Where People & Piggies Thrive

Newbie or Guinea Guru? Popcorn in!

Register for free to enjoy the full benefits.
Find out more about the NEW, drastically improved site and forum!

Register

Veg*n Animal Testing....

gpigluver14

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Posts
747
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
747
Inside HLS

You should really read this...It's about Huntingdon Life Sciences, the second largest lab testing company- it's an account by someone who worked there.

Does anyone have any other opinions about lab testing?? Please share...I try to look for the "not tested on animals" label on most of the stuff I buy. But without it we wouldn't have all the medicines we have today, so I honestly don't know how I feel about it. I definitely don't support it though- I think it's animal cruelty. :?:

Also...Don't use Splenda! The artificial sweetener Sucralose was tested on animals; Splenda is the "brand name" for Sucralose:

Useless experiments
 

JarBax

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Posts
2,315
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Messages
2,315
There are a few other topics on this in the vegetarian section of the forum - but this is the one that sprang to mind:

https://www.guineapigcages.com/forum/kitchen/20595-vivisection.html?highlight=vivisection

Like you, I check the labels of eerything I buy, checking that they've not been tested on animals. Are you acquainted with this list:

PETA's Companies that DON'T Test on Animals List | Ethicast.com
 

Terekins

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Posts
422
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Messages
422
I can't even read that, it will just upset me. I try to get products that aren't tested on animals too, and for the most part it isn't too difficult (getting into dish detergent and things like that I find a bit trickier). It bothers me to know that any animal has to go through torture, but after having guinea pigs for just a few months, I find it so hard to imagine that such intelligent and sensitive creatures could be treated that way.

Here we have the Body Shop which has very nice products, but even in regular pharmacies you can easily find cosmetics that are cruelty free. I buy either Revlon or Almay for makeup, and there are lots of creams and body washes (I really like Burt's Bees but it's quite expensive) if you look around. I talk to some people who say "everything is tested on animals" as if there's no point in even trying to find a product that isn't, but that's not true. And some people say "well the ingredients in there have been tested on animals by someone else"...so what! I'm sure at this point it's nearly impossible to avoid products that at some point were tested on animals, the damage has been done, but many companies don't test anymore. That's my two cents! :)

What kinds of products do you buy?
 

gpigluver14

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Posts
747
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
747
Thanks for the replies!


No I didn't know about that list, thank you! I am going to print it out once I get the chance. I'm glad to say I use a lot of the products on there. It's good that there's a lot of them...But there are some major ones that aren't on there...ie: Johnson and Johnson, Secret, Dove...: (
 

FoolOnTheHill

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Sep 30, 2006
Posts
485
Joined
Sep 30, 2006
Messages
485
Ooo, Lush! I love the smell of their shops, and all their products look great. It's quite expensive though, which I guess will put a lot of people off as it's cheaper to get normal stuff.

I thought The Body Shop was bought by Loreal, so it's not really non-tested now?

I'm about half way through that link and am disgusted.
 

Terekins

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Posts
422
Joined
Jan 2, 2007
Messages
422
Ooo, Lush! I love the smell of their shops, and all their products look great. It's quite expensive though, which I guess will put a lot of people off as it's cheaper to get normal stuff.

I thought The Body Shop was bought by Loreal, so it's not really non-tested now?

I'm about half way through that link and am disgusted.

The Body Shop still stands by its stance that it is cruelty free.
I like Lush too, but can't afford it on a regular basis. As with Burts Bees, I usually will ask for these products as xmas gifts. A nice supply will last me most of the year :) As for less expensive stuff, here in Canada Lawtons' Life brand has a lot of cruelty free products, and the Superstore does too. Glysomed cremes are all cruelty free and inexpensive.
 

xDanix

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Posts
52
Joined
Jan 1, 2007
Messages
52
I love Lush! And I don´t think that they´re so expensive, beacuse the products last for a long time.
I use Jumping Juniper, a shampoo bar, and it lasts almost 3 months for me. So, it ends up not being expensive.
And what I like about them, it´s that they just don´t simply test, they are totally against animal testing, make campaigns in their website against it, etc.
My cosmetics are all cruelty-free. I always check out the list of PEA, an organization for animal rights that have a list like PETA, but adapted for Brazilian companies and/or foreign companies that sell products here.
But I also have difficulties on buying products for cleaning my house, clothes, etc.

