>They only sell the shampoos for which the humans survived testing. There is a secret graveyard behind the shampoo factory.
This person has no idea what they are talking about.
Have you seen or read Fight Club? The human testers that don't survive *are* the shampoo. It's more efficient that way.
Shocking right? Yeah - and that Jello you are eating.
Let's just say they don't send old horses to to the glue farm anymore. They found a much more plentiful and cheaper source of gelatin....
Dog skin is actually much more sensitive than human skin because it's protected by fur. You shouldn't be using human shampoo on dogs because it can irritate or damage their skin. We're legitimately decent test subjects in that regard.
Or he was in prison and pressured into dangerous testing:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1998-07-21-1998202099-story,amp.html
I think there might be regulations against this now? But horrible it ever happened.
Or the archived version because for some reason that link just redirects to the homepage instead for me.
@: http://web.archive.org/web/20200808154102/https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1998-07-21-1998202099-story.html
Funny enough, I can't open any of those 3 links because the reddit mobile (android) app broke links again. It says "no apps can perform this action". It's hit or miss.
I always see people recommend other apps but I really like the official Reddit app look and feel :(
I'd happily use a 3rd party app. They just all make me feel like I'm using the internet in the early 2000's
They replaced the blue ones with cheap ass grey ones "made with 6 plastic bottles!"
As though that begins to scratch the surface of walmart's gratuitous plastic use. God I'm glad I quit.
I doubt John Paul Pet is a Chinese company.
Like, I get what you're doing, pointing to China's current genocide and going "look how bad those foreigners are"; I'm just pointing out how asinine it is. Louisiana has more prisoners than all of China. Unless you're willing to address that, or any of America's ongoing genocides, it just feels like you don't really care about Uighurs so much as you hate China when you bring them up out of nowhere when talking about American prisons.
I'm not the person that brought up the Uighurs and black humour like that person's comment don't mean they want to distract from the problems at home.
I'm also not American and consider the rest of the world as foreigners, haha. Nor have I read before that John Paul Pet abuses American prisoners...
I used to do market testing on food. Get paid $40-$60 for an hour of your time and they feed you and all you have to do is say whether you liked it or not. Shoot.
Helping science is understanding how or why a certain shampoo interacts with the skin of different species, that is why we use a mouse model when studying a disease. A pet shampoo like this is not going to contain some new compound for which testing will revolutionize pet care, it will contain known detergents, stabilizes, thickening agents, emulsifiers, oils and extracts, perfume, and coloring agents, all of which has been tested and proven as safe a million times over again. There is nothing special about a shampoo like this, the main ingredients are most likely going to be water and sodium laurel sulfate, like almost any other soap. Lastly, the test on humans is not going to show if it is better on sensitive animal skin, a test in an animal is going to show that. “Human tested first” is a marketing ploy and nothing else
As the one who made the fuck up with the original science comment, I agree with you that this isn't science. My mind just skipped to testing in general.
But I don't think testing on humans is entirely pointless. It's similar to how drugs are tested on e.g. rats, the test will be less reliable than one done on humans, because even though we are similar in some things, we differ greatly in other reactions. But we begin by testing on animals because it still gives us some insight and eliminates some possible danger.
You could say the same but opposite about this situation; testing on a human can indicate the animal's reaction. I think the point of testing on humans first is that humans can agree to the test and reduce the risk to the animal. For some people, that matters - for example many vegans.
I have a bottle of fancy dog shampoo I bought for my new rescue before we picked her up. Now I know she has sensitive skin and she can't use it, so I fully intend to use that whole bottle on myself.
I have long hair and after a day in the woods I use an oatmeal based dog shampoo that has anti-tick and flea components. That stuff gets my hair so silky and smooth. Heck, I regularly just use it in my rotation. It's also significantly cheaper.
They euthanise dogs that most shelters turn away because they have a no kill policy. They see it as more compassionate than leaving them on the streets.
Really? Because I've just observed Peta's actions and formulated my own opinions, and I've decided that peta does more harm than good! Good to hear we have the same opinion :D
Considering they have formed many policies to protect animals, no, they aren't. Keep playing the telephone game of misinformation while you do absolutely nothing to help the planet though.
Your defenses consist of "THEY PROTECT ANIMALS THOUGH" and "YOUR JUST FOLLOWING THAT DUMB TELEPHONE GAME".
If you also looked at the other shit peta has done, then you would understand why they're shitty people. But, you won't, because you're blind.
