1. News & Issues

Dawn Kills Animals

By July 19, 2009

Follow me on:

Dawn Commercial
Doris Lin 2009, licensed to About.com, Inc.

Proctor and Gamble tests on animals, they don't want to stop, but they want the public to think they are animal-friendly.

Last night, I saw a very disturbing commercial for Dawn dishwashing liquid. The commercial claims that thousands of animals caught in oil spills have been saved by being washed in their dishwashing liquid. The video depicts a penguin, a duckling and an otter, all covered with oil, being bathed with their dishwashing liquid. In the "before" video, you can see how the duckling stumbles and struggles to walk. In tiny letters at the bottom of the screen, it says, "simulated demonstration." This was not footage of an actual rescue. They intentionally covered at least three animals with tempera paint and corn syrup to simulate oil, just so they could wash them on camera. If Dawn really is used to wash oil off of animals, why couldn't they use footage of an actual rescue? The company then has the audacity to put up a website at DawnSavesWildlife.com, extolling their role in wildilfe rescue.

Meanwhile, Proctor and Gamble, the parent corporation that owns Dawn, continues to test on animals and defends animal testing: "We must conduct research involving animals to ensure materials are safe and effective." Not to be branded monsters, they have joined with The Humane Society of the United States in a partnership "committed to the elimination of animal use for consumer product safety evaluation." I'm guessing that this guarantees that HSUS will not target P&G in any campaigns.

P&G, if you were really committed to the elimination of animal testing, you would stop it. Today. Now. Stop the lip service. Stop pretending.

What you can do: Boycott Proctor & Gamble products. Contact Proctor & Gamble at 513-983-1100 or via email at comments.im@pg.com (Update: It appears that P&G has now disabled this email address. If you have a good email address for P&G, please let me know), to tell them you are boycotting all of their products until they stop testing on animals. It's not always easy to tell which brands are owned by P&G and the list is always changing, so try to familiarize yourself with this list, from the official P&G website. Dozens of brands are part of the P&G corporation, including Dawn, Gillette, Cover Girl, Pampers, Tampax, Clairol, Febreeze, Tide, Mr. Clean, Crest and others. Iams and Eukanuba are also owned by P&G and sponsor the Iditarod, so there are at least two reasons to boycott these two brands.

Even better, boycott all companies that test on animals. Two apps available on iTunes make it easy to carry around a list of companies that don't test on animals. Cruelty-Free and BNB (short for "Be Nice to Bunnies") are both compatible with the iPhone or the iPod touch.

July 21, 2009 Update: I just spoke to Cory, a representative at P&G, and told him that I'm not swayed by the "Dawn Saves Wildlife" campaign, and if P&G really cared about animals, they would stop animal testing. Cory was very nice and said that he would pass along my comment. He also said that P&G is required by law to conduct animal testing. I told him that was not true. Federal law requires drugs to be tested on animals, but no law requires household products to be tested on animals. Cory said that the EPA requires new chemicals to be tested on animals. But that's not the same as requiring all household products to be tested on animals. A dishwashing liquid can be made using known, reliable ingredients, without creating new chemicals. There are lots of cruelty-free companies making the same types of cleaning products that P&G makes, without animal testing. Our very civil conversation ended with my accepting Cory's offer to send me a pamphlet about P&G's animal testing, but turning down his offer of coupons for P&G products.

Regardless of the certification from AHA, the animal rights position is that animals should not be used for entertainment or commercials, and should not be covered with paint or corn syrup.

Correction, July 22, 2009: The original post
incorrectly stated that during the filming of the commercial live animals were covered with oil. However, according to American Humane Association, the animals were covered with a mixture of tempera paint and corn syrup designed to simulate oil. The original post also suggested that animals may have been injured or killed during the filming of the commercial. American Humane Association was on set to supervise the filming of the commercial and certified that "No animals were harmed" during the taping.


Add to Technorati Favorites

Share on Facebook
Follow Me on Twitter


July 19, 2009 at 10:57 pm
(1) VeganTrash says:

Is it possible that the commercial is completely simulated and doesn’t involve oil at all?

