GooberMcNutly wrote:

How about the hair dye she and that black haired chick are using? Do they worry about all of the bunnies that are intentionally blinded while testing that shit?

Not to side with PETA, but they probably do, Goober. Products that refrain from animal testing are usually pretty clear about it. I'm not a PETA sympathizer by any stretch, but I won't buy cosmetic items (deodorants, soap, etc.) that tests on animals, either.

I am pretty sure you can't get a hair dye that isn't tested on animals. It's extremely toxic. Do you want the first mammal test to be on humans? Putting that shit on your head is like rolling up a big phthalate/lead dust/PCB doobie and smoking it while playing lawn darts with a spastic chimp. Yet you can buy it in every store without trouble. I'm just saying that people need to get their priorities straight.

All health and beauty products are tested on animals. It's just that some of them are first tested on humans.

The funny thing about that is, a lot of those products that don't test on animals are distributed by companies that DO, such as Proctor and Gamble. Them shits put out hundreds of products from toothpaste and dish soap to fucking Hawaiian Punch. Seriously.

You know that all so cute TV commercial with the animals all covered in oil and some  lab worker is washing the poor lil guy with Dawn and blah blah blah they care so much about animals - proctor and gamble product.

kim wrote:

The funny thing about that is, a lot of those products that don't test on animals are distributed by companies that DO, such as Proctor and Gamble. Them shits put out hundreds of products from toothpaste and dish soap to fucking Hawaiian Punch. Seriously.

You know that all so cute TV commercial with the animals all covered in oil and some  lab worker is washing the poor lil guy with Dawn and blah blah blah they care so much about animals - proctor and gamble product.

Unfortunately, you're right. I was reading a little while ago that - Clairol? - sells "cruelty free" products, but then turns around and also makes and sells additional products that are tested on critters, which sort of undermines buying any non-animal tested products from them at all.

I wish I felt more cynical about this but it seems sort of par for the course, you know?

Emmeran wrote:

Look, if they don't want to be our slaughter-chaff then they need to get busy and evolve to the point where they get a vote...

Or opposable thumbs, at any rate.

Taint wrote:

Unfortunately, you're right. I was reading a little while ago that - Clairol? - sells "cruelty free" products, but then turns around and also makes and sells additional products that are tested on critters, which sort of undermines buying any non-animal tested products from them at all.

They learned how to do it from the "organic" food companies, most of which are spinoffs from major food engineering companies.