Aloette
Almay
Aveda
Avon
Bobbi Brown
The Body Shop
Bonne Bell
Chanel
Clarins of Paris
Clinique Laboratories
Crabtree & Evelyn
Dermalogica
Donna Karan Beauty Company
EstŠ¹e Lauder
Hello Kitty
Kate Spade Beauty
La Mer
Lush
M.A.C. Cosmetics
Nivea
OPI Products
Origins
Physicians Formula
Prescriptives
Revlon
Stila Cosmetics
Ultima II
Burt's Bees
Kissmyface
Wet 'n' Wild
Mary Kay
Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Cosmetic Testing on animals
In my Opinion animal testing is disgusting.
Hope you enjoy the article below:
The Hidden Ingredient in Cosmetic Testing: Animal Suffering
Every year, cosmetics companies kill millions of animals to test their products. These companies claim they test on animals to establish the safety of their products and ingredients for consumers. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require animal testing for cosmetics, and alternative testing methods are widely available and lead to more reliable results. Hundreds of companies – including Avon, The Body Shop and Mary Kay – already use humane non-animal testing methods to ensure the safety of their cosmetics.
Painful and Deadly Tests
Product testing is commonly performed on animals to measure the levels of skin irritancy, eye tissue damage, and toxicity caused by various substances used in the manufacture of cosmetics. In the Draize test, caustic substances are placed in the eyes of conscious rabbits to evaluate damage to sensitive eye tissues. This is extremely painful for the rabbits, who often scream when the substances are applied and sometimes break their necks or backs trying to escape the restraints.
Lethal Dosage (LD) tests are used to determine the amount of a substance that will kill a predetermined ratio of animals. For example, in the LD50 test, subjects are forced to ingest poisonous substances (through stomach tubes, vapor spray inhalers or injection) until half of them die. Common reactions to LD tests include convulsions, vomiting, paralysis and bleeding from the eyes, nose, mouth or rectum.
The Failure of Animal Testing
Not only is animal testing inhumane; it is inherently inaccurate. For example, LD tests do not measure human health hazards, but only determine how toxic the product is to the type of animal it was tested on. Test results cannot be extrapolated from a mouse to a rat, let alone from a rat to a human. Each species reacts differently to various substances. Moreover, LD test results can be affected by the age and sex of the animals tested, their housing and nutritional conditions and how the compound is administered.
Humane and Effective Alternatives
Non-animal testing methods that are more reliable and less expensive have been developed. These make use of cell and skin tissue cultures, corneas from eye banks, and sophisticated computer and mathematical models. Some companies avoid testing altogether by using non-toxic natural ingredients or those that have already been safety-approved by the Cosmetics, Toiletry and Fragrance Association. As Gordon Baxter, cofounder of Pharmagene Laboratories, which uses only computers and human tissues to create and test drugs once said, “If you have information on human genes, what’s the point of going back to animals?”
Why Test On Animals?
Regulatory agencies don’t require animal testing of cosmetics, and the effectiveness of non-animal product testing methods has been thoroughly demonstrated. In 2003, the European Union passed a ban on the use of animals in cosmetics testing starting in 2009, and a complete sales ban effective in 2013. So why do some American companies still insist on conducting these barbaric and obsolete tests?
The resistance of industry technicians and researchers trying to protect their jobs accounts for some of the reason. In addition, corporate legal departments typically use animal testing as a way to evade liability in the event of a lawsuit. However, consumers who purchase products from companies that test on animals are also partly responsible. Compassionate consumers must use their purchasing power to send a strong message to cosmetics manufacturers that testing on animals is cruel and unacceptable.
What you can do
1. Only buy products from companies that don’t test on animals! A comprehensive list is available at www.leapingbunny.org. Encourage your friends and family members to support humane companies, as well.
2. Let companies currently testing cosmetics on animals know that you will not buy their products until they stop. Most companies have toll-free numbers that you can call for free!
Hope you enjoy the article below:
The Hidden Ingredient in Cosmetic Testing: Animal Suffering
Every year, cosmetics companies kill millions of animals to test their products. These companies claim they test on animals to establish the safety of their products and ingredients for consumers. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require animal testing for cosmetics, and alternative testing methods are widely available and lead to more reliable results. Hundreds of companies – including Avon, The Body Shop and Mary Kay – already use humane non-animal testing methods to ensure the safety of their cosmetics.