Definitely boycott P&G, but it seems like there’d be a lot easier things to cover a duck with to appear like oil.

July 20, 2009 at 12:56 am
(2) Doris says:

Hi, VeganTrash,

Thanks for your comment. I see what you’re saying.

It’s possible that it’s not oil, but whatever it is, it acts like oil. It weighs down the duckling and causes her wings to stick to her body, so she can’t stick out her wings to balance when she’s walking. But whether it’s real oil or something that just looks and acts like oil, it’s traumatizing to the animals to be covered in such a heavy, sticky substance.

July 20, 2009 at 10:03 pm
(3) Karen Oldham says:

According to the International Bird Rescue Research Center, the commercial was made at the Los Angeles Oiled Bird Care and Education Center using IBRRC staff from San Pedro. I just now asked them why the “simulated demonstration” thing was on there; hopefully they’ll get back to me.

July 20, 2009 at 10:55 pm
(4) Doris says:

Thanks, Karen! If you find out anything more, please let us know!

I tried to call P&G today, but they put me on hold, and at the time, I couldn’t wait more than 5 minutes, so I gave up. I’ll have to try again.

July 21, 2009 at 10:43 am
(5) Karen OLdham says:

I got an answer back from the IBRRC about the filming of this commercial: “We did film the commercial at our center but the three animals in the shot, the duckling the penguin and otter are all owned by other people. Basically what we do is pretend that they have oil on them. It was a mixture of some kind of easily waterproof paint and some jell to look like oil. It washed off without even using soap.

The duckling was one of four that were used and we made sure that each bird was only on set for a very small amount of time. The otter is an asian small clawed otter that is an actor animal. As you saw in the shot it just sat there with its owner. The penguin was another long time actor that has been in many movies etc. It was very calm and used to being handled.

Again, the simulation is that the oil was fake and the animals were not really washed. Just pretending to be because that is pretty close to what it looks like when we actually wash oiled animals. IBRRC has a policy to never oil a live animal for any reason and to only use captive, permitted animals in commercials etc. Hope this helps. Jay Holcomb”

July 21, 2009 at 2:21 pm
(6) animalrights says:

Thanks, Karen! I’ve posted an addendum to the blog.

I spoke to someone at P&G (after being put on hold for about 10 minutes). I’ll post an update to the blog.

July 24, 2009 at 2:55 pm
(7) lisa says:

ok- so they may have not been harmed during the taping, but what about before and after- statements can be misleading because people tell half-truths, also known as lies.

July 25, 2009 at 12:18 am
(8) Doris says:

Lisa, you’re absolutely right! “No animals were harmed” is a seal of approval given by the AHA, but doesn’t literally mean that no animals were harmed. Probably the most egregious example is the movie “Flicka”, for which two horses died in two separate accidents in the filming of the movie. The AHA still gave the film their “No animals were harmed” approval. The AHA claimed that the deaths were unavoidable accidents. Yes, I would imagine that harming animals is unavoidable in a movie about a rodeo. How about not using animals in entertainment, to avoid these deaths?

July 31, 2009 at 7:44 pm
(9) Angel says:

THANK YOU to those responsible for posting this article!!! I JUST viewed the Dawn dish soap commercial and was TOTALLY taken in by it and ready to make a donation at their website address! Your article popped up along with the page I got to get their website address!!! SO GLAD I read it FIRST!
These people should be SUED for such FALSE advertising! GOOD WORK GUYS!

August 1, 2009 at 2:34 pm
(10) Tristan says:

You should probably change your entry’s title so it doesn’t mislead people or have these “half-truths, also known as lies” as Lisa said.

They test on animals to make sure their product is safe for the animals. Kinda like clinical drug trials before they go widespread. I wouldn’t really want to take a new medication without it being tested first.

This is the same as PETA not endorsing Innova/California Natural foods because they “test” their foods on animals. Testing to make sure they like it and giving their animals a wonderful home is not the same as testing to see if Aspartame will give a rabbit cancer.