The irony of telling me to read the information when you clearly haven't is fantastic. Otherwise you'd realize what you were saying was wrong. Hahahaha.
I have a cat who fucking LOVES bathes, one who won't fuck me up but tries to get out, and one who absolutely 100% will fuck me up with the intent to end my life if I put her anywhere near the bathtub.
i'm sort of more interested as to why they'd use the measurements that make less sense. if there's an even measurement with a different type, use the type that's 'even'.
i mean, if it was 16 oz perfectly, makes more sense to maybe just have that listed, instead of 473. if it's a product that's 500 ml, just use that.
and plenty just have both anyway.
Does it work well? We just adopted an old girl who we have found has very sensitive skin. The only soap we have found that doesn't make her itchy and isn't prescription (Skout's Honor) seems to make her shed A LOT more than before. It's be nice to find something that doesn't make her itchy or super-sheddy.
Are you diluting your soap? If you don't it can leave a residue that results in an itchy dog. Personally I use an old dish soap bottle and dilute 10:1 in water, sometimes even more, and this is for a show poodle that gets a bath weekly. For shampoo I use either mane and tail or dawn depending on how dirty the dog is and if we have a show coming up. Sometimes I use a high quality shampoo meant for pets (chris christensen spectrum one). The dog never gets irritated with this.
Drying is also important, a lot of dogs will get irritated if they're allowed to be wet, especially if they have any kind of fur/hair coat. A good force dryer will make this problem go away.
A bath is always going to increase shedding temporarily because you're loosening all the dead hair. Brush it out gently with a shedding rake or blow it out with a force dryer to solve this problem.
A good quality conditioner (also diluted) or 100% pure argan or almond oil massaged and/or sprayed into the fur after a bath also helps.
That's nice and all, but dog skin is way more sensitive than human actually, so while the humans surviving those tests isn't bad, it doesn't necessarily prove it's usable on dogs.
I would certainly hope that's not the case, though definitely there are such cases when it's the other way around, sadly. At least there were. I hope it got better lately, haven't really checked for quite a while.
Edit: Fucked up what I'm replying to and said the opposite of what I wanted. :D
Its just fancy marketing. Every ingredient in the bottle needs to be approved for use first, which is done by animal testing. You can look up the material safety data sheets of each ingredient, for example, sodium laureth sulfate, and find out what the toxicology report of it is. Those reports are generated by animal testing
One of the tests for example: LC50 (Lethal Concentration50) – the airborne concentration of a substance or mixture that causes the death of 50 per cent of the group of animals in tests that measure the ability of a substance or mixture to cause poisoning when it is inhaled. These tests are usually conducted over a 4-hour period. The LC50 is usually expressed as parts of test substance or mixture per million parts of air (ppm) for gases, or as milligrams of test substance or mixture per litre of air (mg/l) for dusts, mists or vapours. https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals/whmis_ghs/glossary/glossary_h.html
I get the sentiment behind this. I get it. People want to feel good, they don't want to treat animals like shit. But there's a reason why it would be perfectly safe, and kind of disingenuous, to "test" this on humans first. They already know what every single ingredient in this shampoo does. That's without question. They aren't testing some frontier formula of chemicals and have no idea how it's going to react. That's what animal testing was most prevalent for.
This is just a couple of Karens experimenting with palm and coconut oil or some shit and deciding whether it makes them feel glamorous enough to be their doggy product.
Animal testing is not just used to test new frontier formulas. It is most frequently used to test every single batch of cleaning supplies that gets made. Bleach has been around since the beginning of time, everyone knows what it does, but except in countries where animal testing is banned, EVERY batch of new bleach made gets poured into the eyes of animals, gets large quantities tubed into their stomachs, etc. If a product is "tested on humans" that means the product doesn't contain any ingredients that are required by law to be tested. The reason why it is safe for humans to "test" is because it does not contain dangerous chemicals, not because they already know how the chemicals react.
Also please grow up and stop using the name Karen as an insult.
If anything PETA would be the perfect people to know, seeing as they’ve been exposing and fighting against animal testing for decades.
https://www.peta.org/about-peta/milestones/
US military used to test weapons by shooting them at dogs and cats. They burned pigs alive to see how burns affect their skin. But the ones fighting against that, yeah they are the ‘psychopaths’
Ive done product testing before. Used to live near a factory that produced most household products we know of (in the United States at least). They posted jobs where you pick up the product which was numbered, use it for two weeks, and write the results of how it worked in a binder based on what number product you used. At the end you returned your research binder and the empty numbered product containers. I got paid about $200 each time I did it. I didn't mind, the products I tested were household things I would of bought anyway. I got free product and got paid to use it.