Painful and Deadly Tests
Product testing is commonly performed on animals to measure the levels of skin irritancy, eye tissue damage, and toxicity caused by various substances used in the manufacture of cosmetics. In the Draize test, caustic substances are placed in the eyes of conscious rabbits to evaluate damage to sensitive eye tissues. This is extremely painful for the rabbits, who often scream when the substances are applied and sometimes break their necks or backs trying to escape the restraints.
Lethal Dosage (LD) tests are used to determine the amount of a substance that will kill a predetermined ratio of animals. For example, in the LD50 test, subjects are forced to ingest poisonous substances (through stomach tubes, vapor spray inhalers or injection) until half of them die. Common reactions to LD tests include convulsions, vomiting, paralysis and bleeding from the eyes, nose, mouth or rectum.
The Failure of Animal Testing
Not only is animal testing inhumane; it is inherently inaccurate. For example, LD tests do not measure human health hazards, but only determine how toxic the product is to the type of animal it was tested on. Test results cannot be extrapolated from a mouse to a rat, let alone from a rat to a human. Each species reacts differently to various substances. Moreover, LD test results can be affected by the age and sex of the animals tested, their housing and nutritional conditions and how the compound is administered.
Humane and Effective Alternatives
Non-animal testing methods that are more reliable and less expensive have been developed. These make use of cell and skin tissue cultures, corneas from eye banks, and sophisticated computer and mathematical models. Some companies avoid testing altogether by using non-toxic natural ingredients or those that have already been safety-approved by the Cosmetics, Toiletry and Fragrance Association. As Gordon Baxter, cofounder of Pharmagene Laboratories, which uses only computers and human tissues to create and test drugs once said, “If you have information on human genes, what’s the point of going back to animals?”
Why Test On Animals?
Regulatory agencies don’t require animal testing of cosmetics, and the effectiveness of non-animal product testing methods has been thoroughly demonstrated. In 2003, the European Union passed a ban on the use of animals in cosmetics testing starting in 2009, and a complete sales ban effective in 2013. So why do some American companies still insist on conducting these barbaric and obsolete tests?
The resistance of industry technicians and researchers trying to protect their jobs accounts for some of the reason. In addition, corporate legal departments typically use animal testing as a way to evade liability in the event of a lawsuit. However, consumers who purchase products from companies that test on animals are also partly responsible. Compassionate consumers must use their purchasing power to send a strong message to cosmetics manufacturers that testing on animals is cruel and unacceptable.
What you can do
1. Only buy products from companies that don’t test on animals! A comprehensive list is available at www.leapingbunny.org. Encourage your friends and family members to support humane companies, as well.
2. Let companies currently testing cosmetics on animals know that you will not buy their products until they stop. Most companies have toll-free numbers that you can call for free!
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Cows are magical
The Hidden Lives of Cows
Cows are as diverse as cats, dogs, and people: Some are bright; others are slow learners. Some are bold and adventurous; others are shy and timid. Some are friendly and considerate; others are bossy and devious.
According to research, cows are generally very intelligent animals who can remember things for a long time. Animal behaviorists have found that cows interact in socially complex ways, developing friendships over time and sometimes holding grudges against other cows who treat them badly.
These gentle giants mourn the deaths of and even separation from those they love, even shedding tears over their loss. The mother-calf bond is particularly strong, and there are countless reports of mother cows who continue to frantically call and search for their babies after the calves have been taken away and sold to veal or beef farms.
BRAINY BOVINES
Research has shown that cows clearly understand cause-and-effect relationships—a sure sign of advanced cognitive abilities. For example, cows can learn how to push a lever to operate a drinking fountain when they're thirsty or to press a button with their heads to release grain when they're hungry. Researchers have found that not only can cows figure out problems, they also, like humans, enjoy the intellectual challenge and get excited when they find a solution.
PECKING ORDERS AREN'T JUST FOR CHICKENS
A herd of cows is very much like a pack of wolves, with alpha animals and complex social dynamics. Each cow can recognize more than 100 members of the herd, and social relationships are very important to them. Cows will consistently choose leaders for their intelligence, inquisitiveness, self-confidence, experience, and good social skills, while bullying, selfishness, size, and strength are not recognized as suitable leadership qualities.