Most animal rights activists are taking their title too far, if you ask me.

August 4, 2009 at 12:04 pm
(11) animalrights says:

Hi, Tristan,

Thanks for your comment.

The title refers to P&G’s animal testing. It always has, and that’s why the I found the “Dawn Saves Wildlife” campaign to be so hypocritical. The animals used to test Proctor & Gamble’s household products are killed. They don’t go to sanctuaries or private homes.

There are plenty of household products made by companies that don’t test on animals, and some of those are even vegan. One of the most widely available is Method, which you can buy at Target, Costco and other stores.

September 24, 2009 at 1:14 pm
(12) Zoe V. says:

Thank you for exposing the animal testing fact. Most consumers are smitten by a cute package or an ad without doing any research to what that product really contains. Animal testing is an awful practice that should be banned by the government once for all. There are other detergent companies out there like Seventh Generation and Mrs. Meyers.

October 19, 2009 at 8:26 pm
(13) Gregg says:

The most important thing any person who owns an animal or cares about the earth is to never purchase a product by P&G Tide is the most polluting product on earth. Also—I’ve been on sets with the American Humane Association where the rep was no where near the filming involving animals. It started out as a good organization but is now in bed with corporate. Speaking of …products I was just at the Vets and a young dog almost died from being in the apartment where a woman used Easy-Off to clean her oven. The vet was lecturing her about the toxicity of the product which she paid little heed to.

February 10, 2010 at 12:03 am
(14) Valerie says:

I have volunteered in oil spill recovery of birds — and I simultaneously care deeply about issues like animal testing. I encourage readers here who wanted to help but who don’t support P&G — to donate money to IBRRC or similar wildlife rescue organizations directly. It’s unfortunate that the product deemed best in removing oil safely, has at its root a company with such a bad track record on animal treatment.

The need for funds at any number of wildlife rescue centers is monumental. I urge you not to let your disdain for P&G’s policies prevent you from making a donation to the worthy source you originally considered.

(I am not affiliated with IBRRC although I have seen firsthand the incredible work they do.)

April 12, 2010 at 4:38 am
(15) Jarronica Bizane says:

Dawn was indeed used to degrease otters caught up in the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, and the detergent was also used to remove oil from penguins and cormorants rescued after the Sydney Harbor oil spill in 1999.

According to those who specialize in cleaning oil-soaked wildlife, the method amounted to “Apply a mixture of Dawn liquid detergent and water, and scrub.”

Many substances harmful in large quantities or concentrated versions are quite safe and effective when used in appropriate amounts.

So yes, you can use Dawn to cleanse greasy wildlife

April 18, 2010 at 10:02 pm
(16) Kelly says:

I was unaware of the fact that the animals in this commercial were deliberately covered in tempra paint and corn syrup to simulate oil. How horrible to do that to them for the sake of advertising! I watch the commercial because the animals were just so darn cute! But I have to admit that Dawn really does do a good job of getting oil out of an animal’s fur. About two years ago, our housecat, Cassidy, got outside and one of the neighbor’s dogs chased her under my car. She climbed up under the hood and got oil in her fur. We brought Cassidy back inside the house and tried to find something to clean her fur with. I went online and read that Dawn is excellent for getting oil out of an animal’s fur and it’s the only safe dishwashing liquid to use for this. We immediately went to the store and bought a bottle of Dawn. It got the oil right out of Cassidy’s fur. But after reading about Dawn being tested on animals, I will not purchase any more P&G products until they end this practice. It seems really hypocrytical for them to do charity work to save wildlife and continue to test their products on animals. What’s wrong with this picture?

April 20, 2010 at 3:21 am
(17) Kelly says:

Yikes I misspelled “hypocritical!” I was typing fast. Sorry about that! LOL!

May 4, 2010 at 5:18 pm
(18) Becci says:

Thanks for this important post. We are hearing a lot about buying Dawn because of the recent spill in the Gulf–I’m sure that Dawn is jumping up and down with joy at all the profit they’ll be making from well-meaning people who just don’t know better.