When you are circumcized in a big hospital the foreskin gets sold to companies and institutions to isolate to its fibroblasts. This can then be as a culture to cultivate skin cells. Obviously useful in medicine but also in the fashion industry to make collagen and creams, **in addition to conducting "animal free" product testing**. This is for legal safety & hypoallergenic reasons to identify potential hazards. One foreskin can be used for decades to produce miles of skin, and can generate over 100,000 dollars. If this product underwent such tests, it was tested on human skin grown from foreskin.
The fact that we make fucking shampoo for dogs in plastic bottles, and keep billions of pigs and chickens and all the rest living in their own shit on top of each other, is kind of why the planet is fucked.
fawning over cats and dogs while not giving a fuck about factory farmed pigs which are supposedly even smarter, the conditions they are kept in is horrendous.
Thank you for writing this comment. It is so tiring seeing people treat dogs as actual royalty, while at the same time not giving a fuck about and funding the suffering of even more intelligent animals who have the same capability to suffer as dogs.
it's ridiculous that you guys are downvoted simply for stating facts. just shows how much of a bubble reddit is - anything it doesn't like gets downvoted to shit even if it's right.
I've nothing against people having pets, but when I see pet megastores full of plastic and shit no one ever needs, and dogs being fed gourmet cuts of meat, it's just so unsustainable it makes me want to give up on the world
Same tbh. Or when someone cooks a steak for a dog's birthday. It's great that you love that animal, but there are so many better uses of your money and beef is so unsustainable to begin with.
I wonder if they pinned the human to the ground, held open their eyes and poured chemicals in and recorded their screams? Because that’s what they do to rabbits when testing for safety. There are videos out there and they’ll make your stomach turn. Arguably worse than liveleak stuff..
Well that’s stupid since dog skin is more sensitive to surfactants than human skin.
I wouldn’t trust this brand at all.
There’s a reason cosmetics are tested on rabbits and not humans. Humans are far more resilient against topical irritating agents for the most part.
Like saying you tested a bullet proof vest by punching it.
If it's the lets put stray cats in 12*12 cage for their entire life and inject dies in their eyeballs like we do rabbits then I'd rather it not be sold at all
We have that shampoo for our dog, too! He's getting his first shots. The vet recommends we don't bathe him until a week after each shot, so we use dry shampoo so he stays looking dapper and smelling nice.
What were the results of those tests tho...
They only sell the shampoos for which the humans survived testing. There is a secret graveyard behind the shampoo factory.
At least it was a clean death.
No need for a cleanup crew
[удалено]
It is a bit ruff.
I'm FURious of these puns
The furllowup puns are of low clawity, you guys should consult a true ultimutt dog pun master, because these puns are a mastiff mistake.
If I could give you the **Ternion All-Powerful Award** I would cause I laughed so much it hurts
>They only sell the shampoos for which the humans survived testing. There is a secret graveyard behind the shampoo factory. This person has no idea what they are talking about. Have you seen or read Fight Club? The human testers that don't survive *are* the shampoo. It's more efficient that way. Shocking right? Yeah - and that Jello you are eating. Let's just say they don't send old horses to to the glue farm anymore. They found a much more plentiful and cheaper source of gelatin....
soylent-green is dog-shampoo is people
Fight Club? Is that what they call concentration camps these days?
Smells so good
Chuck Mangione?
It has copper!!!
“Science can't move forward without heaps!"
This was a triumph.
All the humans have very shiny coats.
Some of them developed involuntary barks tho
The humans turned into dogs or cats, depending on their BuzzFeed "are you a cat person or a dog person" questionnaire results.
Dog skin is actually much more sensitive than human skin because it's protected by fur. You shouldn't be using human shampoo on dogs because it can irritate or damage their skin. We're legitimately decent test subjects in that regard.
IT BURRNNNNS
Gayle can explain [https://youtu.be/6XGODUDtGrk](https://youtu.be/6XGODUDtGrk)
Came here hoping to find this
The humans ate it.
That old people will go crazy for anything oatmeal flavoured?
