Lush cosmetics' controvercial 'ban reptiles' ad campaign

If anyone's been to Lush recently, you're likely well aware that they've teamed up with the Animal Protection Agency to call for an outright ban on reptile keeping.

This, understandably, has upset a great many responsible owners. Not just the idea, but the way in which it is being done: massive amounts of what could be referred to as propaganda have been pumped into the media. But, it boils down simply, to Lush and the APA accusing all reptile owners of being cruel and neglient.

Here's Lush's point of view:

http://www.lush.co.uk/articles/our_ethical_campaigns/a_far_cry_from_nature.html

Here's the backlash from the owners, a group caling themselves Truth About Reptiles - and their point-by-point argument that the Lush/ACA campaign is based on lies.

http://i36.tinypic.com/iqwitk.jpg

So, opinions? This has now been referred as a complaint to the Advertising Standards Authority.

And just in case anyone says 'who cares?'

Reptiles are now the most popular pet in the UK - with 8 million being kept. Cats come in second with 7.5 million and dogs in third place at 6 million. Imagine someone campaigning to ban cats... that's how big this is.

Reply 1

blinkbelle

17

I'm not sure LUSH are arguing to ban reptiles, just raise awareness of an issue which I also think is valid. Catching wild animals and selling them as pets is wrong. xx

Reply 2

Miraclefish

OP

blinkbelle

I'm not sure LUSH are arguing to ban reptiles, just raise awareness of an issue which I also think is valid. Catching wild animals and selling them as pets is wrong. xx

"Proceeds from sales of the new Chameleon Bath Ballistic will help to fund further projects, including eradicating the sale of reptiles in the UK"

Taken from Lush's very own homepage not two minutes ago.

Reply 3

lillyann92

8

Lush are stupid and often not very well informed on the groups they support. Over christmas they sold soaps in aid of the hunt saboteurs association, basically an organisation that assaults people and animals and also ended killing a man all in the name of 'animal rights' and also gave lots of incorrect information about fox hunting, saying hunts are still hunting, even though it is illegal. Hunting is not illegal, just the actual killing of a fox by a hound.

I never go to Lush after this and this sounds very typical of their stupid campaigns that haven't been very well researched.

Rant over.

Reply 4

blinkbelle

17

Miraclefish

"Proceeds from sales of the new Chameleon Bath Ballistic will help to fund further projects, including eradicating the sale of reptiles in the UK"

Taken from Lush's very own homepage not two minutes ago.

Ah fair enough. But I agree with the sentiment. xx

Reply 5

flugestuge

3

"The capture and transportation process is crude and brutal. For example, chameleons can suffer broken bones while being collected from the wild, either from rough handling or from the blow they receive when knocked from the branches. These frightened animals hiss and bite each other when packaged together in batches; the chameleons, already suffering from shock, can then endure long periods of dehydration and unsuitable temperatures in transit.

Most wild-caught reptiles die within their first year in captivity. Breeding reptiles in captivity for the pet trade causes suffering on a huge scale.

Even pet shops set a bad example to customers. For example, reptiles should never be kept in glass tanks. In the wild, reptiles don't encounter glass boundaries and never adapt to cope with them. Repeatedly trying to escape can cause facial injuries and also long-term and consistent stress."

Reply 6

Pheonixx

15

Miraclefish

Reptiles are now the most popular pet in the UK - with 8 million being kept. Cats come in second with 7.5 million and dogs in third place at 6 million. Imagine someone campaigning to ban cats... that's how big this is.

Reptiles are a group of pets not a type of pet. Reptiles are related to each other as dogs are to cats even humans are to cats. In fact if you are grouping pets in the same type of groups as you grouped reptiles, dogs, cats mice, rats rabbits ect would be in the same group with them all being mammals supassing reptiles as the number one pet.

Who ever wrote that argument needs to learn some science and/or check their wording.

Reply 7

Steiss

Yes, let's release domesticated animals into the wild and allow them to be obliterated for their own good. Does Lush not understand how fragile an ecosystem is?

Reply 8

Annora

1

Steiss

Yes, let's release domesticated animals into the wild and allow them to be obliterated for their own good. Does Lush not understand how fragile an ecosystem is?

