People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) recently revealed allegations that Mondelēz International is supporting research in which mice are force-fed human feces and then dissected. While these experiments are reportedly conducted to study the gut microbiome, PETA claims they are a guise for promoting the company’s “healthy snacking” marketing strategy. The accusations have caused outrage among consumers and raised ethical concerns about corporate interests influencing scientific practices.

The experiments involve researchers feeding feces from obese women to mice to study the gut microbiome. While PETA strongly opposes such practices, there is scientific merit behind the concept. The gut microbiome is a critical factor in digestion, immunity, brain function, and even behavior. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT)—the transfer of fecal matter from one organism to another—has been instrumental in scientific progress. It has shown success in areas such as enhancing cancer treatments in animals, combating antibiotic resistance by restoring gut bacteria, and more.

PETA US discovered the Oreo maker’s pointless “nutritional science” experiments on animals include tormenting countless animals by:
•    Force-feeding mice feces from obese women and a diet high in saturated fat, then killing them
•    Force-feeding human feces to mice, feeding them a chemical and a diet high in saturated fat, then killing and dissecting them
•    Force-feeding human feces and glass beads to mice and feeding them a diet high in saturated fat
•    Feeding rats a mixture of chips, crackers, and candies; force-feeding them glucose; and repeatedly taking their blood.

https://www.peta.org/action/references/ Click here to see the Reference and Proof of these test results.

PETA’s motto, "Animals are not ours to eat, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment, or abuse in any other way," underlines its opposition to these experiments. Beyond ethical concerns, critics—including some vegan advocates and researchers—highlight a scientific issue: the differences in microbiota composition between mice and humans. These differences, stemming from variations in physiology, diet, and gut microbiota, mean that results obtained from mice may not always be directly applicable to humans.

Despite these concerns, the controversy has sparked a broader discussion about the ethics of animal testing in scientific research. Opponents argue that ethical alternatives—such as in vitro models or computer simulations—could offer valuable insights without involving animals. However, proponents of such research maintain that animal studies remain essential for understanding complex fields like microbiome science.

Companies often fund these experiments to gain scientific insights and develop products accordingly. However, some have chosen to distance themselves from such practices. For example, The Coca-Cola Company, PepsiCo, Fresh Innovations, and Sensient Technologies stopped funding the Food Research Institute (FRI) after PETA informed them about how their money was being used. On the other hand, some companies, like Taconic Biosciences and Mondelēz International, continue to fund these experiments.

PETA has achieved many victories in advocating for animal rights, including curbing animal testing, banning fur fashion, stopping animal circuses, and enhancing wildlife protection. While these efforts have positively impacted global biodiversity and animal welfare, not all human actions can be measured solely by ethical standards.

As this debate unfolds, it reminds us of the delicate balance between scientific progress and ethical responsibility. For now, though, it seems the discussion on animal testing will continue—as quiet as a mouse.