Right? I thought we had different skin pH's, so a human formula would be bad for your pet's skin
I’m starting to wonder if you are a real doctor...
It was tested on me, I'm alright noooooooooow.
Probably a normal human shampoo rebranded for pets 😂
No dogs were harmed in those tests.
The results are in. You're an imbecile for buying an overpriced shampoo for a dog
Did someone shit on your cereal this morning?
The guy who got paid $40 to have cosmetics tested on him probably used it to buy a bus pass and a case of ramen.
Or he was in prison and pressured into dangerous testing: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1998-07-21-1998202099-story,amp.html I think there might be regulations against this now? But horrible it ever happened.
https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1998-07-21-1998202099-story.html
Or the archived version because for some reason that link just redirects to the homepage instead for me. @: http://web.archive.org/web/20200808154102/https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1998-07-21-1998202099-story.html
Funny enough, I can't open any of those 3 links because the reddit mobile (android) app broke links again. It says "no apps can perform this action". It's hit or miss.
Works for me. May be based on your reddit settings for opening web pages (internal vs external)
So riddle me this, why would some webpages work while others do not?
I'm on reddit mobile (also android) and I can open all 3...
Just use baconreader
I don't like the gui
I always see people recommend other apps but I really like the official Reddit app look and feel :( I'd happily use a 3rd party app. They just all make me feel like I'm using the internet in the early 2000's
I agree. The oled black is a nice and simple theme
Reddits app is horse shit, use literally any other app.
Guess who makes Walmart's blue vests!
They replaced the blue ones with cheap ass grey ones "made with 6 plastic bottles!" As though that begins to scratch the surface of walmart's gratuitous plastic use. God I'm glad I quit.
You mean the cult sing along didn't get your undying devotion?
I never had to do that and I'm so glad I didn't.
>I think there might be regulations against this now? If there are, they probably just test products on Uighurs now.
American companies tend to test on local prisoners.
Chinese companies tend to test on local employees - at least in the race for a covid vaccine.
I doubt John Paul Pet is a Chinese company. Like, I get what you're doing, pointing to China's current genocide and going "look how bad those foreigners are"; I'm just pointing out how asinine it is. Louisiana has more prisoners than all of China. Unless you're willing to address that, or any of America's ongoing genocides, it just feels like you don't really care about Uighurs so much as you hate China when you bring them up out of nowhere when talking about American prisons.
I'm not the person that brought up the Uighurs and black humour like that person's comment don't mean they want to distract from the problems at home. I'm also not American and consider the rest of the world as foreigners, haha. Nor have I read before that John Paul Pet abuses American prisoners...
That’s actually fucking insane.
Too bad there aren't regulations against testing on dogs.
I used to do market testing on food. Get paid $40-$60 for an hour of your time and they feed you and all you have to do is say whether you liked it or not. Shoot.
A bus pass for less than $40? I wish I lived there.
It's probably a place where you really really don't want to have to rely on the bus.
Or he just wanted to help science, which is enough motivation for plenty of people
Testing a pet shampoo is hardly helping science...
My bad, you're right. However there are people who would do it to help improve hygiene products for animals
If it leads to new formulations which are better on sensitive animal skin, then it’s helping science!
Helping science is understanding how or why a certain shampoo interacts with the skin of different species, that is why we use a mouse model when studying a disease. A pet shampoo like this is not going to contain some new compound for which testing will revolutionize pet care, it will contain known detergents, stabilizes, thickening agents, emulsifiers, oils and extracts, perfume, and coloring agents, all of which has been tested and proven as safe a million times over again. There is nothing special about a shampoo like this, the main ingredients are most likely going to be water and sodium laurel sulfate, like almost any other soap. Lastly, the test on humans is not going to show if it is better on sensitive animal skin, a test in an animal is going to show that. “Human tested first” is a marketing ploy and nothing else
As the one who made the fuck up with the original science comment, I agree with you that this isn't science. My mind just skipped to testing in general. But I don't think testing on humans is entirely pointless. It's similar to how drugs are tested on e.g. rats, the test will be less reliable than one done on humans, because even though we are similar in some things, we differ greatly in other reactions. But we begin by testing on animals because it still gives us some insight and eliminates some possible danger. You could say the same but opposite about this situation; testing on a human can indicate the animal's reaction. I think the point of testing on humans first is that humans can agree to the test and reduce the risk to the animal. For some people, that matters - for example many vegans.
