So, I've heard a lot of people on here saying how they refuse to use any P&G brands. I decided to go onto their site and kinda check it out for myself. I was really surprised at how many common brands they make that I use. I'm debating whether or not to give up all these brands and I guess I was just wanting everyone's opinion of this company.

Here's a link to their "Research Invoving Animals" page:
http://www.pg.com/science/animal_alt.jhtml

Here's also a link to their product lists:
http://www.pg.com/products/usa_product_facts.jhtml

They sent me a packet once that sugar-coated their reasons for doing animal research. After I got done reading it I caught myself thinking "maybe they're not so bad." But then I came to my senses. :p

I still boycott their products and to be honest that probably won't ever change. It's not like they make anything I can't get from somewhere else.

I felt the same way when I was reading their reasons for doing lab research on animals and only using them as a last resort, and then I was like, "Whoa, what am I thinking. . . :dunce:

I don't use products that were tested on animals by the company I buy them from, but I do use products from companies that test other things on animals. Just like I get soymilk from a company that sells real milk . . .

I don't use their products, and even if they changed their practices today, I would have a hard time buying from them knowing what they have done.

Hell no, they are evil, as so many other companies are -like Gillette. Now they are going to become 1 big conglomerate. Ick. :notvegan:
I hate them w/ a passion.

Well, they seem to be big buddies of IAMs. Because they give a link to their web-site.

When will people realise that big corporate companies like this are interested in one thing and that is making their SHAREHOLDERS happy. They're not motivated by compassion, love or wanting to make people or animals happy. They would experiment on their grandmothers but can't because it would create bad publicity for them.

Absolutely. You should definetely (feel free to) use any Proctor & Gamble products that are not tested on animals and contain no animal ingredients. There is a large line of cruelty free products that P&G produces, and they keep a close eye on those products to see if consumers prefer cruelty-free products or not. If people boycott their cruelty-free products, then they are basically telling the companies that there's no point in ending animal testing because we'll still not buy your stuff.

I won't purchase anything from P&G, including their Herbal Essenses line. This is one of the few areas where I disagree with KPICKELL. P&G now owns Gillette. They already owned Iams. A couple of years ago, they purchased Aussie Formula. At that time, the company that was being absorbed responded to an email I sent telling me that they were looking forwards to working with P&G to eliminate animal testing. Guess what? Aussie Formula products no longer claim that they don't test on animals.

Although it does seem that they make a lot of products, my household has been P & G-free for about 12 years. After a difficult initial period of realizing how many products do come from companies that actively animal test, we no longer feel deprived and have found that some products from non-animal testing companies are actually cheaper than the big-name product lines.
After reading info about the company from a great array of sources, I have concluded that P&G shouldn't be a major focus of animal campaigns. However, that doesn't mean I believe animal advocates should support them, either. When many products are available from cruelty-free companies, I don't see why I should give money to a company that still uses animals, even if they have slowed it down a bit.
If there were all-veggie fully-stocked grocery stores and restaurants where I live, I would support them. But there aren't, so I don't have the option of choosing those that don't have a hand in animal killing. Cosmetics and household products, I have a little more control over who I support.
So, it's up to you how you feel about P&G. I have read from animal-advocacy sources that they have indeed made improvements toward reducing animal use. However, it's important to realize that P&G also has very good PR staff and they are there to gloss over any thing negative about the company.
P&G also owns the Iams company, which has taken a lot of criticism. Iams also sponsors hunting dog trials and dropped a partnership with the Humane Society simply because hunters complained that the Humane Society opposes sport hunting and trapping. To me, that's reason enough to oppose Iams, let alone all of the animal testing stuff.
www.navs.org maintains an excellent database of companies and their animal testing status.

I buy animal friendly products when its affordable or when I just plain find a great product. Otherwise, I still purchase some conventional stuff, such as, Gillette razors. Sometimes I'm evil, but not to an extreme extent.

Gillette hasnt tested on animals for a very, very long time. :D

I buy animal friendly products when its affordable or when I just plain find a great product. Otherwise, I still purchase some conventional stuff, such as, Gillette razors. Sometimes I'm evil, but not to an extreme extent.

Gillette hasnt tested on animals for a very, very long time. :D
But they will be now that they are owned by P&G. The long-term hiatus on testing is now null and void.

There's some companies I just won't support, P&G's one of them. They aren't ever going to change.



When will people realise that big corporate companies like this are interested in one thing and that is making their SHAREHOLDERS happy.

Good point. We should all buy stock. Seriously.

I don't use their products, and even if they changed their practices today, I would have a hard time buying from them knowing what they have done.

After seeing an undercover video of Procter & Gamble testing at HLS in which a *conscious* monkey was dissected until dead (and what does P & G do in response? Nothing), and techs are brutalizing - throwing them around, mocking them, screaming at them - other monkeys in the same study, I have no desire to ever support that company.

Gillette hasnt tested on animals for a very, very long time. :D

Well, thats good to know :yes: I guess I can enjoy silky smooth legs with even less guilt :p

Actually its a merger. i wouldnt expect P&G to just walk in and change the way Gillette functions.

If Gillette's methods are as cost effective and relaible as theyve said...P&G might just adopt some of them.

But they will be now that they are owned by P&G. The long-term hiatus on testing is now null and void.

I stopped buying P & G products earlier this year (around the time I joined VB).

I was in Walmart one day (yes, I know... :) ), minding my own business and was offered a free sample of shampoo, Pantene. I took it, looked at it and declined it and gave it back. I politely said 'no thank you". The woman looked at me like I was bright green and said, its free. I said, no thanks its made by P&G and I don't support that company. She was dumbstruck, didn't know how to respond and just said "oh...really? Okay". I bet I was the first person that ever did that to her.

I stopped buying P & G products earlier this year (around the time I joined VB).

I was in Walmart one day (yes, I know... :) ), minding my own business and was offered a free sample of shampoo, Pantene. I took it, looked at it and declined it and gave it back. I politely said 'no thank you". The woman looked at me like I was bright green and said, its free. I said, no thanks its made by P&G and I don't support that company. She was dumbstruck, didn't know how to respond and just said "oh...really? Okay". I bet I was the first person that ever did that to her.

Good for you!!!

There's some companies I just won't support, P&G's one of them. They aren't ever going to change.
I feel the same way :-/

I feel the same way :-/

Don't worry, I'm working on buying all their stock :D ;)

After seeing an undercover video of Procter & Gamble testing at HLS in which a *conscious* monkey was dissected until dead (and what does P & G do in response? Nothing), and techs are brutalizing - throwing them around, mocking them, screaming at them - other monkeys in the same study, I have no desire to ever support that company.

THOSE F**KING BASTARDS!!!! Testing like this is so pointless. And I definitely think the people that work in the labs are sadistic. They get pleasure out of hurting animals.

was offered a free sample of shampoo, Pantene. I took it, looked at it and declined it and gave it back. I politely said 'no thank you". The woman looked at me like I was bright green and said, its free.

Good on you...Yeah, and it's not "free". The cost was all the animal lives that were lost in the production of the product.