Ahd, yeah, a lot of things that help us today were discovered by testing on animals. But we shouldn´t live in the past. If we have this knowledge today, why should we continue testing? And in the past, they didn´t have all these alternative ways, like tests on computer, on synthetic materials, etc. That´s why I think it´s not correct to test in animals today, we have these alternatives. Sometimes I think scientists are just lazy about trying new stuff, so they prefer to continue testing on animals because that´s how they learned to do.
 

TheSnufflenoses

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Posts
79
Joined
Feb 17, 2007
Messages
79
I personally am extremely against animal testing for products, without question. However, like gpigluvr14, I don't know where to stand when it comes to medicine. Wikipedia says currently only 2% of lab animals are guinea pigs. It says they are used in research primarily as models for human medical conditions such as juvenile diabetes, tuberculosis, scurvy, and pregnancy complications.

It really boils down to what you believe in most: that animals have as much right as humans and since they can't give consent shouldn't be tested on for any reason... or sacrifices for the greater good of mankind. If it means that testing on a few guinea pigs will develop cures to save the lives of millions of adults and children and/or keep them healthy, is it worth it?

On one hand I believe in the "greater good" model, however that's easy to say when it doesn't affect you. If someone came to me and said we need to do animal testing on YOUR piggies, because we THINK we might get closer to a cure for such and such disease, I couldn't do it. Even if they said doing so would 100% positively cure such and such, it would still kill me. Honestly I can't make up my mind, but I do know that I wish animal testing wouldn't have to happen at all.
 

gpigluver14

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Posts
747
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
747
Thanks for the replies everyone. :)

I was so happy when I saw Bath and Body Works on the list of 'don't test'. What a relief, since I love shopping there. It must be why it's rather expensive too. I'm just waiting for the day when there is an afordable company that sells safe products, maybe a whole store even that sells only natural/organic foods, make-up, lotion, and household cleaners that aren't tested on animals. It should have natural pet foods too. Is there a store like this?? I know there are websites out there you can order from that are similar...

And does anyone know if Avon tests on animals??
 

Maisiepaisie

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Posts
546
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
546
I thought The Body Shop was bought by Loreal, so it's not really non-tested now?
The Bodyshop is now owned by Loreal who are an animal testing company, however Bodyshop products remain non animal tested. Personally I prefer not to give my cash to unethical companies Boycott the body shop!

Regarding Avon, their products are not animal tested but most likely contain animal derived ingredients. They don't even bother to state in the book that they don't test on animals so that suggests to me that they don't feel its very important and for me, that puts me off buying their products.
 

Fay

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Posts
1,557
Joined
Jul 6, 2006
Messages
1,557
I'm against Animals testing but I often get the argument that without Animals a bunch of medications would not exist. What I wonder is, If those medications were yet to be created in modern days. Could they have been created without the use of Animals?
 

Maisiepaisie

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Posts
546
Joined
Jun 7, 2006
Messages
546
I'm against Animals testing but I often get the argument that without Animals a bunch of medications would not exist. What I wonder is, If those medications were yet to be created in modern days. Could they have been created without the use of Animals?
Of course, yes. Without animal testing we would most likely have a lot more useful medicines as time would not have been wasted on useless methods. I found Europeans for Medical Progress to be the most helpful website for explaining why animal testing doesn't work and the alternatives. Europeans For Medical Progress are not an animal rights group. They oppose animal experimentation purely because it doesn't work.
 

gpigluver14

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Posts
747
Joined
Feb 6, 2007
Messages
747
Then, question...Why are all-natural products and most things that aren't tested on animals more expensive? It's probably a dumb question, but...If they didn't have to take the time to test them wouldn't it be cheaper? Or is there some other major reason why??

