Natural Products with Corporate Owners

I see a lot of people checking out my post on which companies perform animal testing, and thus I wanted to make sure to spread the news. It seems many small companies which make green products, and often don’t test on animals, have been bought up by larger companies that do.

In 2006 Tom’s of Maine was purchased by Colgate-Palmolive.

In 2007 Burt’s Bees was purchased by Clorox.

There was a third one, however, I can’t recall what it is at the moment. I am not suggesting to those who read this blog that they refrain from purchasing Burt’s Bees or Tom’s of Maine. I leave the choice to each individual, as they have to decide what they want to support. I haven’t made up my own mind yet. I think continuing to purchase green products owns by corporations will help send the message that this is what we want, so perhaps the corporations will lessen their production of harmful chemicals. However, I also realize that if I buy these brands, knowing they test on animals, then I am sending a message of a different kind. It’s not an easy decision. I just like consumers to be informed.

I welcome posts on other green products which are owned by corporations, so that people can be informed. I also welcome discussion on which side of the argument y’all are on.

List of Companies Who Test on Animals

I decided to post of a list of companies which have products that are tested on animals. Some of these companies may manufacture individual products which aren’t tested on animals, but as a whole, the company does prescribe to this kind of activity. While this list may contain companies which manufacture products (drugs) that are required to be tested on animals by law, this was not the reason for their inclusion.

The products listed in parenthesis are examples manufactured by the listed company or its parent company. Remember to check out the company’s website, or contact them directly, to get a complete list of products they manufacture.

Arm & Hammer (Church & Dwight), P.O. Box 1625, Horsham, PA 19044-6625;
609-683-5900; 800-524-1328; www.armhammer.com

Bic Corporation, 500 Bic Dr., Milford, CT 06460; 203-783-2000;
www.bicworld.com

Chesebrough-Ponds (Faberge, Ponds, Vaseline), 800 Sylvan Ave., Englewood
Cliffs, NJ 07632; 800-743-8640; www.pondssquad.com

Church & Dwight (Aim, Arm & Hammer, Arrid, Brillo, Close-up, Lady’s
Choice, Mentadent, Nair, Orange Glo International, Pearl Drops), P.O. Box 1625,
Horsham, PA 19044-6625; 609-683-5900; 800-524-1328; www.churchdwight.com

Clairol (Aussie, Daily Defense, Herbal Essences, Infusium 23, Procter & Gamble),
1 Blachley Rd., Stamford, CT 06922; 800-252-4765; www.clairol.com

Clorox (ArmorAll, Formula 409, Fresh Step, Glad, Liquid Plumber, Pine-Sol, Soft
Scrub, S.O.S., Tilex), 1221 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94612; 510-271-7000;
800-227-1860; www.clorox.com

Colgate-Palmolive Co. (Hills Pet Nutrition, Mennen, Palmolive, SoftSoap, Speed
Stick), 300 Park Ave., New York, NY 10022; 212-310-2000; 800-221-4607;
www.colgate.com

Cover Girl (Procter & Gamble), One Procter & Gamble Plz., Cincinnati, OH
45202; 513-983-1100; 800-543-1745; www.covergirl.com

Dial Corporation (Dry Idea, Purex, Renuzit, Right Guard, Soft & Dri), 15101 N.
Scottsdale Rd., Ste. 5028, Scottsdale, AZ 85254-2199; 800-528-0849;
www.dialcorp.com

Johnson & Johnson (Aveeno, Clean & Clear, Listerine, Lubriderm, Neutrogena,
Rembrandt, ROC), 1 Johnson & Johnson Plz., New Brunswick, NJ 08933; 732-
524-0400; 800-526-3967; www.jnj.com

Lever Bros. (Unilever), 800 Sylvan Ave., Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; 212-888-
1260; 800-598-1223; www.unilever.com

L’Oreal U.S.A. (Biotherm, Cacharel, Garnier, Giorgio Armani, Helena
Rubinstein, Lancome, Matrix Essentials, Maybelline, Ralph Lauren
Fragrances, Redken, Soft Sheen, Vichy), 575 Fifth Ave., New York, NY 10017;
212-818-1500; www.loreal.com

Max Factor (Procter & Gamble), One Procter & Gamble Plz., Cincinnati, OH
45202; 513-983-1100; 800-543-1745; www.maxfactor.com

