<div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">
<div>Originally Posted by <strong>LazureFairie</strong></div>
<div style="font-style:italic;">Just to chime in here--I am a customer and "business builder" with Melaleuca, I use many of their products obviously but not all of them. Just to clarify about the animal testing, it is not the kind of animal testing that P & G does where they blind, main and kill puppies, bunnies & kittens. Frank V. Melaleuca's company president and ceo did "test" their pet shampoo on his own dogs to be sure the product worked well enough to market it and they are not admitted to the vegan safe PETA list because of that. Personally I do not have a problem with that kind of "animal testing",</div>
</td>
</tr></table></div>
<img alt="" class="inlineimg" src="http://www.mothering.com/discussions/images/smilies/headscratch.gif" style="border:0px solid;" title="headscratch"> It seems like they engaged in testing a bit more invasive than shampooing dogs. It's also unclear to me where exactly they stand now re: testing. From toraji's link to PETA (I added the bold):<br><br><div style="margin:20px;margin-top:5px;">
<div class="smallfont" style="margin-bottom:2px;">Quote:</div>
<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="99%"><tr><td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset;">We removeed Melaleuca from our list of companies that do not test on animals after learning that it commissioned two animal tests that were not required by law. In 1996, during the course of litigation with a competing company, Melaleuca commissioned a lethal-dose test on the competitor’s product. The test resulted in the agonizing deaths of 10 rats. In 1997, we learned that Melaleuca had commissioned experiments on dogs for its nutritional product Provex CV....<br><br>
It seems that every consumer we speak to has heard a different story from Melaleuca about its removal from our “don’t test” list. <b>One common accusation is that we removed the company from the list for washing its employees’ companion animals with dog shampoo. This is not accurate.</b> Using animals in laboratory settings to test products for safety and trying out a product that has already been proved safe through non-animal testing methods on one’s companion animal are two entirely different situations. We would not take issue with the latter scenario, which does not involve harming animals....<br><br>
It is important to note that Melaleuca used animals for tests while it was included on PETA’s cruelty-free list—after signing our statement of assurance, which indicates that the company will never test on animals, in 1993. Obviously, Melaleuca is willing to make exceptions to its “no animal testing” policy whenever it deems it necessary....<br><br>
In a March 2003 letter, Melaleuca freeely admits that it commissioned laboratory tests in which rats and dogs were used, stating, “The rats died a horrible death. … Prior to performing human studies to prove Provex CV’s effectiveness, Melaleuca commissioned that the product be tested on dogs first. … In our quest to save life, we refuse to tell PETA that we will never again test our cardiovascular products on animals.”</td>
</tr></table></div>
Whatever one thinks of PETA (and I have issues with them myself) this seems damning to me.