May 9, 2010 at 9:28 pm
(19) Billy B says:

I don’t get it. I am not an animal rights activist. I like animals, but I’m not a terrorist like PETA, and I don’t rail on people on Facebook or other places on the Internet about abusing animals. I have been reading more and more about animal rescues, animal abuse, etc, and I have been thinking about getting more involved, like writing letters, raising funds for rescue shelters, etc. My problem, especially with articles like this, is that some people seem to want to find a ‘target’ and just do everything they can to hurt them. In this case, P&G is the ‘target.’ I’m not saying P&G is right or wrong, but we have all seen the horrible images from the Exxon Valdez spill. We also saw Dawn used to clean and rescue hundreds, if not thousands, of animals. P&G donated large quantities of their project to the cause. The product worked, and it saved animals. Now they’ve filmed a commercial. They put water color paint and corn syrup on some animals and cleaned them up. The owners make money with these animals, so they wouldn’t allow them to be harmed or killed for P&G, so they survived okay. My 6 year old grandaughter plays with water paints and gets it on her skin, and it washes off. She has survived the water paint. My 18 month old grandson eats his pancakes by himself, covered in Aunt Jemima’s fake maple syrup, which is all corn syrup. He gets sticky. He holds his hands up and says ‘icky’ to me because he doesn’t like being sticky. (No grandchildren were harmed in this demonstration). People film commercials and allow themselves to be covered in goo or whatever, and nobody cares. Why don’t we complain about that? I’ll bet a lot of people who say they shouldn’t use animals for entertainment have watched movies like “Marly and Me” and enjoyed it. PETA has been found to have euthenized many more animals than they have rescued, where’s the outcry? I’m sorry, but I see hypocrisy on both sides. I think some people just like the spotlight.

May 9, 2010 at 10:09 pm
(20) Jan says:

Great post, Bill and ITA. I’m very involved in animal rights issues, as you know, but good God people, use some common sense & put all that energy where it’s needed. Choose your battles carefully or you just look fanatical, IMO.

May 9, 2010 at 11:41 pm
(21) janice says:

No idea why my previous post posted twice – I’m reporting you for Aunt Jemima abuse, Bill..you should be ashamed of yourself :) ))

May 10, 2010 at 1:42 am
(22) animalrights says:

Thanks for your comments, Billy and Jan.

Jan, I’ll delete your first comment, since the second one is longer.

I’m sorry the main point of the blog post did not come through, but the hypocrisy lies in their saving wildlife while killing animals in laboraties.

The campaign against Proctor and Gamble’s animal testing has been going on for over 20 years, and has nothing to do with the Dawn commercial. That’s why animal advocates have been boycotting P&G for a very long time. It’s not a new idea or a new campaign.

Yes, P&G is a “target.” If we don’t target the companies that conduct animal testing, who should we target?

Billy, the outrage over PETA killing animals can be found here as well as other sites, and I mentioned it in the comments section here.

May 10, 2010 at 3:33 am
(23) jeri says:

..years ago..my cat jumped into an open parts washer….its a elevated deep metal pan pan filled with diesel fuel.. used to wash oily cart parts….our vet told us to wash her in dawn…it worked.. she never was quite the same after.. as she had injested some oil b4 we found her..

but that dawn really does cut motor oil..

May 22, 2010 at 12:17 am
(24) bd says:

just a fact. dawn works so well on removeing oil it band by the d.e.p. from being used on docks and such. it is so gentile you can use it on a baby. the problem is it makes the oil into tiny balls. that can be digested by wild life. the ad maybe staged but it dose work that well.

May 29, 2010 at 9:54 am

What can we do to wash the oil spill off the animals instead of using the dish detergent dawn? Let’s show them the SAFE way to do wash them!

June 3, 2010 at 11:57 pm
(26) katie says:

I think if they used paint and corn syrup in the commercial the animals were more annoyed than harmed.
But I agree about the animal testing in labs. It is incredibly wrong to test products on animals that are mostly used for vanity on humans. If it has the possibility to be harmful for human use it at all? There are plenty of companies out there that don’t seem to see the need in animal testing. I feel safer using products that have no need to be tested on animals anyway. For the reason that they found no need to use harmful chemicals. Wouldn’t you feel safer using something that wont possibly give you cancer down the road? The problem with animal testing is that they don’t see the long term aaffects on humans.

