PETA co-founder Alex Pacheco is being condemned by fellow animal rights activists for making bogus claims about a “dog neutering pill”.

Alex Pacheco, 600 million stray dogs
Animal rights group SHARK turned against Pacheco, after he continuously failed to provide information about the money he was supposed to spend on the development of “miracle drug that can neuter dogs” in Central America.

SHARK, an animal rights group, claim Pacheco is misusing donor funds.

They launched the attack on Pacheco’s bizarre claims after saying he repeatedly failed to publicly declare information about donor’s funds on his tax returns.

A SHARK spokesman said:

“As Pacheco is listed as the group’s president and treasurer, he has a legal responsibility to provide these documents… We have contacted his tax preparer.

“If we do not hear from him, we will ask the IRS to intervene.”

In response to Pacheco’s bizarre activity, SHARK also launched a YouTube video headlined: Is Alex Pacheco Scamming Animal Rights Donors?. It pledged that much more opposition was coming against Pacheco soon.

The charity spokesperson added:

“We do this because when caring people are deceived by scammers, that hurts those caring people and all the good groups who are starved for funds. More importantly, it hurts the animals, and that goes against our mission.”

Since 2011, Pacheco has raised more than $1million for his charity 600 Million Stray Dogs, to develop “hypothetical ‘spay and neuter cookies.’”

However, scientists have rubbished his claims, stating that a dog neutering pill “don’t exist yet, and likely never will, with no such product even distantly visible on the scientific and regulatory horizons.

Linda Rhodes, former vice president for clinical development at AlcheraBio LLC, of Metuchen, New Jersey said:

“I would say that there is no chance that the government will approve a substance to be given to feral animals using a bait, flavoured substance or food, by lay people, given what we know about the science today.

“In order to not impact people, especially children, or other wildlife, such a substance would have to be completely species-specific. For example, a drug that could only be effective in cats and no other birds or mammals. Given today’s science, there is no drug or substance that I can think of that has that level of species specificity.”

Joyce Briggs, president of the Alliance for Contraception of Cats & Dogs, in Portland, USA, also expressed her concerns about the unfounded statements being made by “600 Million” charity about the effectiveness and safety of ChemSpay.

Dr Briggs said:

“The treatment was being presented as proven and ready to be submitted for regulatory approval, but no data was presented to support those claims.”

When being asked to report on the money spent, the PETA co-founder only said that $104,715 donor donations were used on the clinical trial of “spray/neuter cookies” and that he would not disclose any further information about the cause.

Pacheco stated:

“We do not disclose much about our processes because there are multi-billion-dollar drug companies out there who could easily assign a team of scientists to patent a formula based on any information that we disclose.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *