Would you change brands if you knew a company tested its products on animals?

Years ago I would have said it doesn’t make a difference to me. But they have got better testing methods today. I wouldn’t use anything tested on animals. I’ll write a few letters and if necessary switch a few products. Thanks for the list.

Well… I wonder where you might draw the line on this, because the fact is that there is no cosmetic or drug on the market that does not benefit from animal testing, either now or in the past. Any company that says its products “have never been tested on animals” is either lying or bending the truth. So, when you say “I don’t want to use products tested on animals”... I would guess that you mean “I don’t want to use products made by companies that do their own animal testing”. But even at that, they are certainly using research done by others to make sure that their products are safe for humans.

Yes

I’m pretty sure I don’t buy any of the products on this list (I haven’t used Max Factor makeup for years!), but I’m sure I do buy lots of products on various don’t-buy lists for one reason or another.

But guess what? I’ve spent a lifetime narrowing down my personal list of items I like to buy, and while I’m happy to listen to anybody’s diatribes about one company or another, I’m probably not going to change my buying habits.

I was in PETA all through college. I avoid products that I know are tested on animals, but it takes a lot of energy to keep up with which company tests on animals, so I just do the best I can to keep track.

What I found is that I might choose a company that says that it does not test on animals, and they don’t, but where they buy their base or ingredients from might.

I also started to question “how” something is tested—if a rabbit is shampooed with a trial run of shampoo, and not altered or injured in any way, I don’t think it’s that bad, but if a rabbit is injected with some chemical, that bothers me. The problem with “tested on animals” does not give us the specifics of what’s being done.

From that list, I use Dove, Pantene and Olay… urk… research time.

I’d like to say yes, but I use a few products on that list that I’m not willing to part with. Clinique most of all. I have very finicky skin and Clinique products are the only ones that don’t break me out or dry me out but still look good on.

Nope. I don’t use cosmetic products because I don’t see the point.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I am pretty sure humans are just one more species of animal. So any cosmetic company that honestly doesn’t test their products on any other animal species is testing them on human animals. Would you like to buy cosmetics knowing that the newest were untested and you were being used as the guinea pig?

I prefer my cosmetics to be tested on animals first.

@ETpro I was about to completely agree with your answer, but then I found this and this. Those articles provide alternatives to animal testing, some of which don’t use humans either. Apparently, results of animal testing can be misleading and are not great predictors of human reactions to the products being tested.

Like I said, I’ll continue to buy Clinique, but I didn’t know a lot of the information on those sites until now. Pretty interesting. And PETA is great at pulling on my heart strings with those sad photos.

I am thrilled to report that I buy from none of those companies.

Thanks for the head’s up. With so many choices out there, I’m sure I’ll find some alternatives.

@livelaughlove21 If it isn’t tested on any other animal, then the first use on humans IS animal testing. There are all kinds of non-animal (including human animal) tests that can be done, but real live things don’t always react like substitutes. Yes, we should do all we can to rule out harmful substances before any kind of animal testing is done. But the fact remains that if we only test in simulations, then the first use by humans is, in fact, a test and the outcome of that test is uncertain.

@ETpro, of course we are animals, however I think it’s fairly clear from the article that when it talks about animal testing in terms of products, it means animals other than humans. Personally, I am quite happy for them to skip testing on animals other than humans and to seek volunteers from our own species to carry out any necessary testing where a living animal is required. We can read ethical clearance documents and give informed consent to whatever happens to us.

@glacial I agree with you that there are some products such as medicines where the benefit of the product may outweigh the use of animals to test them. I certainly wouldn’t want to see people giving up essential medication because animal testing was done. However, as @livelaughlove21 mentions, often drug testing that’s carried out on animals is not reliable in terms of what we learn about the possible effects of that drug on humans. I have always had concerns about drugs that are specifically designed to resolve problems only women face being tested on men. Again, if drugs are destined to be used on humans perhaps we should again seek volunteers from our own species to test these drugs. As long as people aren’t being coerced into taking part because of poverty or other pressure, this would seem to be a more valid scientific approach.

@linquaphile you make a very important point that even if we choose to buy products from companies that do not test their goods on non-human animals, there is a good chance that ingredients that go into that product may have been tested on non-human animals. I agree, there’s no perfect solution.

While we may not be able to eradicate non-human testing of drugs, we can all at least make more informed decisions about where we buy our cosmetics and beauty products.

Thank you everyone for your input so far. It’s a huge subject and all of your posts are giving me food for thought. I appreciate your ideas.

@linguaphile sorry!

