of American Feed Control Officials (AAFCO), a nongovernmental body with no power."

Doesn't sound like jumping to conclusions, unlike your last statement.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

42. Alright, so they asked some other FDA wonk to resign.

Same thing.

[flvegan]

45. Way to prove a point.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

46. Thanks.

I guess I wholly debunked the "PETA's just asking questions" nonsense.

[flvegan]

50. One's self-importance is a laugh track for another.

Cheers.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

52. I know I'm laughing.

Considering everything.

[catgirl]

40. As he should

he clearly isn't qualified to run the FDA. We need someone who
is able to get to the bottom of things.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

43. "he clearly isn't qualified to run the FDA."

And why not? What's so clear?

[catgirl]

47. That's the point. NOTHINGS clear

because he sat on this while this food was being sold
and fed to cats and dogs.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

48. But you just said it was clear...

and that's why this guy should resign.

[catgirl]

63. Nothings clear as to all the causes of the deaths.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

68. And if it's not clear what's causing the deaths...

why would the FDA blame somebody for it?

Are you even thinking this through?

[catgirl]

121. They have blamed the chinese wheat gluten

I'm not sure where you're going with this. If you're
defending the FDA, I could open a can of worms and
start listing their failures. That's for another thread
though.

[mhatrw]

74. No, I don't think ANYBODY is working on this problem right now -- except

on covering it up. If it's really Chinese wheat gluten, why doesn't the FDA tell us who brokered the tainted wheat gluten to Menu Foods and who else they brokered this wheat gluten to? Why is that too much to ask? How far will this recall have to expand before the FDA comes clean and tells us what it knows?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

80. Aren't you the guy...

that says STDs aren't infectious?

[mhatrw]

119. Are you the guy who defends the FDA for knowing nothing a month

into a crisis that's killed 1000s of pets?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

132. I'm a guy who doesn't partake...

is pseudoscientific witch hunts.

[mhatrw]

135. So it's a "witch hunt" to demand a halfway competent FDA?

Either the FDA still doesn't know what's causing this more than a month into the crisis or the FDA is lying to us about what they know and don't know.

Which is it -- gross incompetence or a corporate protection racket? Think about the EPA's actions at Ground Zero and FEMA's inaction in the face of Katrina before answering. Or would mentioning these also qualify as "witch hunting" in your estimation?

[catgirl]

44. Interesting, I just checked my bag of Science Diet and it has vit. D3

It's the K/D Prescription cat food. The M/D has been recalled. Now
I can't help but wonder about this food. The PetGuard dry does not
have vitamon D3 added. I trust them more than Science Diet. Perhaps
D3 shouldn't be in cat food at all.

[magellan]

58. Cats and dogs cannot produce their own viatmin D

So it has to be added, either by way of ingredient (vitamin D3 is found in eggs, organ meats, animal fat, cod liver oil and fish) or as a supplement. And therein lies the trouble.

I have a book by Donald Strombeck DVM in which he states that pet food manufacturers can't be precise about how much of any supplement to put into their product, so excessive amounts can and do happen occasionally. Vitamin D is toxic in excessive amounts. It can bring on renal failure.

[catgirl]

65. In humans: Excessive doses of Vitamin D3 causes toxicity and...

taking excessive amounts daily may cause a decrease in
bone mass according to the guide book Prescription for
Natural Healing which was written by doctors.

[catgirl]

70. Plus more is absorbed from being in the sun

I think PETA may be right on. There are plenty of
avenues that need to be looked at when it comes to
pet food. Much of what you find on the shelves is
junk food. Junk food eventually causes illness.

[magellan]

94. That's right

That's what my little book is saying too. Dr. Strombeck isn't impressed with commercial pet foods at all. But he's not saying anything we here don't already know! (And neither is PETA.)

What are the foods that you've got?

[catgirl]

120. PetGuard

which is a quality pet food, but I'm back to making homemade food.
One of my older cats is (WAS) on Science Diet Prescription K/D, which
has a lot of junk in it. I'm reading The Natural Cat...great book with
recipes. I'll share some later (I need coffee first).

[magellan]

122. I've heard PetGuard is great

One of our dogs was on Hill's Prescription I/D dry and canned. I talked to our vet about switching to Solid Gold and while he was okay with the dry, he actually preferred I go homemade using Dr. Strombeck's book, http://www.amazon.com/Home-Prepared-Dog-Cat-Diets-Alternative/dp/0813821495/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-0519924-9517426?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1175693255&sr=8-1">Home-Prepared Dog & Cat Diets: the Healthful Alternative, over any canned at this point because of the recall.

BTW, the vet liked that I had a copy of Strombeck's book; he said they keep a copy in the office and he refers to it whenever he needs to work out a good homemade diet for someone. So I don't need recipes, but thank you just the same! :)

[catgirl]

124. I'll get that book

Thanks!!

[magellan]

125. No probs!

I can copy you a recipe or two while you're waiting for the book if you like. PM me with your cats weight, age, and any medical/dietary concerns they might have.

:hi:

[nashville_brook]

59. PETA is a rights-advocacy group. all they are doing is asking for answers.

no need for the anti-PETA brigade to get their dander up. you don't have to have a university degree to ask questions...

or do you? is that what you want?

[truedelphi]

69. According to some - University degree is needed

Having investigated the pesticide risk, consumer mis-information situation for the last twenty yers, I can say this: If you go about asking questions *Critical* of corporations, Government agencies, etc, then you will face the insinuation that you need a degree.

But if you *Support* the corporations and Government agencies (And people, face it - they are one and the same) then you may well be asked to appear as a news blip about the safety of a questionable product.(With no degree required)

I have a great deal of use for Some people who have a University degree of some type. But a university degree is NO promise of life's two most important demands: critical thinking and common sense.

Our experiences with George the Younger and his degree from Yale ought to offer some proof of my thesis.

[hang a left]

25. Exactly...

Poor Waxman, that dude has got to be exhausted.

[Critters2]

6. My new policy is that every time there's an atni-PETA thread on DU

I send PETA a donation.

[MonkeyFunk]

9. cool

my new policy is to eat a steak. Vive le difference!

[ronnykmarshall]

13. Lobster & chowdah anyone?

[ChavezSpeakstheTruth]

57. I make a donation to Katz's Deli

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

104. Don't forget to eat TWO this Friday. -nt

[MonkeyFunk]

111. oh, on Good Friday

I always have Fillet du Prêtre.

At least that's what Father Francis called it when I was an altar boy.

[DrunkenMaster]

15. awesome!

Every post regarding animal rights around here turns into an ad hominem attack against PETA, usually because they euthanize unwanted pets.

Funny, I never read any attacks against the Humane Society...don't they do the same thing?

[asthmaticeog]

16. I agree! PETA's fucking awesome!

:thumbsup:

[Beaverhausen]

20. PETA criticizes abusers and vivisectors, not euthanizers

Big difference.

[DrunkenMaster]

but that's not what the media told me!

I mean, EVERY story in the MMM is about how terrible PETA is, so it MUST be true right? I mean, they've been right about everything else...

[DrunkenMaster]

23. PETA doesn't criticize euthanizers

they realize that euthanization is a result of pet overpopulation. PETA protests animal cruelty, including the fur trade and uneccesary animal testing. Please provide me with a source that proves PETA is against euthanizing sick or unwanted animals.

[catgirl]

29. Wrong. No animal groups critize euthanasia if the animal is suffering

and can't be brought back to health.

[flvegan]

33. Don't forget, they also

-"support terrorists/ism"

-"advocate violence against people"

-"lie to take pets, promise good homes for them, then kill them"

-"want to take all our pets away"

-"liken blacks and jews to farm animals"

Did I miss any of my bullshit talking points?

[HEyHEY]

36. They do all that?

....Jesus.
I always thought they were the good guys.

[flvegan]

39. One might be led to believe it, if they read certain remarks made here

when PETA comes up in any topic. I figured I'd toss the bullshit first...you know, get it out of the way.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

51. Reading certain remarks here...

one is led to believe your quotes in post #33.

Why just yesterday there was some goof comparing farm animals to jews and black during the holocaust and slavery.

[Critters2]

81. That goof was Isaac Bashevis Singer

When you're a well known Jewish ethicist, I'll start caring whether you think there's reason to compare the suffering of animals in factories to the suffering of concentration camp internees.

It was Singer who said, in reference to the suffering of animals "For them, it is an eternal Treblinka".

[DrunkenMaster]

84. one goofball does not a movement make

Bornagain,

You would be horrified if Rush Limbaugh took a member of the Democratic party who believed that Bush brought down the Twin Towers (the "Loose Change movie people, etc) and used that person to create a hasty generalization that "all Dems are conspiracy nuts and think Bush attacked his own country."

Would this cause you outrage? Because this is the same thing that I see done against animal protection movements both in the mainstream media and here at DU -- taking the most extreme example and using to smear an entire group.

One recent and particularly disturbing version occured with that German bozo who wanted to kill the orphaned polar bear cub a few weeks ago: every news outlet I consulted referred to "animal rights groups" who wanted the bear killed. It was one freaking guy, not the mainstream of the movement, but everyone who watched the news that evening came away shaking their heads at all the "eco-nuts" who wanted to slaughter a cute little baby bear.

It is also true that quite a large number of animal-centered folks recognize the necessity of some medical testing on animals (the polio vaccine is the most common one cited) but find themselves horrified and disgusted at the type of testing that goes on in consumer labs and the small handful of medical schools who have yet to take Harvard's lead and move to computer models instead of kidnapped household pets.

If you do a Lexus-Nexus style search of mainstream news stories that cover groups like PETA, Defenders of Wildlife, Greenpeace, etc, what you will find is that an overwhelming majority of them focus on either the most controversial aspects of the protests or on the extremist fringe who advocate and practice ideals out of touch with the mainstream of a fine movement of people who believe that every conscious creature should be treated with dignity.

In truth there are many amazing accomplishments these groups have achieved that deserve celebration, from the creation of wildlife sanctuaries to pressuring Burger King into making new food choices in their menu to the re-introduction of the Lynx to its natural habitat. These stories receive cursory, ephemeral coverage at best because they don't contain controversy or inflame public sentiment against a movement that threatens the corporate and government-sponsored destruction of our planet and its biodiversity.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

85. That's true.

Maybe PETA's only got an image problem. But it's a doozy of an image problem.

[Beacho]

61. Actually those are facts

If that makes them talking points then fine.

I find it incredulous that PETA is concerned about pet owners since they see the owning of pets as abhorrent.

[flvegan]

66. Um, yeah...okay.

I find it hard to believe that such an outspoken, in your face organization could get away with supporting terrorists/terrorism. Your last statement is idiocy, considering most PETA employess not only have pets, but bring them to work...at PETA hq.

[Critters2]

75. Link please

Put up or shut up.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

88. ...

"In a perfect world, all other-than-human animals would be free of human interference, and dogs and cats would be part of the ecological scheme, as they were before humans domesticated them and as they remain in some parts of the undeveloped world."
-- From The PETA Statement on Companion Animals

"In a perfect world, animals would be free to live their lives to the fullest: raising their young, enjoying their native environments, and following their natural instincts. However, domesticated dogs and cats cannot survive "free" in our concrete jungles, so we must take as good care of them as possible. People with the time, money, love, and patience to make a lifetime commitment to an animal can make an enormous difference by adopting from shelters or rescuing animals from a perilous life on the street. But it is also important to stop manufacturing "pets," thereby perpetuating a class of animals forced to rely on humans to survive."
-- PETA pamphlet, Companion Animals: Pets or Prisoners?

"The cat, like the dog, must disappear... We should cut the domestic cat free from our dominance by neutering, neutering, and more neutering, until our pathetic version of the cat ceases to exist."
-John Bryant, Fettered Kingdoms: An Examination of a Changing Ethic, PETA 1982, p.15.

[Critters2]

90. Only one of these advocates not keeping pets at all, and that is from 1982.

The other two simply state facts...in a perfect world, dogs and cats WOULD be part of the ecological scheme. States nothing about moving toward that in any real way. The middle quote advocates adopting from shelters rather than buying from breeders. All animal welfare groups advocate this.

