Buyers list leaked; Wisconsin puppy mill customer defends research
The Brief
A whistle-blower with access to an internal Ridglan Farms database has given FOX6 Investigators a list of customers who bought beagle puppies in 2019 and 2020.
FOX6 Investigators are releasing the names of the ten largest customers (by number of dogs purchased).
The founder of East Tennessee Clinical Research calls himself a "loyal" Ridglan Farms customer and defends the embattled breeder's practice of performing "cherry eye" surgeries on dogs with little or no anesthetic.
BLUE MOUNDS, Wis. - Every year, Ridglan Farms in Wisconsin sells more than 3,000 beagle puppies bred for scientific research. Now, we know who is buying them.
What we know
An anonymous source provided FOX6 Investigators with a complete list of customers who purchased beagle puppies in 2019 and 2020. The purchases are perfectly legal, but public scrutiny of what happens to the dogs at Ridglan Farms has increased since a Dane County judge appointed a special prosecutor earlier this year to investigate animal cruelty charges. Former employees testified last fall that dogs are kept in cages 24 hours a day with minimal human contact and that non-veterinarians are directed to perform painful, but routine surgical procedures on the animals without anesthesia.
According to the data provided to FOX6 (which Ridglan Farms neither confirmed nor asked us to correct), the number one buyer over that two-year period was NASCO, a biological supply company for educators based in Fort Atkinson, Wisconsin. NASCO bought 1,736 Ridglan dogs during that time, but it's not clear how they are using the animals or what happens when they are finished.
Number two was TRS Labs, a research and development laboratory in Athens, Georgia.
The third-largest customer was the Illinois Institute of Technology in Chicago. FOX6 Investigators previously reported on IIT's use of 38 Ridglan beagles for a Covid-19 drug toxicity experiment. All 38 dogs were killed on the 15th day of testing so their organs could be harvested for further testing.
FREE DOWNLOAD: Get breaking news alerts in the FOX LOCAL Mobile app for iOS or Android
FOX6 Investigators contacted the 10 largest companies on the buyers list, but 9 of them did not respond to our request for comment. Labcorp (previously known as Covance) in Madison, Wisconsin, did respond to an earlier request for comment after FOX6 Investigators found USDA records showing it uses more dogs for laboratory experiments (2,758 in 2023) than any other lab in Wisconsin. A company spokesperson wrote at the time that "Labcorp firmly believes the proper care of all research animals is fundamental to ethical scientific research and the ability to develop safe and effective new medicines that improve health and improves lives."
What they're saying
The one company that did respond was East Tennessee Clinical Research, a private laboratory on a remote farm west of Knoxville. The company's founder, Dr. Craig Reinemeyer, is a veterinarian and serves as the laboratory's scientific officer. He said he decided to speak up because public perception of animal research is tainted.
"They think we're just the wild, wild west. We're out here doing whatever we want to do. And they don't realize how heavily regulated this industry is," Reinemeyer said.
Reinemeyer said ETCR conducts experiments on dogs to test both therapeutics intended for other dogs and for drugs meant to eventually be used on humans. The Food and Drug Administration requires that all experimental drugs be proven safe and effective before human trials can begin. He said they're just following the rules and he bristles at the suggestion that what they do constitutes "abuse" or "torture," as some critics claim."The implication is that I, as a veterinarian, have completely abandoned my principles. That I am only interested in profit," Reinemeyer said. "And that I am willing to stick red-hot needles in puppies' eyeballs if somebody will pay me enough money. And that ain't the case."
SIGN UP TODAY: Get daily headlines, breaking news emails from FOX6 News
Reinemeyer said beagles make the best research animals not just because of their docile temperament, but also because of their ability to withstand life in a cage.
"Beagles tolerate confinement," Reinemeyer said.
In March, Reinemeyer wrote a two-page letter to the Wisconsin Veterinary Examining Board in defense of Dr. Richard Van Domelen, Ridglan Farms' lead veterinarian. In the letter, he wrote that he was a "loyal" customer of Ridglan. He said he visited the facility in 2024 and saw an employee playing with beagle puppies. He learned the employee's full-time job was socializing the animals. Finally, he told the board he did not think the cherry eye surgeries that are the subject of a criminal investigation constitute "animal cruelty."
The other side
The criminal investigation into Ridglan Farms was prompted by a complaint filed by an animal rights group called Dane4Dogs.
"I think it's odd that he would want to announce to the world just how low his standards are," said Rebekah Robinson, Dane4Dogs president.
Robinson said beagles may tolerate cages better than other dog breeds by comparison, but that doesn't mean it's good for them.
"Confinement is just cruelty to these animals," Robinson said. "These dogs are meant to be social animals. They are bred specifically for their attachment to humans."
Robinson also challenged the notion that animal research is "heavily regulated." Federal law requires animal research labs to set up internal committees known as Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees. They are designed to provide oversight that ensures animal testing is safe, humane and minimizes animal discomfort and pain. Robinson said those committees are commonly staffed by insiders with a vested interest in the research moving forward.
At ETCR, the principal investigator conducting the research is Craig Reinemeyer, while the chair of the IACUC is Bree Reinemeyer - his daughter.
"It's the fox guarding the henhouse," Robinson said. "They are writing their own regulations."
Reinemeyer insists the IACUC is not a rubber stamp.
"They ask us hard questions," Reinemeyer said.
Dig deeper
In 2022, Congress passed (and President Biden signed into law) the FDA Modernization Act 2.0, which allows for non-animal alternative methods to be used to prove the safety and efficacy of a drug. That means animal testing is technically not required to get an experimental drug into clinical trials. However, FDA has yet to establish rules and regulations to implement the new law.
"I actually see the FDA as being the root of the problem," said Amy Van Aartsen, founder of The Marty Project, which advocates for "novel alternative methods" like using 3-dimentional models that mimic human organs. She said traditional research labs have been resistant to the idea of change.
"And I would argue if they're not actively, you know, doing things to be part of the solution. They are part of the problem," Van Aartsen said.
Eventually, Van Aartsen said, artificial intelligence will allow for sophisticated computer models that will be far more reliable than dogs or other animals at predicting how a drug will work in humans.
But Reinemeyer said he believes non-animal testing methods are still a long way off.
"[Some say] a decade away. I think, a generation," Reinemeyer said.
What's next
Multiple investigations into possible animal mistreatment at Ridglan Farms remain ongoing.
La Crosse County DA Tim Gruenke is serving as a special prosecutor to determine if criminal charges should be filed.
The Wisconsin Veterinary Examining Board has agreed to allow Dr. Van Domelen to continue practicing while his disciplinary proceeding continues. That agreement is conditioned upon all surgeries at Ridglan being performed only by licensed vets using proper anesthesia.
Finally, the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection is also investigating possible violations of animal welfare at Ridglan that were noted by inspectors in 2024.
The Source
FOX6 Investigators relied on data from an anonymous source at Ridglan Farms, congressional legislation, FDA regulations, public records from the Veterinary Examining Board, interviews with animal rights activists, animal researchers and email communications with an attorney for Ridglan Farms.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scientific American
25 minutes ago
- Scientific American
Can You Still Get a COVID Vaccine This Fall? Here's What to Know
For the first time since the COVID vaccines became available in pharmacies in 2021, the average person in the U.S. can't count on getting a free annual shot against a disease that has been the main or a contributing cause of death for more than 1.2 million people around the country, including nearly 12,000 to date this year. 'COVID's not done with us,' says Jennifer Nuzzo, an epidemiologist at Brown University. 'We have to keep using the tools that we have. It's not like we get to forget about COVID.' In recent weeks, the Department of Health and Human Services, led by prominent antivaccine activist Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has announced a barrage of measures that are likely to reduce COVID vaccine access, leading to a swirl of confusion about what will be available for the 2025–2026 season. HHS officials did not respond to a request for comment for this article. On supporting science journalism If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today. Government officials appear to be limiting COVID shots to people who are aged 65 and older and to those who have certain preexisting health conditions—groups that have long been known to face a higher risk of developing severe COVID. Pregnant people and some children, meanwhile, appear to be explicitly excluded from access, despite plentiful evidence that vaccines are very safe and effective for them and that COVID infections can cause them significant harm. Scientific American spoke with clinicians and public health experts about the latest COVID vaccine recommendations, what access may look like this fall and how these policies might influence people's vaccination choices and health. What COVID vaccines will be manufactured this year? Public health experts are monitoring a strain of the COVID-causing virus SARS-CoV-2 called NB.1.8.1, which was first detected early this year and last month became responsible for one in 10 COVID cases globally. So far, the new variant has mostly been reported in Asia and Europe. But it has also been picked up in airport surveillance in multiple U.S. states, says Peter Chin-Hong, an infectious disease physician and a professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. The emergence of a new variant isn't surprising, particularly at this time of year, Chin-Hong says. 'It's kind of acting like clockwork—maybe this might be the variant of the summer,' he adds. Still, NB.1.8.1 has led to concerns about a potential surge in cases—although Chin-Hong and other scientists don't have any evidence so far that it causes more serious disease than other currently circulating strains. 