Raising cows in unnatural conditions, such as crowded feedlots, is very stressful to them because it upsets their hierarchy. University of Saskatchewan researcher Jon Watts notes that cows who are kept in groups of more than 200 on commercial feedlots become stressed and constantly fight for dominance. (Feedlots in America hold thousands of cows at a time.)
COWS DON'T WANT TO DIE
Like all animals, cows value their lives and don't want to die. Stories abound of cows who have gone to extraordinary lengths to fight for their lives.
A cow named Suzie was about to be loaded onto a freighter bound for Venezuela when she turned around, ran back down the gangplank, and leaped into the river. Even though she was pregnant (or perhaps because she was pregnant), she managed to swim all the way across the river, eluding capture for several days. She was rescued by PETA and sent to a sanctuary.
When workers at a slaughterhouse in Massachusetts went on break, Emily the cow made a break of her own. She took a tremendous leap over a 5-foot gate and escaped into the woods, surviving for several weeks during New England's snowiest winter in a decade, cleverly refusing to touch the hay put out to lure her back to the slaughterhouse.
When she was eventually caught by the owners of a nearby sanctuary, public outcry demanded that the slaughterhouse allow the sanctuary to buy her for one dollar. Emily lived out the rest of her life in Massachusetts until she died of cancer in 2004. Her life is a testament to the fact that eating meat means eating animals who don't want to die.
Cows are as diverse as cats, dogs, and people: Some are bright; others are slow learners. Some are bold and adventurous; others are shy and timid. Some are friendly and considerate; others are bossy and devious.
According to research, cows are generally very intelligent animals who can remember things for a long time. Animal behaviorists have found that cows interact in socially complex ways, developing friendships over time and sometimes holding grudges against other cows who treat them badly.
These gentle giants mourn the deaths of and even separation from those they love, even shedding tears over their loss. The mother-calf bond is particularly strong, and there are countless reports of mother cows who continue to frantically call and search for their babies after the calves have been taken away and sold to veal or beef farms.
BRAINY BOVINES
Research has shown that cows clearly understand cause-and-effect relationships—a sure sign of advanced cognitive abilities. For example, cows can learn how to push a lever to operate a drinking fountain when they're thirsty or to press a button with their heads to release grain when they're hungry. Researchers have found that not only can cows figure out problems, they also, like humans, enjoy the intellectual challenge and get excited when they find a solution.
PECKING ORDERS AREN'T JUST FOR CHICKENS
A herd of cows is very much like a pack of wolves, with alpha animals and complex social dynamics. Each cow can recognize more than 100 members of the herd, and social relationships are very important to them. Cows will consistently choose leaders for their intelligence, inquisitiveness, self-confidence, experience, and good social skills, while bullying, selfishness, size, and strength are not recognized as suitable leadership qualities.
Raising cows in unnatural conditions, such as crowded feedlots, is very stressful to them because it upsets their hierarchy. University of Saskatchewan researcher Jon Watts notes that cows who are kept in groups of more than 200 on commercial feedlots become stressed and constantly fight for dominance. (Feedlots in America hold thousands of cows at a time.)
COWS DON'T WANT TO DIE
Like all animals, cows value their lives and don't want to die. Stories abound of cows who have gone to extraordinary lengths to fight for their lives.
A cow named Suzie was about to be loaded onto a freighter bound for Venezuela when she turned around, ran back down the gangplank, and leaped into the river. Even though she was pregnant (or perhaps because she was pregnant), she managed to swim all the way across the river, eluding capture for several days. She was rescued by PETA and sent to a sanctuary.
When workers at a slaughterhouse in Massachusetts went on break, Emily the cow made a break of her own. She took a tremendous leap over a 5-foot gate and escaped into the woods, surviving for several weeks during New England's snowiest winter in a decade, cleverly refusing to touch the hay put out to lure her back to the slaughterhouse.
When she was eventually caught by the owners of a nearby sanctuary, public outcry demanded that the slaughterhouse allow the sanctuary to buy her for one dollar. Emily lived out the rest of her life in Massachusetts until she died of cancer in 2004. Her life is a testament to the fact that eating meat means eating animals who don't want to die.