So, the best you got is a quote from 1982. Excuse me if I'm not impressed.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

91. You're trying to move the goal posts.

You didn't ask for something from post-1982, you asked for something from PETA.

Furthermore, the qualify "in a perfect world" doesn't negate that these people have a problem with pet ownership, it supports it. These people think, at best, that pet ownership is some sort of necessary evil, and that makes them completely flat-out, nobody's-home, froot-loopy insane.

Now if you're embarassed by the negative public imagine that PETA has, that's fine. Just don't pretend it's not there, and don't complain about it to me.

[Critters2]

96. Not embarassed. The public usually lashes out at prophetic voices

No surprise there.

But okay, find me something post-1982.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

98. You're putting the cart before the horse.

Just because the public thinks PETA's nuts, doesn't mean it's prophetic.

"But okay, find me something post-1982."

OK

"The bottom line is that people don't have the right to manipulate or to breed dogs and cats ... If people want toys they should buy inanimate objects. If they want companionship they should seek it with their own kind."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, "Animals," May/June 1993

"You don't have to own squirrels and starlings to get enjoyment from them ... One day, we would like an end to pet shops and the breeding of animals. would pursue their natural lives in the wild ... they would have full lives, not wasting at home for someone to come home in the evening and pet them and then sit there and watch TV."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, Chicago Daily Herald, March 1, 1990.

"Pet ownership is an abysmal situation brought about by human manipulation."
-Ingrid Newkirk, President, PETA, Washingtonian, August 1986

"One day we would like an end to pet shops and breeding animals would pursue their natural lives in the wild."
-Ingrid Newkirk, Chicago Daily Herald, March 1, 1990

[Critters2]

99. One day I'd like world peace, too.

I guess that means I don't support the troops.

:eyes:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

101. Would you like to see the day...

nobody owns any pets?

[Critters2]

102. I'd like to see us stop thinking of it as "owning" but rather as "caring for"

I'd like pet shops to stop selling them. I'd like puppy mills to go away. I'd like pets to be able to go to their guardians workplaces rather than sit at home all day (the beagle comes to work with me, btw). I'd like them to be happy.

I'd like the lion to lie down with the lamb. I dream of a better world. So shoot me.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

108. Now you're dodging the question.

These people in the quotes don't want anybody to have pets. Is that something that you want, or are you just defending them because you associate with them?

[yewberry]

114. I don't think she is.

No one I know (including those on this board) has any kind of agenda promoting the abolishment of companion animals, no matter what anyone says.

The language that "AR people" use is used for a reason. Animals are our companions; we are their guardians or caretakers. Animals are not property.

I don't "own" a dog. I live with one. Without drawing a specific comparison between animal "ownership" and slave "ownership" of any kind, I am still aware that the language and hierarchical framework of "ownership" and "property" is the same. Some kind of transaction (i.e. I paid the shelter for his neutering and shots) took place and I have a dog here. Is it the same as buying a pair of shoes, which I then own? The end result that I come to is that, no, I don't "own" a dog the same way I do a pair of shoes, or the same way that people mean when they say that people "own" slaves. People are not things that can be owned. Animals are not things that can be owned. There should be no conflation between the two arguments--people and animals are not the same, but the utter disempowerment and dismissal of selfhood in the theoretical framework of "ownership" is at play in both discussions.

PeTA isn't against having animals companions. They encourage people to adopt from shelters and provide good homes for animals. They are against animal industries that continue to encourage animal breeding while this country euthanizes millions of animals annually. Every animal that is born in any kind of breeding operation in this country means another animal dead in a shelter (or worse), because there is one less home available.

In short, nobody I know wants to "outlaw pets." PeTA doesn't. I can't speak to John Bryant's opinions; he's a bioethicist and not a PeTA member or employee as far as I can tell (please correct me if I'm wrong).