'All of these new variants, they might be more transmissible, they might be more immune evasive, but I've seen no data whatsoever that suggests that they're more pathogenic,' says Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan. Within the U.S., a strain called LP.8.1 has been the most common one detected since March. Both NB.1.8.1 and LP.8.1 are among the alphabet soup of strains that descended from a key ancestor lineage called Omicron JN.1, which dominated U.S. cases by early 2024. Current vaccines target this category of strains. And in May a Food and Drug Administration panel determined that, this year, vaccine producers should again tailor their shots to a single strain within the JN.1 lineage—preferably LP.8.1. What's going on with COVID vaccine policy? Strain selection aside, the recent messaging and decision-making on vaccine policy for COVID and beyond have been chaotic, with various governmental groups and officials announcing different access guidelines and restrictions. 'The situation we're in right now is nuts,' says Nuzzo, referring to the fact that agency leaders have sidestepped the formal science committees that traditionally make vaccine-related decisions. 'We don't change vaccine policy on a willy-nilly basis. There's an incredible amount of nuance, and all of the data need to be considered.' But on June 9 Kennedy took a major step against this evidence-driven decision-making process by firing the entire CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP). Kennedy announced the committee rehaul in a Wall Street Journal op-ed, in which he alleged there were 'persistent conflicts of interest' among committee members. According to a recent HHS statement, new committee members are under consideration, and the group will still meet as scheduled from June 25 to 27. ACIP has traditionally been particularly important because any vaccine it recommends must be fully paid for by health insurance companies—a condition that greatly determines real-world access. It's unclear what the committee's overhaul will mean for COVID vaccine access in particular. Another concern is that Kennedy announced in late April that HHS would implement a policy requiring all 'new' vaccines—including updated versions of existing ones, such as COVID shots—to be tested against a placebo. The original COVID vaccines were tested in just this manner. But conducting similar tests when an effective and very safe vaccine already exists would be not only unethical for researchers but also expensive and time-consuming for manufacturers. It remains unclear when the new policy will take effect. What does this mean for COVID vaccine access this fall? If you are 65 years old or older, you should be able to get a COVID shot as you have in recent years. If you have an underlying condition such as cancer, diabetes, or heart or lung problems, you may also be able to get a COVID shot as usual. These issues and several others are on the CDC's list of conditions that leave people more vulnerable to severe disease, and this list is included in the description of the new regulatory framework. One 2021 study looked at many (but not all) of the conditions on the list and estimated that three in four U.S. adults has at least one. People are allowed to self-disclose a preexisting condition at pharmacies without a prescription or doctor's note. That list could also be expanded later if new research finds other risk factors that increase people's risk of severe COVID, says Jacinda Abdul-Mutakabbir, a clinical pharmacist and an assistant professor at the University of California, San Diego. But there's also a chance that qualifying conditions may be reduced instead. For example, current or recent pregnancy is included in the CDC's existing list, but HHS officials announced in late May that the COVID vaccine would no longer be recommended for pregnant people. Data have shown that COVID may cause various complications during pregnancy —increasing the risk that the pregnant person may require emergency care, be put on a ventilator or die. The newborn child of an infected person is also more likely to be born preterm or to have low birth weight. And babies younger than six months old—who are ineligible for vaccination because of their immature immune system—have the highest rates COVID hospitalization after adults aged 75 and older. In contrast, evidence from people vaccinated during pregnancy show that newborns receive protective immunity through antibodies that cross the placenta and are found in breast milk, Chin-Hong explains. Healthy children also face new restrictions to COVID vaccine access: The shot is now only recommended to them based on 'shared clinical decision-making,' according to the vaccine schedules released by the CDC last month. This means parents must consult with a health practitioner about whether to vaccinate such children. Experts worry about the consequences of restricting access for kids. Children under age 18 make up a smaller percentage of COVID hospitalizations and deaths. But that doesn't mean zero risk, Chin-Hong says. 'We know that COVID still kills kids,' he says. 'No death of a child is a good death—and these are all preventable.' 'Because children and pregnant people are considered vulnerable populations, they were not included in the original studies that were done for the COVID vaccines,' Abdul-Mutakabbir says. But five years' worth of real-world vaccine data from these groups show the health benefits. 'We do see effectiveness and safety in these vaccines,' she says. It's still possible that the late June ACIP meeting will shift the landscape again. But if you want a COVID vaccine this fall and don't meet current guidelines, you may still be able to request a shot. Your insurance may not pay for it, however, leaving you to risk a price tag of around $200. 