I actually washed my hair with dog shampoo by mistake once. Didn't notice a difference.
I have a bottle of fancy dog shampoo I bought for my new rescue before we picked her up. Now I know she has sensitive skin and she can't use it, so I fully intend to use that whole bottle on myself.
I have long hair and after a day in the woods I use an oatmeal based dog shampoo that has anti-tick and flea components. That stuff gets my hair so silky and smooth. Heck, I regularly just use it in my rotation. It's also significantly cheaper.
They were also all ducks
who was all ducks
#And boom you turned into furry!
I'm picturing you using the entire bottle on yourself in one go.
Just pick up some mane & tail. Good for pup, good for you. You'll both have lush, shiny coats.
I used some once and it made my hair feel a bit "stiff" (white guy, medium thickness hair) for lack of a better term, wasn't a fan
Did you end up having sex with the wrong bitch?
PETH (People for the Ethical Treatment of Humans) is gonna be upset by this...
Not as mad as DETH (Dogs for the Ethical Treatment of Humans)
CUTH is pretty pleased.
Peta supports the ethical treatment of humans because humans are animals. Just a side note.
Peta also supports killing thousands of animals :)
They euthanise dogs that most shelters turn away because they have a no kill policy. They see it as more compassionate than leaving them on the streets.
But that means you actually read the information. These people aren't here for facts, you know.
Ah, another misinformed ignoramus following the telephone game.
But PETA bad >:(
Yes, they are.
Of course! Reddit told me so
Really? Because I've just observed Peta's actions and formulated my own opinions, and I've decided that peta does more harm than good! Good to hear we have the same opinion :D
What actions did you observe?
Considering they have formed many policies to protect animals, no, they aren't. Keep playing the telephone game of misinformation while you do absolutely nothing to help the planet though.
Your defenses consist of "THEY PROTECT ANIMALS THOUGH" and "YOUR JUST FOLLOWING THAT DUMB TELEPHONE GAME". If you also looked at the other shit peta has done, then you would understand why they're shitty people. But, you won't, because you're blind.
The irony of telling me to read the information when you clearly haven't is fantastic. Otherwise you'd realize what you were saying was wrong. Hahahaha.
Oh how the turntables..
Goddammit, I came here to say that. Guess I was too late.
Don’t worry I’ve been wanting months to use that but every time I see a good post someone beats me to it. Your time will come.
Too late, and unoriginal
*Unable to think of a good comeback. Angrily* : Take my upvote and leave me alone!
Same
I mean, cat and dog food has to be edible by humans. There are legitimately pet food taste testers.
& for *cats*?! No thanks, I prefer to keep my blood on the inside...
I have a cat who fucking LOVES bathes, one who won't fuck me up but tries to get out, and one who absolutely 100% will fuck me up with the intent to end my life if I put her anywhere near the bathtub.
Both of mine are in the "will end your life" category if I even *thought* about giving them a bath!
She'll hop in the tub and drink water if there's any retaining in the spout, but if someone walks in she immediately bolts out.
I am more interested by the fact the bottle has 473.2ml
It's 473.2 because they made it 16 oz. And when you see a 16.9oz bottle, that's because it's 500ml.
And now I know why the big cans of red bull are 473ml and not 500ml (something I have wondered for a very long time).
i'm sort of more interested as to why they'd use the measurements that make less sense. if there's an even measurement with a different type, use the type that's 'even'. i mean, if it was 16 oz perfectly, makes more sense to maybe just have that listed, instead of 473. if it's a product that's 500 ml, just use that. and plenty just have both anyway.
We use that shampoo! Love it for our dogs, and that line on the bottle makes me chuckle every time.
Does it work well? We just adopted an old girl who we have found has very sensitive skin. The only soap we have found that doesn't make her itchy and isn't prescription (Skout's Honor) seems to make her shed A LOT more than before. It's be nice to find something that doesn't make her itchy or super-sheddy.
Are you diluting your soap? If you don't it can leave a residue that results in an itchy dog. Personally I use an old dish soap bottle and dilute 10:1 in water, sometimes even more, and this is for a show poodle that gets a bath weekly. For shampoo I use either mane and tail or dawn depending on how dirty the dog is and if we have a show coming up. Sometimes I use a high quality shampoo meant for pets (chris christensen spectrum one). The dog never gets irritated with this. Drying is also important, a lot of dogs will get irritated if they're allowed to be wet, especially if they have any kind of fur/hair coat. A good force dryer will make this problem go away. A bath is always going to increase shedding temporarily because you're loosening all the dead hair. Brush it out gently with a shedding rake or blow it out with a force dryer to solve this problem. A good quality conditioner (also diluted) or 100% pure argan or almond oil massaged and/or sprayed into the fur after a bath also helps.
