Jennifer B writes,
>I'm OK with selling products that HELP pets (shampoos, vitamins, etc.)
>but allowing the sale of products at a pet 'show' of sorts that are
>derived from intentionally killing an animal (and one related to
>ferrets???) That just seems too off base to me.  Too weird.  UNLESS
>there's no harm being done to the mink to obtain the oil.
 
Yes, the oil is a byproduct rendered after the death of the animal.  If
you have any idea of how these animals are killed for their fur, you know
it's inhumane in the extreme.
 
But what a lot of people don't think about is the conditions these poor
creatures are forced to endure while they're alive.  Think of every mass
ferret rescue you've seen or heard about, and you have a glimpse.  So
depending on how you define "harm," even if these animals weren't killed
for their fur, I think they suffer significant, unimaginable horrors
(i.e. harm) and their eventual death, painful as it is, is a mercy.
 
Please be aware that many, many cosmetics, perfume and household products
(like toothpaste) contain animal products or were tested on live animals,
causing agonizing pain and death.  It's all about vanity, and wholly
unnecessary.  There are so many good and cruelty-free alternatives.
Revlon is one of the "nice guys;" L'Oreal is one of the worst offenders.
 
Please consider purchasing only cruelty-free products - which are labeled
as such.  The labels will also state if the products were not tested on
animals.
 
You don't have to like what they're doing or their tactics, but PETA has
a very good and comprehensive list on its website of companies that "do"
and "don't."  See www.peta.org <http://www.peta.org/> .
 
Susann
[Posted in FML issue 5136]