'Insurance companies or providers are only required to pay for vaccines that are listed as recommended by the CDC,' Abdul-Mutakabbir says. Full, partial or no-cost coverage for nonrecommended vaccines is at the insurance provider's discretion. Any changes to coverage—and the times at which those changes are announced—will vary among programs, including private and governmental ones, such as the federal-state program Medicaid and the federal program Medicare. Until then, Chin-Hong and Abdul-Mutakabbir say, the COVID vaccines released in the fall of 2024 are still recommended and available to people who haven't already had one. And as of April 26, only 23 percent of adults and 13 percent of children in the U.S. had received the shot. 'If you are nervous about the surge or planning summer travel, I would recommend' getting the vaccine, Abdul-Mutakabbir says. The larger fight over vaccines For Rasmussen, the confusion over COVID shots signals the beginning of a longer tug-of-war—with Kennedy's HHS on one end. 'I think I know what their plan is, and it's to reduce access to vaccines in general,' she says. 'In my view, this is an incremental step in a larger attack on vaccination in general.' She encourages people worried about vaccine restrictions—and about the role of science in making these decisions—to call their congressional legislators. 'A lot of people speaking out is what is needed right now to make a big difference here,' she says. Abdul-Mutakabbir also hopes people continue to seek vaccines for COVID and other diseases—especially while they are still easily available. 'It's important that we consider the things that we can protect ourselves against,' Abdul-Mutakabbir says. 'Should you have a barrier with getting a COVID vaccine, guess what? There's no change to the flu vaccine; there's no changes to the pneumococcal recommendations; there's no change to measles, mumps, rubella vaccine. Get the vaccines that we can get.'
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
New York Judge Censured After Erupting During School Board Meeting, Demanding His Son Be Named Valedictorian
Long Beach City Court Judge Corey E. Klein was formally censured by the New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct The judge, who will maintain office through 2034, was accused of using his title amid a heated exchange during a school board meeting where he complained that his son was not named valedictorian Klein now has 30 days to appeal the decisionA New York judge was censured after erupting during a school board meeting. The New York State Commission on Judicial Conduct confirmed via press release on Monday, June 9 that Long Beach City Court Judge Corey E. Klein had been censured for "invoking his judicial office in a personal matter involving his son." During a local school board meeting that streamed live on YouTube on April 11, 2024, Klein took the microphone after the session was opened up to the public for questions. He announced that he wanted "to discuss the implications of this board's policies as it relates to COVID and the selection of the valedictorian." The judge proceeded to say that his son was "not selected as a valedictorian because of this board's policies," adding that they "impact[ed] one person and one person only this year, my son." Klein said that his son was a straight-A student before he was cut off. "Don't try to out-lawyer me with the law," the judge said when the superintendent asked the school district attorney if this was the right place to have Klein's conversation, per a formal written complaint reviewed by the Commission on Judicial Conduct on Feb. 20, 2025. The judge's microphone was seemingly turned off as a member of the school board spoke. However, Klein could still be heard shouting in the background. 'If you are going to try to be a lawyer, then refer to me by my title as well, okay. Thank you," Klein said. 'You can refer to me, counsel, as judge,' he also said, according to the complaint, which also noted that Klein frequently used the terms "counsel" and "counselor" to address the attorney. At one point, Klein accused the board of "[trying] to sick your pit bull attorney on me." He also said, "I'm sorry that your attorney needed to go at me when all I wanted to do was come up here and politely address one simple question." He had the floor for nearly 20 minutes. Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer, from celebrity news to compelling human interest stories. Amid his outburst, he was told that he "had the right to appeal" the decision about his son. However, this was not the place to do so. "Don't try to shut me down," Klein said, threatening to continue speaking "all night." At one point, the attorney noted that he was "respecting" Klein and asked for the same respect in return. He also addressed Klein's repeated use of legal terminology, saying, "Your Honor, we are not in court at this point." In the commission's press release, it was noted that Klein "agreed to the censure." The release also noted that all 11 members "concurred" with the determination that was made on May 29, 2025. He was also censured for using his office to help an "acquaintance" get out of a "traffic matter." Now that the determination has been filed, Klein has 30 days to make a formal appeal. According to the New York State Commission, the judge has held office at the Long Beach City Court since 2015. He will remain a judge until the end of 2034. 'It corrodes public confidence in the judiciary when a judge lends the prestige of judicial office to advance a private benefit," Commission Administrator Robert H. Tembeckjian said, per the release. Tembeckjian continued, by adding, "Doing so impulsively, in an unseemly public argument over who should be a high school's honoree, or as a favor to a parking ticket scofflaw, is especially irresponsible." According to the Center for Judicial Ethics of the National Center for State Courts, a censure "is a formal sanction for violating the Code of Judicial Conduct." While a judge who is censured "does not require suspension or removal," the formal matter is a "stern rebuke." PEOPLE reached out to the New York State Unified Court System for comment but did not hear back at the time of publication. Read the original article on People