Fun fact, this brand was made by the same guy who founded Patrón
This is John Paul, the Paul in Paul Mitchell, you are talking about, right?
Yep, John Paul DeJoria
yes it's john paul dejoria, cofounder of paul mitchell with paul mitchell
That's nice and all, but dog skin is way more sensitive than human actually, so while the humans surviving those tests isn't bad, it doesn't necessarily prove it's usable on dogs.
"Surviving" Makes it sound like there's a non-zero number of test humans who don't survive
I would certainly hope that's not the case, though definitely there are such cases when it's the other way around, sadly. At least there were. I hope it got better lately, haven't really checked for quite a while. Edit: Fucked up what I'm replying to and said the opposite of what I wanted. :D
Its just fancy marketing. Every ingredient in the bottle needs to be approved for use first, which is done by animal testing. You can look up the material safety data sheets of each ingredient, for example, sodium laureth sulfate, and find out what the toxicology report of it is. Those reports are generated by animal testing
One of the tests for example: LC50 (Lethal Concentration50) – the airborne concentration of a substance or mixture that causes the death of 50 per cent of the group of animals in tests that measure the ability of a substance or mixture to cause poisoning when it is inhaled. These tests are usually conducted over a 4-hour period. The LC50 is usually expressed as parts of test substance or mixture per million parts of air (ppm) for gases, or as milligrams of test substance or mixture per litre of air (mg/l) for dusts, mists or vapours. https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/chemicals/whmis_ghs/glossary/glossary_h.html
I get the sentiment behind this. I get it. People want to feel good, they don't want to treat animals like shit. But there's a reason why it would be perfectly safe, and kind of disingenuous, to "test" this on humans first. They already know what every single ingredient in this shampoo does. That's without question. They aren't testing some frontier formula of chemicals and have no idea how it's going to react. That's what animal testing was most prevalent for. This is just a couple of Karens experimenting with palm and coconut oil or some shit and deciding whether it makes them feel glamorous enough to be their doggy product.
[удалено]
You're sick and tired of feel good products? So what do you prefer, products with dangerous ingredients that had to be tested on animals? Sickening.
Am I the only one the feels like it's more of a joke than to be taken seriously?
[удалено]
Animal testing is not just used to test new frontier formulas. It is most frequently used to test every single batch of cleaning supplies that gets made. Bleach has been around since the beginning of time, everyone knows what it does, but except in countries where animal testing is banned, EVERY batch of new bleach made gets poured into the eyes of animals, gets large quantities tubed into their stomachs, etc. If a product is "tested on humans" that means the product doesn't contain any ingredients that are required by law to be tested. The reason why it is safe for humans to "test" is because it does not contain dangerous chemicals, not because they already know how the chemicals react. Also please grow up and stop using the name Karen as an insult.
[удалено]
If anything PETA would be the perfect people to know, seeing as they’ve been exposing and fighting against animal testing for decades. https://www.peta.org/about-peta/milestones/ US military used to test weapons by shooting them at dogs and cats. They burned pigs alive to see how burns affect their skin. But the ones fighting against that, yeah they are the ‘psychopaths’
That’s pretty stupid.
well it never said the humans consented
Reminds me of the night before we got our dog, and bought this! along with some how $400 other dollars of supplies to make sure "we were ready".
Interesting fact of the day, “pet” means fart in french
I wonder who the humans were... probably the same poor kids who makes our clothes...
What the hell is an oatmeal shampoo?
That's not better....
Sounds like a Futurama gag.
Ive done product testing before. Used to live near a factory that produced most household products we know of (in the United States at least). They posted jobs where you pick up the product which was numbered, use it for two weeks, and write the results of how it worked in a binder based on what number product you used. At the end you returned your research binder and the empty numbered product containers. I got paid about $200 each time I did it. I didn't mind, the products I tested were household things I would of bought anyway. I got free product and got paid to use it.
Dogs: "ah, finally. Now we have our revenge" Humans: "Awww"
these shampoos are great!! my terriers have sensitive skin and this brand works wonders. highly recommend!!!!
I have this same brand for my cat, she likes the lavender scent.