June 7, 2010 at 1:30 pm
(27) jackie says:

I got suckered in and bought 6 bottles of Dawn. :(

I’ll check first from now on.

June 15, 2010 at 8:04 pm
(28) jackie2 says:

Well,I’m going to buy some anyway. Seems wrong to deny these animals the product that’s best and is needed to help them. Jump on P&G later, help these animals NOW.

June 27, 2010 at 4:41 pm
(29) AnimalLuvr21 says:

Ok, I honestly think most of you are blowing this commercial thing WAAAAAYYYY outta Proportion. I do agree that the animals were more ANNOYED with the fake oil substance than harmed and i do disagree with animal testing. However, Just because yall dont like the commercial, does not mean you should not buy the product. Because it DOES help the REAL OIL-COVERED animals in REAL oil spills. My best friend’s mother is a wildlife rehabilitator and she goes to help with oil spills. Wanna know what they use to clean the animals? …Take a wild guess. By not buying the product, you are NOT helping the real harmed animals, youre just mad at the fact that the commercial might have made a duckling loose her balance for a few seconds.

July 27, 2010 at 2:09 pm
(30) Yvette says:

I like your aditude AnimalLuvr!! you are so right! Dawn does test on Animals, to make sure their products dont damage the skin, or hair…I dont think they feed the shit to the animals! just wash them…its like Bath and Body works stuff is tested on animals to ensure it is not harmful to humans…i’m NOT saying I’m for Animal testing…and i’m NOT saying P&G is 100% in the right. they shouldn’t test their products on animals…So hey Doris why dont you sign up for product testing bet you wont!!! thats why they need to do it on animals…so all those people jumping on the band wagon…I bet you are not prepared to do the product testing. Product testing is a must or else thousands of people would get sick or die from poisoning…and if it has to be done on animals…then its a necessary evil and until the companies can find another way to test products.

oh and I made some of the “oil” they used (the non toxic paint and corn syrup) I poored it on a large tarp and let my friends and thier kids play in it…It was so much fun we are going to do it again!! It did take a lot of DAWN to get us clean though.

December 21, 2010 at 6:11 pm
(31) cara says:

Does anyone find it ironic that self proclaimed animal activist Ellen DeGeneres is paid to endorse Proctor & Gamble beauty products?

December 28, 2010 at 12:32 am
(32) animalrights says:

Cara, yes, I agree that Ellen DeGeneres’ hawking products tested on animals contradicts her animal advocacy.

March 4, 2011 at 11:17 am
(33) SherWan says:

Straight from the mouth of Alice B. Berkner founder of IBRRC.


April 3, 2011 at 7:39 pm
(34) katie says:

I also found the commercial to have a conflict of interest since I know that Proctor and Gamble tests on animals and yet there they are acting like they care about animals!!! Not falling for that one, that’s for sure.

April 3, 2011 at 7:42 pm
(35) katie says:

I also found it odd and stupid that Ellen DeGeneres does commercials for Cover Girl! I know she loves animals and I don’t know how she wouldn’t know that those products are tested on animals.

April 14, 2011 at 11:01 am
(36) Trey says:

Ok I am against cruelty to animals, but wouldnt you rather have household products (in which WE humans) use everyday, tested on animals rather than experimental drugs? And the fact that they used paint or whatever they used to simulate oil was ok, considering that they didnt want to show animals in actual peril and covered in actual oil. Like i said before, I am against cruelty to animals but, cleaning products…really? I consider cruelty physical beating and neglect and from what I can tell, P&G has done none of that…

April 23, 2011 at 4:17 pm
(37) birdlady1 says:

It’s not about the animals in their commercials that I’m concerned about though they imposed unnecessary stress on them. They could just as easily shown video from the oil spills, the resulting animal tragedies, and the before and after videos. I’m sure the rescues would have been thrilled to loan out their videos as it would promote their causes as well.