I think anything's worth it if it's cruelty free though. :)
 

JarBax

Well-known Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Posts
2,315
Joined
Mar 18, 2006
Messages
2,315
I suppose that most cruelty free products are made by smaller companies, with quality, often fairly traded, or local, or ethical and natural ingredients. More like a cottage industry than a production line. Huge companies will make stuff on such a vast commercial scale that prices can be kept low. Smaller companies perhaps tend to make more by hand - than mass production line - thus paying more in labour.
 

Lakota

Active Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
May 8, 2007
Posts
36
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
36
Of course, yes. Without animal testing we would most likely have a lot more useful medicines as time would not have been wasted on useless methods. I found Europeans for Medical Progress to be the most helpful website for explaining why animal testing doesn't work and the alternatives. Europeans For Medical Progress are not an animal rights group. They oppose animal experimentation purely because it doesn't work.
That is not entirely true. It DOES work that way sometimes. I'm studying to be a vet tech, and trust me it is impossible to know exactly how a drug will work without testing it on someone. Some drugs do work for instance but cause too many side effects that were not anticpated during developement. Would you really want to use a new drug for cancer that should work but was never tested before? How do you know it is safe? Cancer is the rapid growth of cells (your cells); most meds for it affect other rapidly dividing cells. That's why people taking meds for or on chemo often have hair loss, digestion problems, and dry mouth. The treatment doesn't know the difference between normal healthy cells and cancer cells, so it attacks both. People didn't know this until after the treatments were tested. Thankfully new drugs have been developed to limit such side effects, and yes I suspect they were tested on animals before people.

We wouldn't have more drugs that work if we did away with testing; we would have more drugs with serious side effects and fewer new drugs coming out. These testings are not useless! Yes some drugs that work on animals do not work on people and vice versa. But cmon, drugs that only work on animals can be used for our pets. I believe that's how one of the current arthititis medications for dogs came about. It's good to have some testing done.

I'm all for limiting animal testing for mediences (and outright banning animal tests for cosmetics, chemicals, etc). They should only be used when the drug is further along its development when sciencetists are fairly certain it will work correctly. Such testing should not be used when the drug is first thought up. Alternatives should be used to elimate side effects if possible, but ultimately the drug should be tested on subjects to determine effectiveness. As long as the animals are cared for and relatively happy, I don't mind them being used. Testing on them helps find cures, medications, and treatments for other animals and people.

What often affects the success of the drugs is stress (and pain). Animals being used for tests cannot be stressed, need proper nutrition, and need other general care. No one gets better from the flu without rest, plenty of fluids, and good food in addition to medication; the same applies for test animals. Therefore most labs try to take decent care of their animals to elimaite that variable during testing.

And please don't say all labs abuse their animals. That is a balant lie. :grumpy: I've been to a medical research lab before and found they take better care of their research animals than some people do of their pets. I don't think I could work in such a place (I couldn't give an animal a drug that might not work), but there is nothing wrong with all of such places. I simply want those animals to be treated with respect and for federal regulations followed all the time.



Real-Life Example:
I can't help but think where diabetics today would be without the use of rabbits and other lab animals. Diabetes mellitus is when the body either doesn't produce insulin (type 1) or the body doesn't respond to insulin (type 2). (Type 3 happens to pregnant women and normally disappears when the pregnancy ends) Insulin is produced in the prancreas. Since insulin lowers blood sugar levels by sending gluscose to the body's cells, diabetics have dangorously high blood sugar levels and are unable to send sugars to their body's cells. The sugar spills into the urine when blood is filtered in the kidneys, causing sugar to appear in a person's urine.

In addition because the person cannot use sugars for cellular fuel, the body goes to extremes and looks to other sources for sugar (or glucose). One source is fats. The breakdown of fats forms ketones. Such fat metabolism also occurs in fasting and stravation, which should give you an idea of what's happening to diabetics: their bodies are straving! Like glucose, these ketones can spill into the urine, giving the urine a fruity smell, and can cause a potentially serious complication in diabetics called ketoacidosis. That happens when diabetics do not moniter or control their disease.

