Beauty

[Adelina]

What I find confusing here is the willingness at times to take what a company says on its website for fact but then question the accuracy of statements from other companies, despite what is said on the websites. It seems that a lack of objectivity is at play here (or denial?) depending on whether one is hell bound to stay with a product they like, or equally, is hell bound to vilify a company (vendor, spokesperson etc) they don't like.

It is worth repeating that how a company words statements regarding "animal testing" and/or "cruelty free" is often vague and may leave many questions unanswered. I prefer to check a number of sources before I make up my mind on the issue.

[HappyDaze]

---

@baker wrote:

---

@Rachb wrote:
After reading your statement, I immediately went to the Philosophy website. In their FAQ section, it clearly states that they absolutely do not test on animals. Before posting absolute statements, you may want to confirm your research or have something to back it up. You could post "Philosophy states that they don't test on animals but such-and-such says otherwise." Making a false statement in any kind of forum, without any legitimate means to back it up, you open yourself up to recourse by the target due to slander and defamation.

---

I'm glad I read your post, I was just about to cancel my auto delivery from Philosophy.

---

Philosophy is now owned by Coty which DOES test on animals. So if you want to avoid companies owned by companies that still test (i.e. you are still lining the pockets of companies that test on animals) then you should avoid Philosophy. If it doesn't matter to you that they are owned by a company that still tests and you don't mind your money is still going to them, then by all means, still use Philosophy.

[CoG]

National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) website (www.navs.org)

lists companies that do or do not do animal testing .

This is the source of the articles condeming companies who test on animals. 

A list of offenders includes Perricone, Purpose, Neutrogena, Dove,  Clerasil, vaseline, Clinique, Nivea, Noxema, Revlon, RetinA, Retinoids, Revlon, Cetaphil, Lancome, Maybelline, Cover Girl , Clarisonic, Strivectin, Korres, Sephora, L'oreal Shisheido, Chanel.........

In other words everything we've ever used as a topical agent has been tested on animals  including the components of the products of companies listed as not testing on animals themselves. 

[HappyDaze]

---

@Adelina wrote:

What I find confusing here is the willingness at times to take what a company says on its website for fact but then question the accuracy of statements from other companies, despite what is said on the websites. It seems that a lack of objectivity is at play here (or denial?) depending on whether one is hell bound to stay with a product they like, or equally, is hell bound to vilify a company (vendor, spokesperson etc) they don't like.

It is worth repeating that how a company words statements regarding "animal testing" and/or "cruelty free" is often vague and may leave many questions unanswered. I prefer to check a number of sources before I make up my mind on the issue.

---

Oh yes there is alot of denial or pick and choose what you want to believe for those not wanting to give up their favorite products. I understand when people don't want to give up their favorite products but what bothers me is when they try to do what you are saying in order to justify their purchases. It is disinegnious. I would prefer honesty and simply state that they may care but not enough to stop using their products they love. Honesty is much more respected and appreciated than denying the truth or propagating misinformation.

[HappyDaze]

---

@CoG wrote:

National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) website (www.navs.org)

lists companies that do or do not do animal testing .

This is the source of the articles condeming companies who test on animals. 

A list of offenders includes Perricone, Purpose, Neutrogena, Dove,  Clerasil, vaseline, Clinique, Nivea, Noxema, Revlon, RetinA, Retinoids, Revlon, Cetaphil, Lancome, Maybelline, Cover Girl , Clarisonic, Strivectin, Korres, Sephora, L'oreal Shisheido, Chanel.........

In other words everything we've ever used as a topical agent has been tested on animals  including the components of the products of companies listed as not testing on animals themselves. 

---

The point is there is no need to CONTINUE testing. I think we all are fully aware at one point or another most ingredients were tested. There is nothing we can do about the past but we can certainly do something about it now and for the future.

This is often another inane argument- all ingredients were at one time tested so nothing is truly cruelty free so why bother caring about cruelty free now. I get tired of this argument. I am not saying that is what you were saying (I am actually unclear why you posted your last statement otherwise but perhaps I misinterpreted your intentions?) but I see this argument often.

That is (hopefully) one of the great things about being human- we can change our behaviours when new information and evidence comes out showing that what we are doing is inhumane and unnecessary.