Politico
an hour ago
- Politico
HHS justifies decision to stop recommending Covid shots during pregnancy with studies supporting the shots' safety
The Department of Health and Human Services is circulating a document on Capitol Hill to explain its decision to remove the Covid-19 vaccine recommendation for pregnant women — citing studies that largely found the shot is safe. The document, which HHS sent to lawmakers days before Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced his plan to fire the panel that advises the CDC on immunizations, says that studies have shown that women who got the vaccine during pregnancy had higher rates of various complications. And it claims that 'a number of studies in pregnant women showed higher rates of fetal loss if vaccination was received before 20 weeks of pregnancy,' footnoting a research paper on vaccination during pregnancy. But Dr. Maria P. Velez of McGill University, the lead author of one of the studies, told POLITICO in an email that 'the results of our manuscript were misinterpreted.' The 2023 study shows a slightly higher rate of miscarriages among women who were immunized against Covid-19 during their pregnancies. But, Velez said, that after adjusting for 'variables that can confound a crude association,' like 'age, rurality, neighbourhood income quintile, immigration status, comorbidity' and other factors that could affect the outcome, Canadian researchers found 'no association between SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and an increased risk of miscarriage.' Raw numbers don't account for significant differences among the groups being compared — such as underlying conditions and when during pregnancy the people were vaccinated, said Katelyn Jetelina, an epidemiologist who's consulted for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Scientists, including the Canadian researchers, use statistical methods to adjust for those factors, she said, which is how they determined the vaccine wasn't associated with miscarriage. In a statement, HHS spokesperson Andrew Nixon pointed to the raw study data, which showed a slightly higher rate of miscarriage in the first half of pregnancy for women who were vaccinated against Covid compared with those who weren't. 'The underlying data speaks for itself — and it raises legitimate safety concerns,' he said. 'HHS will not ignore that evidence or downplay early pregnancy loss.' Nixon added that HHS and the CDC encourage people to talk to their providers 'about any personal medical decision.' Vaccine researchers and obstetricians criticized the decision to remove the recommendation for pregnant women, and researchers cited in the HHS document largely dismissed any connection between Covid vaccination and miscarriages. 'Given that COVID-19 infection during pregnancy is associated with serious maternal and neonatal morbidity, the current study can inform healthcare providers, pregnant women and those considering a pregnancy about the safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in relation to miscarriage risk,' Velez and her co-authors wrote in the study. That research was based on health-system data from Ontario, Canada, and aligned with similar population studies in the U.S., Scotland and Norway. Similarly, HHS cited an April 2022 study in its document concerning mRNA vaccination in people undergoing in-vitro fertilization, which also found no adverse effects on conception rates or on early pregnancy outcomes. 'Administration of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines was not associated with an adverse effect on stimulation or early pregnancy outcomes after IVF,' the New York City-based researchers at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and Mount Sinai West hospital wrote in the study. 'Our findings contribute to the growing body of evidence regarding the safety of COVID-19 vaccination in women who are trying to conceive.' The HHS document also includes an incorrect link for that study, instead leading to a different study — also cited in HHS' document — by Israeli researchers that found the vaccine 'appears to be safe during pregnancy,' with no increase in preterm labor or in newborns with low birth weight. That February 2022 study did note a possible increase in preterm birth rates for women vaccinated during the second trimester, and the authors suggested future investigations of outcomes based on the timing of immunization. HHS' assertion about significant risks to pregnant women 'contradicts the bulk of published studies,' said Dr. Paul Offit, an expert who has served as an outside adviser on vaccines to the FDA and the CDC. HHS deviated from past practice when it changed the Covid vaccine guidance last month, announcing the decision without the endorsement of an existing outside panel of expert advisers. Dr. Steven Fleischman, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, told POLITICO at the time that he was disappointed by HHS' decision, and pointed to data showing that newborns can benefit from maternal antibodies from the vaccine for protection from Covid. 'In fact, growing evidence shows just how much vaccination during pregnancy protects the infant after birth, with the vast majority of hospitalized infants less than 6 months of age — those who are not yet eligible for vaccination — born to unvaccinated mothers,' Fleischman said.