So, finally (you must be relieved) I'll say that most of the "AR people" I know don't agree with everything PeTA does. Frankly, sometimes they do stupid shit, but that publicity does pay for some really good stuff. At the same time, I kind of look at them the same way I do the ACLU: occasionally unbelievable (Limbaugh? NAMBLA?) but necessary.

[PinkyisBlue]

116. How about a more recent quote from PETA, maybe within the last 10 years?

Those quotes are against animal breeding, not pet ownership. And I fear that the quote from 1986 was taken out of context.

As a member of PETA, I regularly receive their "Animal Times" literature and find nothing extreme in it and no calls to give up ownership of my pets.

You should do some critical research into why certain groups attempt to portray PETA as crazy. There is a lot of money to be made in the exploitation of animals, from the fur industry to entertainment to the meat industry. Show me an organization that attacks PETA as being crazy and radical, and I'll show you an organization that makes money off the exploitation of animals.

[flvegan]

92. What's really funny

is that book was published by PETA, not written by them.

Guess The Google wasn't very friendly to our above poster.

[Critters2]

97. I wondered about that. I'd enver heard of that author before.

But then, 1982 was a long time ago.

[MonkeyFunk]

100. That's really the best way

to conduct an argument? Put up or shut up?

You've been taking debate lessons, I see. Unfortunately, I think I know who your teacher is...

[Critters2]

71. You forgot the ways they abuse feeling, suffering vegetables. And encourage the killing of insects

with combines.

The monsters!

[YOY]

41. Yeah, but the Humane Society doesn't go into grounds of claiming what is or isn't moral to eat

and the whole "ownership" of animals thing...

The comparison of animals to holocost/slavery victims...

(Well awaiting Vegan DUers to confront my points with fluff.)

[Critters2]

73. Actually, the Humane Society of the US does encourage a meatless diet

http://www.hsus.org/farm/humaneeating/rrr.html

[DrunkenMaster]

87. what radicals! they must be commie terrorists or something!

What kind of good American would go vegetarian?

[YOY]

112. What kind of "good American" would try to make lifestyle choices for others

based on their own personal morality?

[YOY]

110. No that's about cruelty free farming

I'm all for that. I'm all for bacon too.

[flvegan]

95. Here's your "fluff"

You obviously don't know JS about HSUS and how they work. PETA has taken the role of the sledgehammer to the forehead, true. HSUS is more of the sniper variety. Just because they wear suits instead of ski masks doesn't change their work.

Your errant "comparison" statement is a specific campaign.

[YOY]

109. Angry vegans on a mission...

Yup "fluff".

[flvegan]

113. That you can't post a half-shit retort to.

Well played, or something.

[YOY]

123. I posted a half shit in response to your quarter shit

and that's being generous...

Like I said. Angry.

[Marie26]

62. My policy is to post a link

to the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals:

http://www.aspca.org/site/PageServer?pagename=lobby_home

They don't get all the publicity PETA does, but they've worked tirelessly to protect animals.

[Corgigal]

26. Ok, I'll play

as a person who had her pet cat, Tino under the prescription brand of Royal Canin, then how do we know what is safe now? I just purchased organic, how will I know?

Oh by the way, I like PETA for no other reason is they shake American up sometimes. I think that is a good thing, we get too much in the box in this society.

[Marie26]

49. I don't trust PETA

Unless they've got a staff of biochemists, I don't know how they can truly say that the FDA is wrong.

[Beaverhausen]

53. Well, I don't trust the FDA

AT least PETA is putting a fire under the FDA's ass to try and get them to figure this out.

[Marie26]

55. Oh, I'm sure there's already

plenty of pressure, what with the national news coverage, millions of outraged pet owners, potential lawsuits, etc. If PETA is really in contact w/"reputable laboratories" that have evidence that vitamin D is to blame in these deaths, I really wonder why these laboratories aren't releasing the information themselves. That's how it usually works - the NY State Food Laboratory held a press conference when they discovered the poisonous chemical in wet pet food. Why are these "reputable laboratories" staying silent w/this blockbuster evidence & relaying it via a vague PETA press release instead? If they have evidence, come forward with it. Personally, I think this is shady. The press release has the typical indications of shadiness: headlines in the form of a question?, unnamed sources, & vague allegations w/o defined evidence to back them up.

