Ecover stripped of Vegan Soc logo
A refusal to agree a cut-off date for animal testing has left green cleaning brand Ecover stripped of its Vegan Society logo, according to a recent joint statement.
The Belgian company's biodegradable and phosphate-free products - which include washing-up liquid, washing powder and more - are tested on water fleas and rabbit blood to detect danger, respectively, to aquatic life and human skin.
While the EU definition of animal testing doesn't include invertebrates such as water fleas, the Vegan Society's founding criteria does.
The main sticking point between the charity and eco cleaning business was Ecover's refusal to submit to a cut-off date for specific products to be free of animal-tested products.
Instead, the green cleaning co is continuing a 'five year rolling rule' (more on Ecover's site here) that means although it pledges not to use today's animal-tested ingredients in its products for the next five years, it could theoretically include them in 2013.
Remaining stocks of Ecover products will continue to bear the Vegan Society logo, but new ones will not carry it. The society says: 'We hope Ecover will continue to develop non-animal test methods and environmentally sound products which will enable us to work together again in the future.'
Lisa Drummy of Beanie's Health Foods suggests: 'Ecover may soon find themselves the subjects of a mass boycott by ethical, animal friendly shoppers.'
Ecover, in its defence, points out that only 0.5ml of rabbit blood is used to test one new product, and the shortage of human red blood cells makes the use of human blood 'unethical'.
-
Forums
-
Jobs
-
Directory
-
The Recycle Warehouse
Winchester -
Cafe ita
Cambridge -
Urban Africa
London -
eco my party
London -
Lucy Rose
Hereford -
Pink Products Ltd
Birmingham
-
Comments
Read the comments from other new comsumers and login or register to post your own thoughts...
Will White says
Just 0.5ml! Couldn’t an employee just prick their finger and be done with it?
Ecover says
Dear ethical consumer,
As a pioneering ecological company Ecover respects the mission and values of the Vegan Society. Ecover has not been stripped of its vegan logo, but came to a mutual decision with the Vegan Society not to carry the Vegan trademark. The decision to do so occurred precisely because of Ecover’s longstanding ethics and principles.
Ecover’s toughest challenge in developing an ecological washing and cleaning product is minimising the effects of its use on aquatic systems. Not accurately measuring the toxicity of these products on aquatic life would result in Ecover not being able to determine the effects of our products on the wider environment. This has to be a priority in our industry.
The RBC test, which uses a mere 0.5 milliliters of rabbit blood (acquired as a byproduct), has not been performed for 2 years. This test was amongst the first alternative methods to testing on live animals. Both the rise of HIV and the shortage of human red blood cells via donation played a part in our decision to use rabbit’s blood. However this year Ecover’s CEO, Mick Bremans, is voluntarily donating his own blood as an alternative. Thus Ecover conforms to the standards set by the vegan community.
Essentially, the vegan community and Ecover share many values. However, Ecover is not a vegan company and as such we have differing objectives. Ecover produces ecological products made from plant-based ingredients with minimal possible impact on the environment. Ecover has been an open and transparent company for 27 years, and will continue to be as we take further steps together on a journey towards a more sustainable future for all people, animals and the planet.
Sam says
Suggesting a boycott of these products is like cutting off your nose to spite your face!
Their testing process might not conform to every ideology but the principles of the company are still admirably high and considerably better than a lot of companies making huge profits today.
Don’t punish the good guys - they’re doing a great job in a tough market.
Elise says
The Vegan Society’s responsibility is to stick to their guidelines. I don’t see the problem with that. Nobody is being forced to boycott Ecover purely because it has lost this one endorsement. Provided the information is available, people (who I will assume are adults, since children don’t usually buy cleaning products!) are capable of making their own minds up about which issues affect their choice of products.
www.lifegoggles.com says
I certainly won’t be boycotting Ecover - in fact I’ve just bought a host of 5 litre tubs at a refilling place at So Organic in Greenwich. It seems logical to me how Ecover do their testing and admirable that both companies recognise their differences.
There aren’t many mass market ‘green’ products so I want to support them (as well as others) and the statement written above proves to me they are the sort of company to be respected and supported.
Gogo says
I am not a big opponent of animal testing as such (depends on the circumstances, in my opinion), but I can understand people who oppose it on principle. But to oppose testing on water fleas! (Why not oppose testing on bacteria as well...) especially since the purpose of the testing is to protect the environment!
