RSS feed for comments on this post

1. Erin

   September 1st, 2007 at 9:46 am

   Bummer Alert!

   I am so sorry to tell you this — but I figured you’d rather know than not know, even if it means having to blacklist yet another brand.

   Jason’s Natural Cosmetics is owned by the Hain Celestial Food Group — a company that is ANYTHING but cruelty-free.

   Check out Seventh Generation’s list of seemingly independent companies that are in fact owned by evil corporate giants:

   http://www.seventhgen.com/making_difference/newsletter_article.php?issue=78&article=511

   Another notable disappointment is Burt’s Bees, which is now owned by AEA Investors.

   Yuck.



2. Emily

   September 1st, 2007 at 4:21 pm

   Hi Erin,

   Thanks for reading this blog, and thanks for the heads up, but actually, I’m not opposed to large corporations (though I prefer small companies), just large corporations that test on animals. So I’m okay with Hain Celestial — as far as I know, it doesn’t promote testing on animals — though it does own a few companies that buy ingredients that may have been tested on animals.

   Hain Celestial Group Inc. actually owns a bunch of the companies on the CCIC’s really-cruelty-free list that I like — Jason, Queen Helene, Heather’s Naturals, Avalon Organics, and Alba Botanica.

   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hain_Celestial_Group

   Hain Celestial also produces most of the natural and organic food products around — it basically makes most of the packaged products at Whole Foods:

   Drinks: Celestial Seasonings, Mountain Sun, Rice Dream, Soy Dream, and WestSoy.

   Foods: Arrowhead Mills, Bearitos, Boston’s, Breadshop, Casbah, DeBoles, Earth’s Best, Ethnic Gourmet, Garden of Eatin’, Grains Noirs, Hain Pure Foods, Hain Pure Snax, Harry’s Premium Snax, Health Valley, Hollywood, Imagine Foods, Lima, Little Bear Snack Foods, Milkfree, Natumi, Nile Spice, Rosetto, Spectrum Essentials, Spectrum Naturals, Terra Chips, Walnut Acres Organic, Westbrae Natural, Yves Veggie Cuisine, and FreeBird.

   Specialty: Alba nonfat dry milk products, and Estee — sugar-free foods.

   Personal Care: Batherapy, Footherapy, Heather’s Naturals, Jason Natural Cosmetics, Jason Natural Cosmetics, Orjene Organics, Queen Helene, Shaman Earthly Organics, and Zia Natural Skin Care.



3. Erin

   September 1st, 2007 at 11:15 pm

   Hi Emily,

   Thanks for the heads up — and thank YOU for this blog. I, too, love PETA, but their list is not nearly hardcore enough for me.

   I had checked Hain Celestial’s website and wasn’t able to find ANY statement about its position on animal testing. So I assumed that while many of its subsidiaries (Alba, Jason, etc.) are cruelty-free, the company itself was not.

   Usually, if a company has a stance against animal-testing, it’s prominently displayed on the company’s website. When a statement about a company’s position on animal-testing is omitted, it’s generally because they’d rather you didn’t know.

   I’m not against big companies either — just companies that directly or indirectly use or support animal-testing.

   I’ve written to Hain Celestial and asked for clarification on their position, so I’ll let you know what I hear back.

   Thanks again!



4. Emily

   September 2nd, 2007 at 11:30 am

   Hi Erin,

   So glad to hear PETA’s list isn’t hardcore enough for you too!

   Also I’m VERY impressed that you only buy from companies that are owned by companies with stated anti-animal-testing policies. That’s even more hardcore than I am — I just don’t buy from really-cruelty-free companies that are owned by evil-animal-testing corporations. It’s why I haven’t been buying anything from the Body Shop lately. I’m squicked out at the thought of giving any money to a subsidiary of L’Oreal, which has actual animal-testing laboratories on site. Even though the Body Shop is really-cruelty-free.

   Anyway, I look forward to hearing what Hain Celestial writes back to you!

   Regards,
   Emily



5. Erin

   September 19th, 2007 at 10:41 pm

   Hi Emily,

   I still haven’t heard back from Hain Celestial. (Sometimes I think those “contact us” forms get sent directly into a virtual incinerator.) I will certainly keep you posted!

   I am trying really, really hard to buy products from cruelty-free companies that are either independent or are subsidiaries of cruelty-free companies. Here’s why. I have heard the argument that supporting cruelty-free subsidiaries of evil animal-testing corporations (like Tom’s of Maine, which is owned by Colgate) sends a message to those evil animal-testers and can ultimately influence them to change their evil animal-testing ways. In fact, I got a message from PETA to this effect when I wrote to them asking why Tom’s of Maine was still on their cruelty-free list. And while I’m not an economist, I don’t buy the argument for one minute. What I think happens instead is that the evil animal-testers take the money and run.

   Colgate didn’t buy Tom’s of Maine because it was interested in Tom’s of Maine’s humane practices. If Colgate were interested in humane practices, it would implement them right now.

   Colgate didn’t buy Tom’s of Maine because it wanted to determine whether or not there are alternatives to animal testing, or whether cruelty-free can be profitable. It knows there are alternatives, and it knows that cruelty-free can be profitable.

   Colgate bought Tom’s of Maine so that it can make great big gobs of money. Colgate doesn’t care how it gets the gobs of money. Colgate just wants more and more and more and more of it. Through its acquisition of Tom’s of Maine, Colgate now has its hand in EVERYONE’S pockets: consumers who don’t know about animal testing; consumers who know about the evils of animal testing but don’t care enough to boycott; and consumers who despise animal testing and do not want to support it.