[Evoman]

67. Because PETA knows diddly squat.

They just latched on to this with the Vitamin D thing because of the high profile nature of this problem. I'm not even saying PETA is a bad organization or trying to insult the well meaning people at PETA...its just that they feel like they need to get involved. But they are more of a distraction and hindrance....they don't know anything, and should stop pretending like they do. Let the biochemists do their job...honestly, you think a biochemist needs PETA telling her that she needs to look at the vitamin D content?

[Marie26]

83. This is my suspicion as well. nt

[gravity]

107. Me neither

If they base their arguments off of sound scientific research then I would treat them with more respect, but they are just political tools who place their agenda ahead of the facts.

[kestrel91316]

82. PETA needs to let the vets and toxicologists do their job.

Vitamin D analogues produce a characteristic laboratory profile in acute overexposure: EXTREMELY high calcium and phosphorus levels.

Cholecalciferol and Vitamin D-type toxicity was pretty much ruled out at the start because the lab picture clearly didn't fit.

Once again, PETA is busy tooting their own horn and trying to make themselves the center of attention. Too bad they don't know what the f--k they are talking about.

[DrunkenMaster]

86. you don't think any Vets and Lab Techs work with PETA?

Interesting perspective...where did you acquire it?

[PinkyisBlue]

117. Friedrich clearly noted that, in a case last year, hypercalcemia occurred in

animals due to toxic amounts of vit. D ingested, which caused the animals' kidneys to malfunction. Hypercalcemia is abnormally high levels of calcium in the blood.

And PETA stated excessive amounts of vitamin D in animal foods MAY be to blame. PETA urged the FDA to consider other sources of contamination, not just wheat gluten. It sounds like a reasonable request to me.

You really should read the article before spouting off against PETA.

[DrunkenMaster]

89. And The Fact Remains

NO ONE knows yet what is killing all these animals. The first results fell through and current crop of stats is absolutely less than conclusive.

Therefore, PETA seems to be right on in their cry for further research. The specifics of Sundlof's tenure are debatable but one fact remains -- if animals are still dying from dry food, we have not yet found the truth behind these deaths and research must continue.

[Jcrowley]

105. K&R

[YellowRubberDuckie]

106. You know, I really thought that this was going to be an anti meat article.

I'm pleasantly surprised. Animals need meat to survive, cats especially, and it infuriates me to no end when people don't feed their animals properly because THEY are against eating meat.
Duckie

[Critters2]

126. Do you actually know people who don't feed cats meat,

or is this more anti-PETA propaganda? I'm vegan, a good many of my friends are vegan, but I know no one who has a cat and doesn't feed it meat. I keep hearing (from anti-vegan loons) that there are such people, but I don't know them. The cats I live with eat good quality meat-based cat food.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

127. I had a friend who went vegan and made her cats and dogs vegan as well.

Her cat nearly died before the vet ripped her a new one. She was just not that smart.
I could give you her name and social security number if you'd like.
Duckie

[Critters2]

128. My dog is vegan, and perfectly healthy (and great at Rally-O!)

Dogs can be vegan with no problem at all.

But, yes, I'm suspicious as to your claim of knowing someone with a vegan cat. It's widely known, even among us wacky vegans, that cats are carnivores.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

129. I didn't say the girl was bright.

I said she turned vegan. Doubt all you want, it doesn't make it any less true.
Duckie

[Critters2]

133. No, but you did use the plural noun "people" in your post

when, apparently, you don't know "people" who feed unhealthy meatless diets to animals. You know one person, if that.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

134. Because I know that if I know one person who's done it...

There are probably others who do it. Jesus Christ. Why do you care? It's not like I said ALL Vegans are idiots or anything. I would never say that. I know a few who are completely lacking in brains, but I did not say ALL. Jeez.
Duckie

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

131. Oh Those Silly Little Peta People, What Will They Think Of Next? LOL

They really are so silly to me. But I'm still not sure which group I consider more laughable; them or a.n.s.w.e.r. So tough to choose LOL