Mead, 10 W. Second St., #1, Dayton, OH 45402; 937-495-6323;
www.meadweb.com

Melaleuca, 3910 S. Yellowstone Hwy., Idaho Falls, ID 83402-6003; 208-522-
0700; www.melaleuca.com

Mennen Co. (Colgate-Palmolive), 191 E. Hanover Ave., Morristown, NJ 07960-
3151; 973-631-9000; www.colgate.com

New Dana Perfumes, 470 Oakhill Rd., Crestwood Industrial Park, Mountaintop,
PA 18707; 800-822-8547

Noxell (Procter & Gamble), 11050 York Rd., Hunt Valley, MD 21030-2098;
410-785-7300; 800-572-3232; www.pg.com

Olay Co./Oil of Olay (Procter & Gamble), P.O. Box 599, Cincinnati, OH 45201;
800-543-1745; www.oilofolay.com

Oral-B (Procter & Gamble), 600 Clipper Dr., Belmont, CA 94002-4119;
415-598-5000; www.oralb.com

Pantene (Procter & Gamble), One Procter & Gamble Plz., Cincinnati, OH 45202;
800-945-7768; www.pantene.com

Physique (Procter & Gamble), One Procter & Gamble Plz., Cincinnati, OH 45202;
800-214-8957; www.physique.com

Playtex Products (Banana Boat), 300 Nyala Farms Rd., Westport, CT 06880; 203-
341-4000; www.playtex.com

Procter & Gamble Co. (Clairol, Cover Girl, Crest, Gillette, Giorgio, Iams, Max
Factor, Physique, Tide), One Procter & Gamble Plz., Cincinnati, OH 45202; 513-
983-1100; 800-543-1745; www.pg.com

Reckitt Benckiser (Easy Off, Lysol, Mop & Glo, Old English, Resolve, Spray ’N
Wash, Veet, Woolite), 399 Interpace Pkwy., Parsippany, NJ 07054; 973-633-3600;
800-333-3899; www.reckittbenckiser.com

Richardson-Vicks (Procter & Gamble), One Procter & Gamble Plz., Cincinnati,
OH 45202; 513-983-1100; 800-543-1745; www.pg.com

Schering-Plough (Bain de Soleil, Coppertone, Dr. Scholl’s), 2000 Galloping Hill
Rd., Kenilworth, NJ 07033-0530; 800-842-4090; www.sch-plough.com

S.C. Johnson (Drano, Edge, Fantastik, Glade, OFF!, Oust, Pledge, Scrubbing
Bubbles, Shout, Skintimate, Windex, Ziploc), 1525 Howe St., Racine, WI 53403;
800-494-4855; www.scjohnson.com

SoftSoap Enterprises (Colgate-Palmolive), 300 Park Ave., New York, NY 10022;
800-221-4607; www.colgate.com

Suave (Unilever), 800 Sylvan Ave., Englewood Cliffs, NJ 07632; 212-888-1260;
800-782-8301; www.suave.com

Unilever (Axe, Dove, Lever Bros., Suave, Sunsilk), 800 Sylvan Ave., Englewood
Cliffs, NJ 07632; 212-888-1260; 800-598-1223; www.unilever.com

Four Reasons PETA Will Not Get My Support

I am glad that there are animal rights activists. I believe strongly in protecting animals and trying to live harmonously with them. With PETA in particular, I feel the good they do is far outweighed by the bad. I believe the inconsistencies within their policies demonstrates ignorance, and I believe they perpetuate the objectification of woman.

4.Outdoor Cats: PETA does not believe in letting cats outdoors because of the increased risk of danager. I do agree with keeping pets inside and safe. We’re charged with their protection. They also support letting one’s cat outdoors with supervision. One of the other “uncompromised” stances of PETA, however, is their views on Zoos. PETA believes that “zoos and wildlife parks preclude or severly restrict natural behaviors, such as flying, swimming, running, hunting, climbing, scavenging, foraging, exploring and partner selection”. If this is the case, why are cats encouraged to be kept indoors and only let out under supervision? Cats are wild animals who were domesticated, and yet PETA does not want them to take part in their instintual activities. Yes, there is danger, but that danger is part of being an animal. Humans do offer an added level, but animals are incredibly adaptable. If PETA is going to be the voice of animals, shouldn’t they be consistent in what they’re fighting for?