That's not what they're saying.

Reply 9

Miraclefish

OP

Pheonixx

Reptiles are a group of pets not a type of pet. Reptiles are related to each other as dogs are to cats even humans are to cats. In fact if you are grouping pets in the same type of groups as you grouped reptiles, dogs, cats mice, rats rabbits ect would be in the same group with them all being mammals supassing reptiles as the number one pet.

Who ever wrote that argument needs to learn some science and/or check their wording.

A swing and a miss there, Pheonixx. A bit like the spelling of your username.

You want to apply 'science'? Here we go then. A rabbit is a rodent - same genus as hamsters, rats, mice and gerbils. Cats are felines and dogs are canines.

There are eight million reptiles, seven and a half million felines and six million canines. Rodents come in at around four million.

Reply 10

Pheonixx

15

Miraclefish

A swing and a miss there, Pheonixx. A bit like the spelling of your username.

You want to apply 'science'? Here we go then. A rabbit is a rodent - same genus as hamsters, rats, mice and gerbils. Cats are felines and dogs are canines.

There are eight million reptiles, seven and a half million felines and six million canines. Rodents come in at around four million.

Pheonixx wasn't a miss, it was a hit.

1. reptiles are all part of the same class not a genus

2. rabbits, rats, cats and dogs are all part of the class mammals not the same genus

Like I said, don't compare the numbers of animals in a class to the numbers in a genus. You have to compare the same if your arguement is to be sound.

Oh dear :rolleyes:

Reply 11

-honeybee-

15

lillyann92

Lush are stupid and often not very well informed on the groups they support. Over christmas they sold soaps in aid of the hunt saboteurs association, basically an organisation that assaults people and animals and also ended killing a man all in the name of 'animal rights' and also gave lots of incorrect information about fox hunting, saying hunts are still hunting, even though it is illegal. Hunting is not illegal, just the actual killing of a fox by a hound.

I never go to Lush after this and this sounds very typical of their stupid campaigns that haven't been very well researched.

Rant over.

I agree with this completely. Lush are very misinformed on the various 'issues' they support.

Reply 12

Aphotic Cosmos

17

Miraclefish

A swing and a miss there, Pheonixx. A bit like the spelling of your username.

You want to apply 'science'? Here we go then. A rabbit is a rodent - same genus as hamsters, rats, mice and gerbils. Cats are felines and dogs are canines.

There are eight million reptiles, seven and a half million felines and six million canines. Rodents come in at around four million.

Reptilia is a class - it's hugely bigger than Canidae (family), Felinae (sub-family) or even Rodentia (order).

Saying that there's 8 million reptile pets in the UK is akin to saying that there's 20-30 million mammal pets comprised of all dogs, cats, rodents, mustelids (ferrets) and so forth. Reptiles are not the most popular type of pet in the UK by any definition.

As for banning them, I happen to think that it should be illegal to keep any pet without a licence regardless of whether they're mammalian, avian, reptilian or otherwise. We need to stop dumping alien species in the UK, and start behaving responsibly towards animals.

Reply 13

Pur-Rulz

It's all well and good for those reptiles imported to keep as pets, but what about the growing home-bred varieties? A lot of them have never seen the soil of their native country, let alone been cruelly taken from it.

Oh yes, and about this;

"In the wild, reptiles don't encounter glass boundaries and never adapt to cope with them."

That doesn't stop mice and other rodents from being kept in cages, and they try to escape far more often. The trick is that you have to make them feel like it's an actual home and not some prison. If they want to come out for a wander, you damn well let them!

Reply 14

kuroshokora

2

I'm a person who is, and always has been, a supporter of animal rights. But I don't think banning reptiles is a force for good.

Cruelty and negligence exists with most pets, but I'd argue that reptiles are more unlikely than pets like rabbits or hamsters to be mistreated. Animals such as snakes and lizards are more likely to be owned by teenagers or adults who will be responsible enough to care for them, while rabbits etc are often given to small children who look after them for a short time and then get bored with caring for them.

Lush cosmetics' controvercial 'ban reptiles' ad campaign

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you