Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why do companies still carry out animal tests? Watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I was recently reading about animal testing for cosmetics and I was shocked to find that a lot of companies still do it. I was horribly naive before and just assumed that they didn't do it any more since it's completely unnecessary. I mean, firstly there are alternative and secondly, does foundation, shampoo etc. really need to be developed more? If people are so vain and obsessed with their appearance that they want some kind of super make up they should be willing to pay for the consequences themselves.

    There are four big companies; l'oreal, unilever, procter and gamble and johnsons and johnsons who are the biggest culprits and own so much stuff. L'oreal even own the body shop! I will no longer be shopping there. I know that the products themself aren't tested on animals but I refuse to hand my money over to a company that continues to carry out cruel and unnecessary tests on animals. Companies like NARS which is part of shiseido also animal test, as do benefit.

    I feel as though I have been duped into buying their stuff all this time. I think it should be made more obvious which companies do use animal testing in order to shame them into changing. The EU is bringing in a total ban in 2013 for the testing of cosmetics but I fear this won't make that much difference since many of our cosmetics are manufactured and developed in America and Japan.

    There are lots of great companies out there that sell ethical products. Lush, MAC, Neals Yard, Barry M, ELF and quite a lot more and in my opinion most of their stuff it loads better than the crap l'oreal pump out. If consumers decided that they were only going to purchase products that were not tested on animals the companies would be forced to change. I don't know why more people don't do this. I think it's mostly ignorance, I know that's the only reason I didn't start avoiding these companies earlier which is also why I think it should be more obvious which companies test and which don't.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I have never understood why we test stuff on animals when there are peadophiles sat in prison.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RainbowDoll)
    I have never understood why we test stuff on animals when there are peadophiles sat in prison.
    Or, alternatively, morons like yourself.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gimothy)
    Or, alternatively, morons like yourself.
    You would be against testing products on peadophiles? OMG.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RainbowDoll)
    You would be against testing products on peadophiles? OMG.
    Please don't ruin my thread with stupid comments.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Fyi maybelline and rimmel also test on animals
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    One reason. Money.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by iainthegreat)
    One reason. Money.
    But they could develop new products WITHOUT animal tests. Plus this is why I think people should boycott them, everything they do it for profit but if consumers make it clear they won't buy products that have been tested on animals they will be forced to change
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by flying twig)
    I was recently reading about animal testing for cosmetics and I was shocked to find that a lot of companies still do it. I was horribly naive before and just assumed that they didn't do it any more since it's completely unnecessary. I mean, firstly there are alternative and secondly, does foundation, shampoo etc. really need to be developed more? If people are so vain and obsessed with their appearance that they want some kind of super make up they should be willing to pay for the consequences themselves.

    There are four big companies; l'oreal, unilever, procter and gamble and johnsons and johnsons who are the biggest culprits and own so much stuff. L'oreal even own the body shop! I will no longer be shopping there. I know that the products themself aren't tested on animals but I refuse to hand my money over to a company that continues to carry out cruel and unnecessary tests on animals. Companies like NARS which is part of shiseido also animal test, as do benefit.

    I feel as though I have been duped into buying their stuff all this time. I think it should be made more obvious which companies do use animal testing in order to shame them into changing. The EU is bringing in a total ban in 2013 for the testing of cosmetics but I fear this won't make that much difference since many of our cosmetics are manufactured and developed in America and Japan.

    There are lots of great companies out there that sell ethical products. Lush, MAC, Neals Yard, Barry M, ELF and quite a lot more and in my opinion most of their stuff it loads better than the crap l'oreal pump out. If consumers decided that they were only going to purchase products that were not tested on animals the companies would be forced to change. I don't know why more people don't do this. I think it's mostly ignorance, I know that's the only reason I didn't start avoiding these companies earlier which is also why I think it should be more obvious which companies test and which don't.
    This would make the companies vulnerable to lawsuits. They are competing against each other to make the next "revolutionary" anti-ageing product etc. and need a constant supply of new products to keep consumers' money flowing.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by flying twig)
    But they could develop new products WITHOUT animal tests. Plus this is why I think people should boycott them, everything they do it for profit but if consumers make it clear they won't buy products that have been tested on animals they will be forced to change
    Agreed, animal testing is obviously the cheapest option for them so until a law passes which makes it illegal they will continue to do so. The only other option is, like you said, to boycott the company.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    Thought it was illegal in the UK to test cosmetics on animals?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RainbowDoll)
    I have never understood why we test stuff on animals when there are peadophiles sat in prison.
    Why do girls insist on wearing facepaint?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Yeah it is pretty rubbish. I think it's great that the EU is cutting it out. I hope Japan will follow suit soon, but America seem like a bit of a lost cause to me. The American Ideal, or American Dream is mainly about liberation and being able to do what you want, which is fine to an extent, but if that's as far as your ethical reasoning goes, it's pretty sad and infantile really. Animal testing immensely speeds up the process of cosmetic testing, so banning it obviously slows down business and growth. But it's stupid that this is seen as more important than the welfare as animals who aren't that different from ourselves. Even if business is slowed by banning, the only people it really affects, I think, are the people at the top - i.e. the CEO only make £100m a year instead of £120m a year, etc
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Obviously, it's a bit hypocritical of the EU to ban the act of testing, but still allow the sale of products.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Thought it was illegal in the UK to test cosmetics on animals?
    It's currently illegal to test the finished product on animals but companies still test the individual ingredients. A full ban will come into place in 2013 across the EU, however as I said in the OP it probably won't make all that much difference (although l'oreal apparently are stopping all animal tests as of 2013, I'm guessing most of their factories and research laboratories are based in the EU) since so much is manufactured abroad.

    Companies are really sneaky with it. They can hire a different company to test their products and then they are legally entitled to say that 'they did not test the product on animals'. Just like if they say' this product is not tested on animals', that doesn't mean the ingredients weren't or that the company doesn't carry out animal tests.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oh my Ms. Coffey)
    Why do girls insist on wearing facepaint?
    I dont know, I dont wear it.
    But there are a lot more then just makeup which they test on animals...
    We cant exactly boycott everything.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Oh my Ms. Coffey)
    Why do girls insist on wearing facepaint?
    irrelevent to the thread - we all use shampoo etc
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RainbowDoll)
    I dont know, I dont wear it.
    But there are a lot more then just makeup which they test on animals...
    We cant exactly boycott everything.
    That's true. It's so difficult. You know even household cleaning products are tested on animals? I mean, why?! I can understand for developing medicine etc. I just don't understand why these things need to be developed any more. We have a tried and tested formula that works just fine. However, if more people boycotted the companies would be forced to change.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Joey_Barton)
    Yeah it is pretty rubbish. I think it's great that the EU is cutting it out. I hope Japan will follow suit soon, but America seem like a bit of a lost cause to me. The American Ideal, or American Dream is mainly about liberation and being able to do what you want, which is fine to an extent, but if that's as far as your ethical reasoning goes, it's pretty sad and infantile really. Animal testing immensely speeds up the process of cosmetic testing, so banning it obviously slows down business and growth. But it's stupid that this is seen as more important than the welfare as animals who aren't that different from ourselves. Even if business is slowed by banning, the only people it really affects, I think, are the people at the top - i.e. the CEO only make £100m a year instead of £120m a year, etc
    Yeah I agree, I don't think it would make that much difference in terms of profit if everyone had to stop and I actually think if one of the big companies stopped their animal testing and made a big deal about it they would probably gain some customers. And about the USA too I agree, it's like capitalism gone mad over there, anything that makes money is okay and will never be interfered with.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    People don't really care about the rights of humans, let alone animals OP.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.