@Bellatrix I’d be 100% in favor of, after all reasonable non-animal testing, recruiting human volunteers. We’d get more accurate results, and the test subjects could sign up with informed consent. Rabbits, white mice and chimpanzees cannot give informed consent.

I hate the thought of some of the meds that are tested on these animals but I don’t see an alternative. Cosmetics as in makeup are another story, they aren’t a necessity of life but as long as the animals do not suffer or are harmed, again I don’t know what the alternative is. Unless as @ETpro says, paid volunteers.

It depends to what extent. The only one I use on that list is Herbal Essences….but if they’re just using animals to test out shampoo….how bad can that be? I mean that literally, I know very little about animal testing.

Edit: I looked it up out of concern, and found this, saying any information about them testing on animals that somehow got into the media was false and they never have and currently do not test on animals.

@deni, what if the shampoo in its original form is corrosive? They put such products in animals eyes to see what the effect is. Just as an example of the type of testing that’s done. I’m not an expert either.

@Bellatrix Let’s keep this real. As a chemistry major, I can assure you we can easily determine what is corrosive and what isn’t. Where animal and eventually human testing is needed is in looking for allergic reactions that may be relatively rare and depend on specific genetic traits, so that they affect only a small portion of the test sample.

@ETpro the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine appear to disagree with you.

While there are alternative methods for testing whether a product is corrosive that doesn’t mean chemical companies have always used those methods. The Scientific American article discusses the Draize Test for instance. Since animal testing still happens in China, I’m not convinced that I can be sure cruel testing that can now be undertaken without using animals is no longer carried out. Similarly the New England Anti-Vivisection Society points out that this type of testing has occurred. The American Anti-Vivisection Society argues animals are still used in skin skin corrosivity tests as part of a tiered testing strategy.

So I am keeping it real. While and chemical companies may not test for corrosion, there are plenty of other tests that cause pain, discomfort and death to animals.

I only buy cruelty free products.

Apparently, if manufacturers want to sell their products in China, they have to undergo testing on animals. From the Choice Australia website,

China’s increasing wealth has seen a rise in consumers with a growing disposable income, and a sizeable chunk of that money is being spent on cosmetics. Additionally, recent economic downturns and consumer belt-tightening in the west, coupled with reduced tariffs and taxes associated with selling cosmetics in China, have proven a tempting combination for cosmetic and personal care brands.

“All cosmetic products sold in China must be registered with the authorities,” explains Dr Alain Khaiat, president of the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association of Singapore, vice president of Scientific Affairs of the ASEAN Cosmetic Association and CEO of SEERS Consulting, a consultancy for manufacturers of personal care products. “In order to become registered, companies are required to submit a dossier to the relevant government authority, along with product samples for the authority to test. The authorities then do a number of tests, including for pH [levels] and viscosity. They also do some skin and eye irritation tests. And at the moment, these tests are done on animals.”

Add Arm and Hammer to the list, and since I learned this, I have looked into alternatives.

Here is what I found: The knock off brands such as Safeway, are just repackaged Arm and Hammer. Bob’s Red Mill does have its own brand of baking soda, but it’s made in a facility that also processes tree nuts and gluten products. So for those with nut or gluten problems, they are back to Arm and Hammer.
http://www.peta.org/living/beauty-and-personal-care/companies/837.aspx
http://allergictoair.com/blog/allergy-friendly-products/

Edit: I just looked at the list again, and I realize I don’t use any of those products at this time.

It depends. A lot of the old testing isn’t done anymore. The way I understand it, back in the day every time a new formula was created it went through testing, even though all the ingredients in the eye shadow, shampoo, etc, had been tested before. There was no need to retest these ingredients. That sort of excessive testing I am against. I don’t know if the cosmetic companies named above actually test on animals, or the chemicals in their products have been tested at one time?

As far as I know the FDA in America does not require testing of cosmetics like they do medications.

If it came to light that a cosmetic company abused animals I would want to stop using the product. I need to research it more.

What an irony that China requires testing?! So much poison in their medicine, food, and air.

As far as I can see, I don’t currently use any products on that list, but I would be very surprised if nothing I use is animal-tested. I had planned to buy something from L’Occitane, which I won’t do now. I’ll make a trip to Lush instead, to find some substitutes for the products I’m using at the moment. Thanks for the links, @livelaughlove21 – and @Bellatrix, thank you for the push.
As to whether any and all animal testing is bad, I don’t think that’s the point. There is no way for us to determine how much the animal in question suffers. Especially as straight answers are hard to get when money is involved. So, for now, I am definitely against all animal testing. And I am completely fine with humans volunteering to test the products they eventually benefit from.