   I think the best way to send a message to Colgate is to stop buying their products altogether, and to write to them and say, “I’m not buying anything you make, or anything made by anyone you own, until you stop needlessly torturing animals.”

   On the other hand, we can only do what we can. Living cruelty-free is very difficult and can be frustrating and tiring. I am still struggling to figure it all out.

   I think it’s perfectly respectable for a person to set a limit on just how far they’re willing to go. If it’s a choice between Colgate toothpaste and Tom’s of Maine, it’s better to go with Tom’s. If it’s a choice between the Body Shop and L’Oreal, go with the Body Shop.

   But if there are reasonable and acceptable alternatives that are truly-truly-truly cruelty-free, and you don’t have to drive 500 miles or pay $500 to get it, I’d say those are the ones to choose!

   I really appreciate what you’re doing for the world of cruelty-free living. It’s a tremendous resource for finding cruelty-free products and keeping up on animal-testing news, but it’s also a great place to find support and like minds.

   Erin



6. Emily

   September 20th, 2007 at 11:58 pm

   Hi Erin,

   Sorry to hear that you haven’t heard back from Hain Celestial. They don’t sound like the sort of company that would be too interested in customers.

   I think that’s very noble that you’re only buying products from truly cruelty-free companies. Wow! Keep up the good work. I know from personal experience how much work that must be.

   Thanks so much for your nice comments about this blog — I think one of the best things about it is I’ve heard from a number of people (like you!) who are also interested in living a cruelty-free lifestyle.

   Regards,
   Emily



7. Erin

   September 24th, 2007 at 5:34 pm

   I am hardly noble! I think that, if given a choice between animal-tested or cruelty-free toothpaste, most human beings would choose the cruelty-free toothpaste. Most would probably even be willing to spend a little bit more on it.

   The problem is that (1) the vast majority of personal-care product companies we “know” and “trust” are involved in inhumane practices, (2) the vast majority of consumers are unaware of this fact, and (3) those of us who are aware of it do not have complete access to the information we need to make informed decisions.

   So often, we’re at the behest of the minced words of public relations people, whose job it is to make it look like the company is a beacon of kindness.

   Just like the government ensures that we get a complete list of ingredients and nutritional information on the packaged food we eat, it should make sure that personal-care and household products are labeled either “animal-tested” or “cruelty-free.” (One of my pet peeves is when I see the words “Final product not tested on animals.” Many kind, caring consumers will take this to mean that the product is cruelty-free, when of course it’s not — because the individual ingredients WERE tested on animals.)

   We also need to have easy access to complete, accurate information about the animal-testing policy AND practices of ALL companies. All companies should have to include this information on their websites.

   But these changes rely on federal legislation. I just wish there were more I could do — aside from my own personal boycotts and spreading the word about animal-testing to my friends and family. When I go to Target or Walgreens and see the shelves just FULL of Johnson & Johnson, Colgate-Palmolive, and Procter & Gamble products, I can’t help but lose hope. These evil, evil companies have brand loyalty and overwhelming market share. What can we REALLY do to change them?

   Erin



8. Emily

   September 25th, 2007 at 5:35 pm

   Hi Erin,

   I completely agree! I would be so pleased if the government would regulate the whole “cruelty-free” label and make it worthwhile. Also I really hate the whole ‘”final product not tested on animals” lie by implication. And I hate the rows of shelves full of Johnson & Johnson, Colgate-Palmolive, and Procter & Gamble bottles in drugstores. Cruelty in bottled form stretching halfway across the store — you’d think there’d be maybe one non-cruel company, but really there’s only Method products, and that’s only at Target.

   But I think people will come around to a cruelty-free lifestyle eventually — every day more and more people want to buy cruelty-free stuff. I’ve met numerous people who buy Johnson & Johnson products, but if I ask them if they like to torture rabbits they become really offended that I would accuse them of that. They just seem to think that cruelty-free means coddling instead of preventing rabbit-torturing, and they don’t want to have to think about which products are cruelty-free or not (which is where government-mandated labeling would come in especially useful).

   I was really pleased to see that Longs, of all places, has started to carry some cruelty-free products, which I never thought would ever happen. Ten years ago only hippies who shopped in co-ops ever bought cruelty-free products. I think this is a sign that cruelty-freeism has become more mainstream and more people are into it.

   Emily



9. Wendy Koenigsmann

   October 30th, 2007 at 1:49 pm

   I use a skin tone balancing lotion made by this company. It’s quite good.



10. Emily

    October 31st, 2007 at 1:20 am

    Hmm, that sounds interesting — I’ll have to look into it.



11. Pawan

    December 21st, 2008 at 12:43 am

    Hi, But can you tell me the names of some ACTUAL brands that produce cruelty free range of basic skin care and toiletries like soaps, shampoos and creams?



12. Emily

    December 21st, 2008 at 7:23 pm

    Hi Pawan,

    I’m not entirely sure of what you mean by “actual” brand. Do you mean one widely available in brick-and-mortar stores? If that is the case, Jason is an “actual” brand — I’ve even seen it at Longs. If you’re looking for other 100%-cruelty-free brands that are widely available in local stores, I have a sublist of my 100%-cruelty-free companies list (the one over there in the sidebar) that only shows brands that are widely available in health food stores/Whole Foods:

    http://www.livingcrueltyfree.com/2007/03/26/the-short-list-of-cruelty-free-companies/

    I hope that helps, and please email me if you mean something else by “actual” brand.

    Regards,