mobile-menu-icon
Ford Authority
Sponsored

Ford Criticized By PETA For Funding Crash Test Study That Used Pigs

Sponsored

Ford Motor Company is under fire from PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) due to a study published in 2018 by Wayne State University that utilized pig cadavers to gather crash test data, according to the Detroit Free Press. The organization recently discovered that The Blue Oval contributed $40,000 to the study via the University Research Program, and wants the automaker to stop funding similar studies in the future.

At issue is the use of 27 pigs that were seemingly euthanized, then used in various tests that helped researchers gain a better understanding of the impact of crashes on small children. According to the study’s authors, donated adult human cadavers are employed to gather crash test safety data, but child cadavers are not used, which is why pigs took their place. “The narrow scope of this research – funded nearly a decade ago and completed in 2014 – was necessarily part of developing enhanced modeling for test dummies and, in turn, improved safety of children in side-impact collisions,” company spokesperson Ian Thibodeau told the Detroit Free Press on Friday. “Ford encourages the use of non-animal alternatives for all testing whenever and wherever possible.”

PETA feels that Ford reneged on its 2009 pledge to ban the practice of funding any research involving animals, although the letter it cited made explicit references to live animals and their use in crash safety tests. From PETA’s perspective, the euthanizing of the pigs violated Ford’s statement. “The main concern is that they shouldn’t be using any animals who can feel pain and suffer from these experiments. Pigs are being killed for this experiment and used in this horrific crash test,” Shalin Gala, vice president of international laboratory methods, explained to the Detroit Free Press. “It shouldn’t be happening. Ford should be mindful of how its money is being spent. And they do have the ability to restrict the funding to only support non-animal research methods if they so choose.”

We’ll be keeping tabs on this issue, so subscribe to Ford Authority for continuous Ford news coverage.

Sponsored

Ed owns a 1986 Ford Taurus LX, and he routinely daydreams about buying another one, a fantasy that may someday become a reality.

Subscribe to Ford Authority

For around-the-clock Ford news coverage

We'll send you one email per day with the latest Ford updates.
It's totally free.

Sponsored

Comments

  1. Greggt

    Of course a Pig’s life is far more important than a human!
    Any organization that spends 98% of their money on promotion should be ignored!

    Reply
    1. Lucy Post

      As you can see here https://annual-review.peta.org/year/ over 82% of PETA’s operating expenses last year went directly to its programs fighting animal exploitation. Only 15.91% was expended on fundraising and 1.21% on management and general operations.

      This isn’t a choice between pigs and humans; it’s between crude, inaccurate experiments on animals and modern, human-relevant testing methods.

      Reply
      1. Stalkbroker94

        Oh, great an expense report from one of the most corrupted organizations about themselves. gonna find only the most accurate information in that. It’s like asking the Government for a report on every dollar they spend.

        Reply
        1. Montana Man

          Only during trumPEDO’s “administration”.

          Reply
    2. NateO

      Yes, I would much rather see my child hurt in an accident and badly injured, than humanely killing a pen of pigs and using them to make life safer. Since the pigs would other wise be allowed to grow to adulthood and then be killed to go on supermarket shelves where I buy it to eat! Sarcasm intended!!

      Reply
    3. NateO

      Yea by the way what does PETA stand for. The only definition that I can think of is the one on the back of my neighbors van, People Eating Tasty Animals

      Reply
      1. Montana Ma

        YuO ArE ThE BeSt AmErIcAn HeRe ToDaY.

        Reply
  2. Kim Marie

    What was Ford thinking?! I truly hope that it recommits to never using animals for tests because it’s insanely cruel and unnecessary.

    Reply
  3. commbubba19

    Did you people read the article before having a cow errr pig? The pigs were dead before the test was conducted. They were not tortured while alive. You also realize that they would have ended up being bacon either way right. JFC

    “pigs that were seemingly euthanized, then used in various tests” – Dead first 🙂

    Reply
    1. Jacques Merde

      shhhhhh… don’t tell them!

      Reply
  4. Robert.Walter

    Only so much accuracy is possible using computer simulations built for what is known.

    At some point as the application is used to simulate a condition (like a child) different from that for which the application was developed (adult), the accuracy will drift.

    Although I support the ethical treatment of animals, and given that these animals were not maltreated, and the testing was to reduce injuries and save the lives of children by increasing the knowledge of crash safety engineers, I’m not sure why PETA isn’t citing this case as animals being treated ethically for the benefit of humankind.

    I also have to say that if PETA misrepresented the content of Ford’s letter as indicated in the article, then they should be ashamed of themselves and issue a correction.

    Reply
  5. Drew

    Kim and Lucy, please keep in mind that the study was meant to benefit child safety. As the article states, cadavers are often used. All cadavers are adult humans who chose to donate their body to science. As children don’t have that choice (and I can’t image grieving parents making that choice), no child cadavers exist.

    Fortunately for the future safety of our children and grandchildren, the researchers used pig cadavers. I suspect those people who criticize this practice will be the same people who will express outrage if the auto industry doesn’t advance the safety of children. Think about that (of course, I am assuming you child safety advancements). You can’t have it both ways.

    Reply
  6. Mick1

    What happened to using crash dummies. Heck, I would have volunteered my mother in law.

    Reply
  7. Kenny Crowe

    This country is so screwed up we care more about everything but human rights

    Reply
    1. Montana Man

      Okay, thanks, Kenny;
      Got it.

      Reply
  8. Jacques Merde

    Pigs Lives Matter

    Reply
    1. Montana Man

      That was in poor taste.
      Reach higher.
      You’ll feel better.

      Reply
      1. Stalkbroker94

        It was in his taste and not to your own. That’s like telling someone they’re wrong for liking a vehicle or ice cream flavor that you don’t like.
        Reach higher.
        You’ll feel better.

        Reply
        1. Montana Man

          Derivative and pedantic.
          But thanks!

          Thanks, too, for repeating my slam. It’s the sincerest for of flattery, you know.

          Reply
      2. Jacques Merde

        oh, chill… Ford was using DEAD pigs… no issue there… PETA, with their holier-than-thou attitude, should do a better job at picking their battles… maybe Ford should ask PETA if they can use all the dead animals in PETA’s freezers?

        Reply
  9. Mike

    That should help Ford. Anything peta is against is usually good IMO.

    Reply

Leave a comment

Cancel
Sponsored