What it *is* about is the unnecessary animal testing. I’d rather harm some computer software using a stuffed animal (made in the United States).

May 11, 2011 at 1:33 pm
(38) Martinez Brianna says:

they are morons for thinking they are doing right i well always boycott against animal testing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

May 11, 2011 at 1:33 pm
(39) Martinez Brianna says:

they are morons for thinking they are doing right i well always boycott against animal testing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

July 26, 2011 at 2:00 pm
(40) TERRI says:

OMG! I have been so blind and ignorant. I have used DAWN and other P&G products for YEARS! No longer! I cannot believe how stupid I have been. I am completely ashamed. Thanks for opening my eyes…finally.

July 30, 2011 at 9:44 am
(41) Kira says:

How would you propose they “test on animals” with sulfates which are found in all products even hair care to see if it’s safe for all, including people?

I love animals, and I also oppose testing on them for menial , but even medical drugs must first be trialed and tested on “humans,” before entering the market and being labeled as “safe.”

I don’t know much about Dawn’s opposition to wildlife and nature, but their ads at least brought awareness of oil spills to the mass public.

July 30, 2011 at 9:49 am
(42) Kira says:

If this is commercial with false oil is to be boycotted, try attacking the movie industry.

The original flipper dolphin trainer was the cause of “swim with dolphin” programs that capture wild dolphins and force them into captivity. He is now the “dolphin defender” to stop what he had once started.

I agree with your passion and purpose, but this Dawn commercial’s purpose is greater than the ordeal that the animal actors went through to prove it. The commercial is trivial compared to what else may be going on in Hollywood and around the world

September 17, 2011 at 3:50 pm
(43) andrew m says:

Obviously this commercial was to make people believe that they are literally washing these oiled animals in dawn. Animals make their own oils (especially avian types) and washing them with Dawn is unsafe. But Im sure other than those animals in commercial, no others were subject to the ‘horrible torture’ of being washed in corn syrup.

Dawn is just downright dirty in implying to ignorant viewers that this detergent is used to wash the animals, when really proceeds go to helping them… bad way to get your attention…but I dont agree with the argument in your article

September 21, 2011 at 11:39 am
(44) Eddie says:

(Part 1) I realize this is a little old but couldn’t resist. I respect animals and I love them, I have had many pets and they have all been great. I am by no means a hardcore animal rights activist or whatever the majority of you people call yourselves. I am not taking sides with you or Dawn, I’m just going to point out the ridiculous-ness that Doris Lin is trying say and what the majority of the commentators have said.

Doris Lin (in my opinoin) you are a big silly pants.
The title of this article reads, “Dawn Kills Animals.” Yet Lin never proved any animals were killed or even talked about animals dying or being in immediate danger. She also forgot her quotations. The title should be, “Dawn Puts Corn Syrup on Animals,” but that doesn’t sound as traumatic as “Dawn Kills Animals.” I’m sure wearing corn syrup isn’t extremely fun, but it is not torturing either by any means.

P&G is a very large, successful corporation that makes lots of money and probably will for a while. Sure, they may not have the best advertising tactics, but they are just trying to continue a successful path and by the looks of things they have, because as some people have stated below, people are buying it. Many companies have made many silly mistakes before but it never turned them into “monsters” and what P&G did does not make them “monsters.” I don’t think I have to explain what a monster is and paste the definition, Lin must have forgot her quotations because she stretched the truth again. If I’m not mistaken, it seems like Doris Lin is trying to point out that Dawn stretches the truth or lies nut that is exactly what she is doing.

September 21, 2011 at 11:41 am
(45) Eddie says:

(Part2) The soap is animal friendly, from my understanding it has never killed any animals. In fact it is used in a common remeady to kill fleas on animals, which I believe is good…of course unless you are a flea killing activist. I’m sure at one point in time people have used Dawn dish soap to clean oil off of animals covered in oil, it is not that far fetched, a commentator even said they did just that with their pet. And I know Dawn dish soap has been used on a regular basis while bathing pets and, it really doesn’t do a bad job. With that being said, Dawn really isn’t lying at all about helping out animals.

