Comments on: Why the Body Shop was sold

By: Disgusted

Disgusted — Fri, 01 Jan 2010 17:37:23 +0000

This is an abhorrent smokescreen set out by worshipers of commerce and the beauty industry to dupe those who they deem too ignorant to, look into the accusations against the Body Shop on animal testing or, think things through. They need to decieve to defend their position of doing the unthinkable. I’d love to see their reaction if the governing bodies decided that all testing was now to be done on the children and grandchildren of all of the employees of the cosmetics industry. The Body Shop’s claim was that their products were “Not Tested on Animals” because they were not. Their products were not, the direct components were not, and they never bought any products from companies that carried out these practices. Those that had previously been tested on animals back in the early to mid part of the 20th century, offered information that was already known. To not use those products would be the same as telling the medical societies around the world that the medical information obtained by the experimentation done during the Holocaust should be buried forever. No civil, or evolved human being would deny that this was a repulsive occurrance in humanity, but to ignore the information uncovered there, would mean that those people and their families who suffered so much, did so in complete vain. Now that we have the information, it is being used for the greater good, to ignore it would be ludicrous. The Body Shop did not create or use any product that was directly tested on animals. This is simply a poor excuse at manipulation for those who are more interested in profits than responsibility. Do you know exactly what they do to these animals? Look into it for yourself, from a reputable, non-biased in any way, source. Then look into the alternatives. There are very cost effective means of alternate testing, but most companies have always tested on animals, so, why rock the boat? Why fix things? Why do the right thing? That’s just it, in plain terms, they simply don’t care. Thank God it’s not you or your children they are testing on, or are they?

By: Mahriah

Mahriah — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 23:36:13 +0000

Have any of you taken a look at the new European Union regulations? Do you really think you know more about this issue than the EU? As of 2004, no finished products could be tested on animals. As of 2009, (I think it goes into effect in March of this year), no cosmetic product can be sold in the EU that was tested on animals anywhere in the world, including new ingredients, where an alternative exists. In 2013, no testing will be allowed, anywhere, by anybody, for any reason, current alternative or not.

By: Aurelie

Aurelie — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 11:10:14 +0000

You might want to check John entine’s social audit of the body shop before it got sold to L’oreal to see if being bought by them would really make a difference to Anita Roddick’s “ethical stance”
Just google his name, check his website, and download the social audit report he wrote. Compelling!
Now, of course he is a journalist but he is busting her myth, and for one, I felt quite bad about it, coz I thought she was different, but hey ho! it’s kind of made me wake up from the marketing spiel of most companies, hence why I make my own cosmetics now.

Great website by the way, ….

By: The Beauty Brains » Blog Archive » The Truth about Animal Testing and Cosmetics

Sat, 12 Jan 2008 19:28:44 +0000

[...] is one of the most vocal advocates against animal testing, The Body Shop (at least they were until L’Oreal bought them out). Here is an ingredient list from one of their high quality shampoo [...]

By: Anna Smith

Anna Smith — Sat, 27 Oct 2007 14:00:44 +0000

So are there any actual free of cruelty companies!?? If there are companies that do not test on animals and use alternatives like humans then why do most companies use the cruel method of animal testing!? ted baker is said to test on humans as an example!