Caryne says
It is not only the testing on daphnia and rabbit blood that has causded Ecover to lose it’s Vegan status but also it’s decision to use the five year ‘rolling rule’ in animal testing. This is the ultimate ‘get out’ rule and is used by many of the large corporations who pretend (to confuse consumers) that they do not test on animals. Basically it means that they can use any product to test that was animal tested five years ago. It is a fudge, no more than that and hardly ‘ethical’. This is a further explanation of it…
“This means that the manufacturer only excludes ingredients that have been animal-tested within the last five years. This is not a fixed date, so an animal tested ingredient may be excluded one year (because it falls within the ‘last five years’ bracket), but included the following year (when it falls outside this bracket). By using this method, the manufacturer is making no clear commitment to reject animal testing and is still profiting from and perpetuating animal testing. The only difference here is that the company delays buying that ingredient for five years. This would make little difference to most suppliers and the industry as a whole, as they know that companies like this may not buy the ingredients today but they will buy the ingredients eventually.”
As ‘ethical consumers should we really support a company who uses this?
Gogo says
Thanks for these explanations: it makes more sense now.
sim says
What I’m concerned about is how long Ecover have been doing this, and how it is that the Vegan Society were not aware of it in the first place.
It’s clear from the comments that before two years ago, Ecover had been carrying out these tests while using the Vegan Society’s logo/trademark. It is also therefore clear that Ecover neglected to inform the Vegan Society of such practice, or even check with the Vegan Society directly whether such practices would be acceptable. I believe that if Ecover wishes to secure ‘vegan’ endorsements from official Vegan bodies, then it is Ecover’s responsibility to ensure they fully understand the requirements.
I also have to ask if there is anything within the Vegan Society’s own practices that could have unwittingly contributed to this situation arising in the first place.
My faith in Ecover, which wishes to present itself as environmentally friendly and also seeks to promote ethical credentials in regards to animal testing/welfare, is all but destroyed. Whether or not Ecover properly veganises its products in future, I will still have serious doubts.
By failing to be upfront about their testing makes me feel that Ecover is driven more by profit concerns than we are led to believe. Yet, promoting on the basis of ethics requires honesty and integrity.
Let’s face it, until more recently, we have been a much easier market to target due to our natural receptivesness for environmentally friendly products than perhaps other consumer groups. I feel quite misled and very disappointed.
I have until now taken it on blind faith that any product displaying the Vegan Society logo meets my needs as a vegan. However, though while I am sure the Vegan Society would not knowingly allow something like this to occur, this incident has also dented my faith in the logo.
Credit is due to the Vegan Society for withdrawing the logo from Ecover. However, given the time that has passed since this issue was first identified, it still begs the question as to why Ecover products are still listed under the Vegan Society’s trademark listings.
Caryne says
I can only agree with you 100% it certainly seems that Ecover have been deliberately misleading the Vegan Society for some time and, for one, would love to know when the facts actually came to light.
Ecover, in a personal reply to ne, seem to be saying that they are more ethical than any other similar company and that their tests are fine as they do not recognise testing on ‘Daphnia’ as animal testing (though, I find it amazing that they can draw the line..it’s a little like those idiots who eat fish whilst claiming to be vegetarian). IN their reply to me they also failed to acknowledge my questions about them using the ‘5 Year Rolling Rule’ (the get out used by all the ‘major’ companies who lie that they do not use ingredients tested on animals) and make very little of the tests they have done using rabbots blood, merely to say they havn’t carried them out for a couple of years.
There are still many questions to be asked here but Ecover have shown themselves to be a company not to be trusted and hardly fitting for inclusion in an ‘Ethical Consumers’ shopping basket.
Finally, sadly, when it comes to updating their site the Vegan Society are very slow. They should be taking Ecover off their approved list and I am sure they will. Maybe some of us should be writing to them to remind them?
Gogo says
About animal testing, out of interest, where do the Vegan Society put their limit? How do they propose to test the potential effect on an ecosytem? What about testing an desinfectant on bacteria?
Caryne says
It’s simple. The Vegan Society will not sanction anything tested on animal life. There are the three categories, animal, vegetable and mineral. If it is not vegetable or mineral then it will not be acceptable.