In the past people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes did not live long lives. Those with type 1 normally died in childhood, and those with type 2 only lived past childhood because they developed diabetes as adults. No one even understood why these people were so ill; they only knew that the person drank a lot of water and urinated a lot (which is why sugar diabetes and the unrelated water diabetes have the same name). They didn't understand why such people were so thin despite eating plenty of food or how to treat them. Some people made diets that helped; however nothing made the problem go away.

It wasn't until the 1900s that doctors and scientists finally fingered out what was wrong (by noticing the similarities of dogs without their pancreases), and many more years would pass until they finally had something to offer (after successful testing on a de-pancrasised dog). What they had to offer was insulin from rabbits and dogs! By using lab rabbits and dog pancreases, they found a way to use their insulin to treat type 1 diabetes (type 2 is treated in a different way because the body doesn't respond to insulin). In 1922 the first human (a 14-year-old boy) was successfully treated with purified insulin. It makes sense now: the person can't make their own insulin so he or she needs an outside source. But in the 1920s this was revolutionary! Diabetics finally had a chance to live normal lives. This discovery also led to the discovery of type 2 diabetes since those patients didn't respond to the new therapy.

And it wasn't until recently that doctors were able to produce sythetic insulin, so many diabetics relied on lab animals for their treatment. What would have happened to them if we hadn't? And what would happen to the pets that also have diabetes? Such individuals would have more or less straved to death!

I wonder why people at PETA don't seem to understand that. They say we should have never used animals in the first place for medical testing, but their current president has diabetes! What hypocrits! They went as far as saying they wouldn't want to find a cure for AIDS or cancer if it involved animal testing. I guess they don't care that so many people will die of those diseases or that animals themselves suffer from similar diseases.




I'm sorry if I offend anyone. This is just my opinion, and much of it is based on fact. I dislike PETA's stance on animal welfare (way too extreme and inconsistent; plus they distort facts) and dislike how so many people think ALL animal testing is pointless and that ALL medical labs are cruel to their research animals. Some testing is pointless, and that's why I feel we should just limit its use thru federal regulation et al.
 

Lakota

Active Member
Cavy Slave
Joined
May 8, 2007
Posts
36
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
36
Then, question...Why are all-natural products and most things that aren't tested on animals more expensive? It's probably a dumb question, but...If they didn't have to take the time to test them wouldn't it be cheaper? Or is there some other major reason why??
I'd be VERY careful of so-called natural products or treatments. Those may not undergo the extensive testing that other meds undergo, meaning that we do not know about side effects or dosage amounts. Testing often happens AFTER those products come out and when they become popular among people. Why? Because they're natural and people think there's nothing wrong with them.

In addition many individuals are allergic to certain natural products. I can't use anything with shellfish in it for instance. If there's some awesome treatment available by eating shellfish, I couldn't benefit from it. I would have to wait until a synthetic product is made.

There's also concern about their interactions with other meds and foods. Because they didn't undergo testing, there's no way of knowing how they would interact with other meds someone's on. Something like that happened to people taking St Johne's Wort.

Please do not misunderstand. I think it is GREAT that people are finally considering natural remedies because that provides more treatment options. :) Some work very well, and they certainly have their role in medical treatments. They deserve a place in protocol. If normal meds don't work, it's worth trying an 'all-natural' product.

Interestingly enough many of our first mediences were from natural sources. Everyone seems to forget that. Geez, the first antibiotic is natural for crying out loud! Pencillin comes from a mold. In fact some other antibiotics are natural too-- they're the substances released by some microbes to inhibit or kill their bacteria and fungi rivals. We just take advantage of that. ;)


I don't know why so many are so expensive. Some should be cheaper given they don't get tested as extensively. I suspect that some manufacturors are taking advantage of people and the 'all-natural' craze some people are on.

But perhaps being a small company, they need the high prices to make a profit and to keep making said product-- it must cost a lot for them to make their products.
 
Last edited:
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.

Similar threads

Top