CircusesHurtAnimals.com
CircusesHurtAnimals.com: To educate everyone he meets about the violent animal abuse in circuses, a PETA staff member legally changed his name to CircusesHurtAnimals.com…
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
WWF - Update - Elephants Under Increased Threat From Illegal Ivory Trade
Featured Story
ELEPHANTS UNDER INCREASED THREAT FROM ILLEGAL IVORY TRADE
A December, 2011 seizure at Port Klang, Malaysia uncovered 211 tusks bound for trade in Asia.
Ivory estimated to weigh more than 23 metric tons—a figure that represents 2,500 elephants—was seized in the 13 largest seizures of illegal ivory in 2011.
TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network, recorded these major cases through the Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS). The illegal ivory trade monitoring system holds details of over 17,000 reported ivory and other elephant product seizures since 1989.
“In 23 years of compiling ivory seizure data for ETIS, this is the worst year ever for large ivory seizures—2011 has truly been a horrible year for elephants,” said Tom Milliken, TRAFFIC’s elephant expert. “The escalating large ivory quantities involved in 2011 reflect both a rising demand in Asia and the increasing sophistication of the criminal gangs behind the trafficking.”
A long battle against poaching
African elephant populations declined significantly in the 1970s and 1980s because of poaching for illegal ivory. The international ivory trade was banned by CITES in 1989 and within the U.S. that same year. Some elephant populations have begun to recover, but poaching continues to be a major threat to their survival.
On December 21, 2011, 727 ivory pieces were discovered at the port of Mombasa, Kenya. The ivory was concealed inside a container destined for Asia. Earlier in the month, Malaysian authorities seized 1.4 metric tons of ivory concealed inside a shipping container enroute from Kenya to Cambodia.
Malaysia has emerged as a key transit country in six of this year’s cases. TRAFFIC first drew attention to this route in 2009. Most shipments end up in China or Thailand.
WWF’s local to global solutions
WWF supports grassroots efforts to curb poaching and helps governments strengthen law enforcement. At the same time, WWF works to increase awareness of the issue and help drive down demand for ivory. WWF and TRAFFIC are calling for higher vigilance and stricter enforcement of laws in order to break the illegal ivory smuggling links from Africa to Asia.
ELEPHANTS UNDER INCREASED THREAT FROM ILLEGAL IVORY TRADE
A December, 2011 seizure at Port Klang, Malaysia uncovered 211 tusks bound for trade in Asia.
Ivory estimated to weigh more than 23 metric tons—a figure that represents 2,500 elephants—was seized in the 13 largest seizures of illegal ivory in 2011.
TRAFFIC, the wildlife trade monitoring network, recorded these major cases through the Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS). The illegal ivory trade monitoring system holds details of over 17,000 reported ivory and other elephant product seizures since 1989.
“In 23 years of compiling ivory seizure data for ETIS, this is the worst year ever for large ivory seizures—2011 has truly been a horrible year for elephants,” said Tom Milliken, TRAFFIC’s elephant expert. “The escalating large ivory quantities involved in 2011 reflect both a rising demand in Asia and the increasing sophistication of the criminal gangs behind the trafficking.”
A long battle against poaching
African elephant populations declined significantly in the 1970s and 1980s because of poaching for illegal ivory. The international ivory trade was banned by CITES in 1989 and within the U.S. that same year. Some elephant populations have begun to recover, but poaching continues to be a major threat to their survival.
On December 21, 2011, 727 ivory pieces were discovered at the port of Mombasa, Kenya. The ivory was concealed inside a container destined for Asia. Earlier in the month, Malaysian authorities seized 1.4 metric tons of ivory concealed inside a shipping container enroute from Kenya to Cambodia.
Malaysia has emerged as a key transit country in six of this year’s cases. TRAFFIC first drew attention to this route in 2009. Most shipments end up in China or Thailand.
WWF’s local to global solutions
WWF supports grassroots efforts to curb poaching and helps governments strengthen law enforcement. At the same time, WWF works to increase awareness of the issue and help drive down demand for ivory. WWF and TRAFFIC are calling for higher vigilance and stricter enforcement of laws in order to break the illegal ivory smuggling links from Africa to Asia.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Wednesday, September 7, 2011
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)