Leaping Bunny debunks common myths about animal testing:
If a product says “Cruelty-Free” or has a bunny on it, that means it hasn’t been tested on animals.
This is simply not true as the devil is often in the details. Designation as “cruelty-free” or “not tested on animals,” or even the image of a bunny on a label may only refer to the finished product, when in fact, most animal testing occurs at the ingredient level. Furthermore, while a company may claim, “We do not test on animals,” it could still contract other companies to do the testing. The only way to be 100% certain a company is cruelty-free is to buy products from companies that have been certified by the Leaping Bunny Program, which requires that no new animal testing be used in any phase of product development by the company, its laboratories, or ingredient suppliers.
The law requires animal testing to be conducted on personal care and cosmetics products.
100% false. Neither the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nor the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission require animal testing for cosmetics or household products. There are sufficient existing safety data as well as in vitro alternatives to make animal testing for these products obsolete. While it is true that virtually every ingredient, even water, has been tested on animals in the past, we can help prevent future animal testing.
If a product isn’t tested on animals, it might not be safe for humans.
Not so! There are many reliable alternatives to using animals available, including cell and tissue cultures and sophisticated computer and mathematical models. Companies can also formulate products using ingredients already determined to be safe. Cruelty-free companies can use a combination of methods to ensure safety, such as employing in vitro tests and/or conducting clinical studies on humans.
It’s hard to find products that really are cruelty free.
Quite the contrary! More and more companies are joining the Leaping Bunny Program each month. We now boast over 300 companies including well-known brands such as Mary Kay, Method, Tom’s Maine and Urban Decay (Editor’s Note: Tom’s of Maine operates independently & are cruelty free, but is owned by Colgate, a non-animal-friendly company.). Remember to use our pocket-sized Compassionate Shopping Guide as a resource or download the FREE Leaping Bunny iPhone app from iTunes to have your shopping guide right on your iPhone or iPod!
And, if you want to help without spending a dime, please take a second to sign the Leaping Bunny pledge. It tells lawmakers and businesses that we are serious about cruelty free products!
Copyright 2010 CCIC – Leaping Bunny
What about companies who claim they are 'cruelty free', but are owned by parent companies who still torture animals? I ask because I see that you specifically mentioned Burt's Bees, who was bought out by Clorox 5 years ago, & I can't give my money to Burt's in the knowledge that the profits go to Clorox.
I remember having a discussion years ago about the first myth. That's always resonated to me and is one of my main reasons I try not to be judgmental about products because even though they say cruelty free, it does not mean their ingredients have not been tested on animals already.
It's almost as if companies got lucky marketing wise to be able to use ingredients previously tested on animals, while stating that the finished product was not tested. It's all the same to me!
I see there is a comment posted after I submitted mine yesterday, which is not showing. I sincerely hope that it was a technical glitch, & that my comment wasn't censored because I outed Burt's Bees as being owned by an animal "testing" parent company, thereby making it impossible to buy their products without profiting Clorox?
Thank you! Tell the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and their subsidiary the "Campaign for Safe Cosmetics" that you do not support the new "safe" cosmetics bill they are responsible for! "This campaign calls on cosmetics manufacturers to test their products for effects such as cancer-causing potential, hormone disruption, skin allergy, genetic and nervous system toxicity, and birth defects—which, if conducted according to standard protocols, could spell suffering and death for hundreds of thousands of animals in laboratories. EWG's report Skin Deep claims that such substances as salt, aloe vera gel, and chamomile are "unstudied chemicals" that should be tested…" http://www.peta.org/features/mean-greenies-enviro…
We agree with PETA's thinking that if a product is still operated in a cruelty free way, being owned by a larger company who DOES test is unfortunate – but does give them broader exposure through mass channels which gives more people (especially those in areas where there aren't a lot of selection outside of Wal Mart or drugstores) more chance to buy them. If more companies are going cruelty free, and the big brands see that consumers demand it (through purchasing power), there is also the likelihood of MORE cruelty free brands being developed. This is a grey area, and just our opinion. You are the consumer and you must do your research, weight the pros and cons, and make your own decisions.
What do companies do to test their products without using animals? Or should I say how?
There are many alternatives to animal testing. http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-exper… And, most ingredients have already been found to be safe – so no need to replicate.
Good article. Sharing this on FB, thanks!
P.S. I don’t even buy from companies that are owned by a larger company or group that conducts testing, like OPI and Coty. It’s just that the money still goes to Coty which are NOT crulety free, and my money could support them if I buy OPI, which I don’t. But I feel everyone should make their own decision about this matter.