I am not a scientist so I cannot tell you any more about ‘potential testing on an ecocsystem’. However I can tell you that there are companies producing vegan alternatives who are also ‘environmentally’ ethical. Companies such as ‘Clear Spring’, ‘Bio D’ and the ‘Earth Friendly’ range sold at the Vegan Store
http://www.veganstore.co.uk/household_index.html
If you want full details on how they test the effect I suggest you contact the manufacturers
of the above mentioned products.
sim says
I also find it quite insulting that a company that openly states it is not ‘vegan’ can then presume to define what ‘vegan’ means, without checking it properly with the relevant authority. Who defines what is acceptable to us as vegans other than ourselves?
Imagine if they did that when seeking religious endorsements?...!
Ecover sell their products across Europe (at least). How much of an issue has this been there, does anyone here know?
Caryne says
What I find interesting is not only is this company ‘Not Vegan’ but its products are not suitable for ethical vegetarians or anyone who cares about the animal testing/exploitation.
It seems to me that Ecover have got by over the years on one big lie and now they have been found out (I so wish I knew how it happened) Just makes you wonder who else is lying to us?
What I also await is all the shops removing the products from its shelves. I realise that large supermarkets etc won’t give two hoots but there are 100s of wholefood shops around the UK who operate on vegetarian/vegan principles who should no longer be selling this product. My local shop knew nothing of the fact that Ecover was ‘animal tested’ until I told them, not surprisingly Ecover do not seem to informing their retailers of the fact. It is up to us, at ‘Ethical Consumers’ to make sure all ethical retailers are aware of this companies lies and ensure that they stock ‘ethical products’.
Gogo says
But I still don’t understand how *any* companies making, say, a vegan-labelled dishwash, could test if their product is not detrimental to the environment without trying it on, say, some water containing some wildlife, including micro-organisms. If the Vegan Society is so strict, then in my opinion, “animals” include micro-organisms, planctons, etc. I am obviously not a vegan, but I would prefer to use a product which I am sure is not harmful to the environment rather than a product which has not been tested for this purpose (I hope I make sense...). I the definition is as strict as that, I would rather look for a product *not* having a vegan label…
sim says
You’re right! - it does seem that a certain amount of fudging of ethical issues (as illustrated by Ecover’s supposed defense) has been done out of corporate self-interest.
I didn’t much like it when L’Oreal took over The Body Shop, nor Cadbury’s takeover of Green & Blacks. For all the reasons outlined above, I now like it even less.
I have just realised that amongst other brands, Ecover also acquired the Eco Lino domestic cleaning/detergent range. Needless to say, the Eco Lino policy now reflects similar concerns to those already raised here, including the ‘5 year rolling rule’!
Caryne says
Gogo...as I suggested I would point you in the directions of the companies I listed and ask that you contact them directly.
Personally I want a product that is vegan and environmentally friendly. These still appear to be available and I would trust these over any company that has, so it seems, spent years lying to its consumers over its ‘animal testing procedures’ (and for the umpteenth time we are talking not just of ‘daphnia’ but rabbit blood and anything if you remember they are operating under the ‘five year rolling rule’). Let’s get this straight Ecover have lied over its animal testing for years..how on earth do we know whether or not they are lying about anything else?
With these big companies ‘corporate self-interest’ always wins out over ethics. Personally I was flabbergasted that this very site listed Anita Roddick as an ‘Ethical’ champion when she sold her company to the scum that is ‘L’Oreal’.
NickB says
I find it slightly odd that while “The Vegan Society recognizes Ecover as a company of integrity”, some of the comments here now paint Ecover as the Devil incarnate.
Given that the Vegan Society has obviously spent quite a bit of time with Ecover discussing the issues (more, I suspect, than have some of those commenting), are people saying that the Vegan Society is lying?
NickB says
Quote:
It’s simple. The Vegan Society will not sanction anything tested on animal life. There are the three categories, animal, vegetable and mineral. If it is not vegetable or mineral then it will not be acceptable.
End quote
Actually, the Vegan Society defines animal as “all vertebrates and all multicellular invertebrates”, leaving quite a large number of species which are not vegetable or mineral as acceptable, apparently.
Caryne says
We are just playing with words here (the sort of behaviour I expect from the right wing media not a ‘so-called’ ethical consumer site.)
I do think that the Vegan Society have been a little too kind to Ecover to be honest but, in the end, they have done the right thing and stripped them of their ‘vegan’ status.
Many people here seem obsessed with the ‘testing on daphnia’ issue. Whilst that makes it ‘non-vegan’ (of course) I am more concerned by the fact that they seem to be totally fudging over the testing on rabbits blood and, most important, the fact that they use the ‘ultimate get out’, ‘The Five Year Rolling Rule’, when it comes to all its animal testing.