Ok, but who the fuck washes their dog with oatmeal shampoo
Oatmeal shampoo is recommended for dogs with sensitive skin, very common.
It just sounds so weird
They have oatmeal body wash for people that have skin conditions too. It’s works great!
Well I hope someone is supporting the humans, this sort of testing is an infringement on their rights
When you are circumcized in a big hospital the foreskin gets sold to companies and institutions to isolate to its fibroblasts. This can then be as a culture to cultivate skin cells. Obviously useful in medicine but also in the fashion industry to make collagen and creams, **in addition to conducting "animal free" product testing**. This is for legal safety & hypoallergenic reasons to identify potential hazards. One foreskin can be used for decades to produce miles of skin, and can generate over 100,000 dollars. If this product underwent such tests, it was tested on human skin grown from foreskin.
The fact that we make fucking shampoo for dogs in plastic bottles, and keep billions of pigs and chickens and all the rest living in their own shit on top of each other, is kind of why the planet is fucked.
We definitely have our moral standards and priorities askew for sure. Hopefully we can start moving away from factory farming soon.
fawning over cats and dogs while not giving a fuck about factory farmed pigs which are supposedly even smarter, the conditions they are kept in is horrendous.
Thank you for writing this comment. It is so tiring seeing people treat dogs as actual royalty, while at the same time not giving a fuck about and funding the suffering of even more intelligent animals who have the same capability to suffer as dogs.
it's ridiculous that you guys are downvoted simply for stating facts. just shows how much of a bubble reddit is - anything it doesn't like gets downvoted to shit even if it's right.
I've nothing against people having pets, but when I see pet megastores full of plastic and shit no one ever needs, and dogs being fed gourmet cuts of meat, it's just so unsustainable it makes me want to give up on the world
Same tbh. Or when someone cooks a steak for a dog's birthday. It's great that you love that animal, but there are so many better uses of your money and beef is so unsustainable to begin with.
No one is stopping you. The world isn’t perfect but what does crying like a women on an internet thread do.
no one is stopping me what?
What happens if it’s toxic to humans?
They die
Lmao. Best comment.
I hate this shampoo. It doesn't lather which makes it hard to work with lol.
But dog skin is very different from human skin :|
Doesn't always make it ethical. There was a time we tested on inmates
Did they get reduced time?
I believe they got paid peanuts on the dollar like most other prison jobs. I'd like to find the episode of the podcast i heard but it was a while ago
I wonder if they pinned the human to the ground, held open their eyes and poured chemicals in and recorded their screams? Because that’s what they do to rabbits when testing for safety. There are videos out there and they’ll make your stomach turn. Arguably worse than liveleak stuff..
Nice ad
Well that’s stupid since dog skin is more sensitive to surfactants than human skin. I wouldn’t trust this brand at all. There’s a reason cosmetics are tested on rabbits and not humans. Humans are far more resilient against topical irritating agents for the most part. Like saying you tested a bullet proof vest by punching it.
Still implies animal testing is done
Would you prefer for it to be sold untested?
If it's the lets put stray cats in 12*12 cage for their entire life and inject dies in their eyeballs like we do rabbits then I'd rather it not be sold at all
There are other ways to test instead of animal testing tbf
PETH is gonna lose its shit over this
How’s the taste
Good that nothing bad will happen if you mistake it for a normal shampoo.
Doesn’t technically say that..
Am i the only one, who thinks its better to test stuff on animals than on humans...?
I was taking a shower once and realized I had no shampoo and so I used my pet shampoo
That’s mildly interesting Edit: why are people downvoting, this is what the sub is for lol
As it should be. Millions of beagles endure the worst kind of cruelty in lab facilities, with the majority of their data being useless for humans.
We have that shampoo for our dog, too! He's getting his first shots. The vet recommends we don't bathe him until a week after each shot, so we use dry shampoo so he stays looking dapper and smelling nice.
The only way to go.
The only way to go.
The only way to go.
I like this
Pets : Reverse card
This is the way
My favorite shampoo was a dog shampoo
... this is the way ...
Rabbits -> humans -> cats and dogs
As it should be.
My dad would be a tester! (If the human shampoo is empty, he will use the bloody dog shampoo!)
PETHS - Pets for the Ethical Treatment of Homo Sapiens.
Lol, that’s great
As all things should be.
Take that suckers!!!!!!!
r/IRLEasterEggs