3. Pit Bull Breeding: PETA’s website does not have a real stance on this. They speak about how the founding member, Ingrid Newkirk, has all these credentials but never do they give support for or against Pit Bulls. There is a generalized statement that all breeders are bad, and how the Pit Bull population by large is mistreated. The wording of this PETA stance implies that PETA supports this ban. I have to question why PETA is not supporting this breed of animal and its right to a happy life. PETA stands for the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. This does not mean “some” animals or “from this approved list”, it means all animals. Yet there is no PETA support behind this misunderstood breed. There is no mention of the positive aspects of a Pit Bull, nor is there any attention brought to the fact that larger breed injuries are more likely to get noticed because the animal is stronger and bigger, not more aggressive, than the smaller breeds. An aggressive chihuahua which bites people (most often referred to as “nip”) isn’t regarded as a threat because this breed is less likely to draw blood or bring serious damage.

2. Euthanasia: PETA believes that euthanasia is “the most compassionate and dignified way for unwanted animals to leave an uncaring world” and that “no-kill shelters do not provide a solution to the problem of animal-companion homelessness”. I understand that the United States is overrun with homeless animals. This fact is heartbreaking and frustrating. However, to believe that killing off “unwanted animals” is an acceptable response to this is unacceptable. I especially don’t understand how a organization which rigidly supports animal rights such as not using them for entertainment, clothing, a food source, etc., could have an “uncompromised” stance that killing animals simply because they’re unwanted is okay.

1. Campaigns: PETA has a history of being sexist, racist, and violent.  The PETA YouTube
page shows video ad campaigns and celebrity endorsements. In one video, breed purity for animals was compared to the KKK. In the way of sexism, while PETA has showcased naked men (I can’t find any links, but I’ve heard things), they have a much higher percentage of using naked woman. One live protest has a topless woman caged in the streets, while another ad show a woman’s pussy with “too much” fur and how wrong it is. PETA openly admits they will use any tactic necessary to bring attention to animal rights. They also believe that liberation is directly related to the amount of clothing a woman wears. When questioned about this, their response was:

First, please know that, as an organization staffed largely by feminist women, we would not do something that contributed to the serious problems that women face. We feel that there is nothing shameful or “wrong” about being naked, and we believe that women (and men) should have the choice to use their own bodies to make social statements. This tactic has been used since at least the 11th century, when Lady Godiva rode naked on a horse to protest taxes on the poor. Far from being exploited, our “naked” demonstrators and billboard models choose to participate in our actions because they want to do something to make people stop and pay attention to animal abuse.

Take Traci Bingham, for example, who posed for our “All Animals Have the Same Parts” ad campaign (http://www.GoVeg.com/feat/tracibee/). She is a deeply committed vegetarian who is known to millions for her television work, such as beating out a platoon of men to excel in an endurance test called Boot Camp. She chose to use her body to bring public attention to a serious animal issue. In this case, Ms. Bingham felt offended by the traditional “meat” posters that treat animals as “parts” and she wanted to make the point that neither they nor women should be viewed as parts; we are all precious.

Consider that it is the societies that allow women to wear revealing clothing in which women have the most rights and the most power. Likewise, it is the societies that punish women for wearing revealing clothing in which women have the fewest rights and the least power they are considered chattel who must do as they are told. Should women only be allowed to participate in activism if they promise not to show their bodies or use them to make social statements? If a person chooses to use her physicality and sexuality to convey a message of her choosing, aren’t those who would censor her, even if their motives are well-intended, also somewhat guilty of disrespect and repression?

Although our use of “nudity” is attention-grabbing, we don’t rely on it for the majority of our outreach, nor do we use it gratuitously; it is intended to underscore our message, whether it is “I’d rather go naked than wear fur” to emphasize the health benefits of a vegetarian diet, or to show the vulnerability of animals in laboratories or circuses. We would also like to note that we do not feature only women in our more provocative ads; please see the following examples:

1· http://www.FurIsDead.com/feat-rodman2.asp
2· http://www.PETA.org/feat/jennaethan/
3· http://www.FurIsDead.com/feat-kristoff.asp

As if the ignorance was not clear enough, PETA has now resorted to using women stripping in order to “spread their message”. I support a woman’s right to autonomy. I also support educating women on where their sense of liberation comes from, and why perpetuating the ideal that a woman’s body is the only way to gain power, pride, acceptance, or attention.