I forgot to add that I use a lot of those brands on the list provided in the original post.

Not at all. Better that they test on animals, than humans die for lack of testing.

@elbanditoroso Humans are not going to die from eye shadow that has chemicals that have been used for 50 years already.

I do avoid buying products from companies that test on animals where ossible. I try and get most of my cosmetics from The Body Shop to be on the safe side and because their stuff always smells so good. However, I will admit that I don’t always check whether a company tests on animals before making a purchase if I am stood in a shop needing to buy something and like the idea of a new product for example but once I do find out that a company tests on animals I think twice before buying their products. (I was not aware that Dove tested on animals for example, from your list that is the brand that stood out as being the only one I use fairly regularly and I am dissapointed!)

Edit: I have just read that The Body Shop is now owned by L’Oreal who do use products tested on animals. However, this would lead you to think that they feel very strongly against animal testing. What’s the story?!

*Possible

They were bought by Loreal? Nooo. Maybe the BS is allowed to operate as usual, with no tampering by Loreal.

“Old Spice?” They test Old Spice on animals? I guess they would smell pretty good. Out of that list, it is the only product that I use. I don’t see the problem unless you have something against nice smelling rabbits.

Avon stopped testing on animals in 1989. Why then are they still on this list? Does someone who maintains this list have an agenda? If so, what is it? If Avon is still on the list long after they stopped animal testing, how many other companies are on it that should not be? http://www.avoncompany.com/corporatecitizenship/corporateresponsibility/resourcecenter/policies_and_procedures/animal_welfare.html

PETA doling out misinformation… colour me surprised.

PETA doesn’t just list if a product is cruelty free, but also if the company itself is cruelty free, it’s manufacturers are cruelty-free and that companies have proof that nothing in their products or manufacturers have anything to do with cruelty to animals.

If these companies want to sell products in China, they have to submit samples to the Chinese authorities for testing on animals. That’s a requirement they have to comply with in order to get authorisation. That list is apparently (according to Choice, PETA’s list of companies that DO test on animals.

China’s increasing wealth has seen a rise in consumers with a growing disposable income, and a sizeable chunk of that money is being spent on cosmetics. Additionally, recent economic downturns and consumer belt-tightening in the west, coupled with reduced tariffs and taxes associated with selling cosmetics in China, have proven a tempting combination for cosmetic and personal care brands.

“All cosmetic products sold in China must be registered with the authorities,” explains Dr Alain Khaiat, president of the Cosmetic, Toiletry and Fragrance Association of Singapore, vice president of Scientific Affairs of the ASEAN Cosmetic Association and CEO of SEERS Consulting, a consultancy for manufacturers of personal care products. “In order to become registered, companies are required to submit a dossier to the relevant government authority, along with product samples for the authority to test. The authorities then do a number of tests, including for pH [levels] and viscosity. They also do some skin and eye irritation tests. And at the moment, these tests are done on animals.”

Uncaged cites Avon as a company that either includes chemicals that are tested on animals OR uses other companies to do the testing for them. This cite says L’Oreal own the Body Shop (I hope that’s not true too!). This is where it becomes difficult. Are companies still testing the chemicals used by say Avon, or are they using chemicals that were previously tested on animals but aren’t now? Makes it nigh on impossible to know what you can and can’t buy. This news story claims Avon have withdrawn their no animal testing claims. There is other info out there that says Avon produce their goods in China, and China’s regulations say products must be tested on animals.

This is PETA’s list of companies that do test on animals (including Avon) and why they’re on their list. This is another “PETA“http://www.peta.org/living/beauty-and-personal-care/companies/525.aspx# page that has other information.

The Body Shop is now owned by L’Oreal but the company has given assurances Body Shop products will not be tested on animals. However, by providing profits to L’Oreal, that money will be used to manufacture products that are tested on animals.

So, where is @Cazzie, let’s just make our own stuff! Seems like the easiest option.

Anita Roddick must be spinning in her urn.

This world is so full of animal cruelty, Australia once again put a ban on live exports to Egypt because of the abomnable way the animals are slaughtered. I think packing them into the hold of a ship is terrible. But when you think about it, people don’t treat people much better than that. It makes me crazy though, you just don’t know what is safe and moral to use anymore! Thank you @Bellatrix for bringing this to light and making us more aware.

@Bellatrix Yeah, it’s the “providing profits to L’Oreal” that concerns me. I have been boycotting L’Oreal for years!!