Laboratory testing on dogs
not a valid requirement
FOR many years there has been opposition to the testing of dog foods in laboratories by the multi-national producers. These companies need to test their foods, more because of what they put into their foods than to test the welfare of dogs that will eat the stuff. Think about it - if they didn't put unsafe chemicals and waste products into their foods they would not have to test how much a dog can take before it gets sick or dies.
But this is the world of big business - they have to test each batch - how much preservative does it need, how much rancid oil and grease can it take, how many euthanised bodies can it include before the chemical affects the unfortunate dogs eating it - how much flavouring does it need before dogs will eat it voluntarily - how much sugar does it need to cover the rotting smell - how much waste and spoilt grain can be added and still claim to contain meat - all those questions and hundreds more have to be answered.
How much better it must feel to produce food for dogs that does not require testing because there is nothing but food put into it, or because it uses only ingredients that are on the everyday use list in the human food chain.
For that reason the following is a list of animal food companies that do not laboratory test their products on dogs:
