Hill Science Plan Animal Testing Evidence ?

[Wiglet100]

Hello All,
I have just joined CCOL and have just read a previous thread on Hills Science Plan and was a little shocked to learn that they test on animals. Does anyone know of any specific hard evidence to back these claims up?

I am contacting them to see if this can be validated or not and to see what form this testing actually takes to get some perspective here; after all we are talking about testing dog food on animals.......

As it stands, Science Plan is very good for my dog. She is in great condition although she can be a little fussy but then some dogs (and some people come to think of it) are like that. I have just recently discovered that she loves carrots so I know these are good for her.

Once I get the evidence to make an informed choice, I will then ask you all what brand of dry food you feed your dog!!!! 

Many Thanks

Wiglet

[Mudmagnets]

Once I get the evidence to make an informed choice, I will then ask you all what brand of dry food you feed your dog!!!! 

And we will then have the choice as to whether or not we reply!!

[Jane S]

Hills don't deny that they test their products - they just deny that the tests they conduct are inhumane:

http://www.hillspet.co.uk/sitecore/content/Adult/About-Hills/Animal-Welfare.aspx

[Wiglet100]

Oh dear,
Less than 1 day in and it appears I have already offended Smuggies Mum...

It wasnt meant to be a serious comment, as the !!! at the end of the sentence normally indicates a certain amount of humour.

Clearly you felt my lack of using the right language was unacceptable.

Dreadfully sorry about this Smuggies Mum, not intended of course.

This should have read " once ........ i would be extremely grateful if you would let me know your views about which food to swap to. 

I hope this clears up this matter.

My kindest regards to you all

Wiglet

[*Lucy*]

I understood what you meant!

I'm sure Smudgies Mum misunderstood you!

Welcome to COL by the way!

[GinnyB]

Hi
welcome to COL

My Mali was fed Hills for her first year after I was given a free sample from her vet. I decided to switch to Arden Grange when she made the move from puppy food to adult, mostly because of the high cost of Hills and the convenience of having the AG delivered to the house.

Good luck with whatever you decide 

[Spaniel Girl]

Hi welcome to Col, Rupert has been fed on Hill's since a puppy, I fed him the food the breeder used,Bakers, he hated it so I changed him to Hill's and he loves it  and looks very well on it the only thing I don't like is the price  but will pay it because he's worth it. 

[Cob-Web]

I am contacting them to see if this can be validated or not and to see what form this testing actually takes to get some perspective here; after all we are talking about testing dog food on animals.......

That perspective, as evidenced in the link that Jane S has posted, is that dogs used to test Hill dog food are not kept in domestic homes as pets. They are housed in a way that meets or exceeds "industry regulatory standards" - the industry in question being vivisection.

[bluegirl]

How far do you go with this, I'm opposed to animal testing but when  you look a little deeper into things practically everything is or has been tested on animals, dogs included. So when does your informed choice stop you feeding or giving to your pet dog things that have trialed in a lab where animals have suffered? If you don't use the food will you then use the veterinary medication derived by the same means?

Not directed at you personally but have wrestled with these issues myself in the past.

[Cob-Web]

How far do you go with this, I'm opposed to animal testing but when  you look a little deeper into things practically everything is or has been tested on animals, dogs included. So when does your informed choice stop you feeding or giving to your pet dog things that have trialed in a lab where animals have suffered? If you don't use the food will you then use the veterinary medication derived by the same means?

Not directed at you personally but have wrestled with these issues myself in the past.

I'm not totally anti-vivisection - when it comes to drugs, then it is a necessary evil imo - but keeping animals under laboratory conditions to test FOOD? It really isn't necessary.....it's only purpose is to increase profits for manufacturers; they work out how they can produce nutritionally balanced food as cheaply as possible, so maximising profit   

None of the foods that "we" eat are tested on people under scientific conditions before they are sold -drugs are, but not food; so why does pet food need to be? 

[Wiglet100]

Blue Girl,
I think this is precisely the point I was alluding to in my original message but I didnt want to bring it all out into the open as it is only my first post and a very sensitive issue for some but I totally agree - where do you stop?

Wiglet