The animals in the commercial had owners and the owners watching, along with the HSUS, thought it was okay, which it really was. The animals were trained and used in movies, they are used to it, its really nothing traumatic.

Doris Lin and some of the commentators are just as bad as they are trying to make Dawn out to be and it usually seems this way when any animal activist tries to make any big time company or corporation look like “trash.”

After saying all that I would still like to thank what animal rights organizations do because they really do help animals out and I’m sure they love animals, as do I. But sometimes it seems they also love picking stupid battles with companies and making them look way worse than they are.
This being one of those times.

November 5, 2011 at 10:32 am
(46) Debbie says:

My dogs covered themselves in tar from a newly slurried asphault street….used Dawn (from a neighbor’s daughters suggestion- who works as an animal trainer at the zoo). It worked like a charm and my doggies are as cute, healthy, and happy as ever.

November 16, 2011 at 2:51 pm
(47) Raw Foods Weight Loss says:

Just wish to say your article is as amazing. The clearness for your submit is simply excellent and that i can suppose you are an expert in this subject. Fine together with your permission let me to grab your feed to stay up to date with imminent post. Thanks 1,000,000 and please continue the enjoyable work.

February 2, 2012 at 5:03 pm
(48) Shaun says:

I just want to say, Eddie’s comment is SPOT on the money. Glad there are still normal people in the world that can see through the lies.

April 11, 2012 at 9:32 am
(49) Trufl says:

So no one will probably read this, but it makes me sad when people automatically condemn everyone involved with P&G. They do horrible things don’t get me wrong, but it doesn’t mean that every person working for any company owned by a conglomerate is evil.

I worked at a humane society and saw a few animals euthanized for almost no other reason than they had been there for too long.
Point being, just because part of a place is bad doesn’t mean everyone in it is. I bet there are people in the company trying to stop it, but too many over zealous activists condemn them to, throwing hate around even if its supposedly justified never helps.

October 26, 2012 at 1:11 pm
(50) Yasmeen says:

I guess the commercial is something you should question. But if Dawn (P&G) can help animals covered by oil, then shouldnt we try the product?I mean i can see where your from, but honestly if Dawn really does work, how will we know if we dont test animals. And putting up a Dawn kills animals, I dont understand.

November 30, 2012 at 5:42 pm
(51) jude anne says:

If anyone put Tempra paint on my dog, I would probably be pissed off. P and G, u are such a successful company that you can afford to stop the vivisecting. So cut the crap and get back to work w/o the use of animals. I have to wonder what the P and G employees would think if someone vivisected one of their pets; they would be horrified. Please stop P and G. You do have great products; however, they should be boycotted because a company like yours cannot progress with the times and stop the vivisecting.

March 4, 2013 at 5:08 pm
(52) RageAgainstTheMedia says:

I understand all the complaints about animal testing and I’m certainly against it as well. However, no one on this site has provided actual proof that any animals were harmed or that any of these other claims have any validity. All I’ve read so far is that this company said this and this person said that. Where’s the proof? I refuse to accept media induced “facts”.

March 31, 2013 at 8:56 am
(53) Mark says:

It is incredible that you present this blog like you have first hand knowledge of science or for that matter what actually occurred during these commercials when in fact you are just a trouble maker who feels that your ideology trumps the facts. Please do your damn research to support your ideology than and only then publish your findings. I want the 5 minutes back that it took to look at this non-sense!

June 30, 2013 at 7:28 pm
(54) ML Duvall says:

Thanks Jay Holcomb, most people have no clue how difficult it is to film adult humans let alone children and stand-in animals. Your filming was excellent and I would work for you in a heart beat. The point came through to anyone that wanted to try to understand the reality of the devastation. Kind regards, Michelle

September 14, 2013 at 4:58 pm
(55) crystal says:

Im glad that p&g realizes that they have an amazing product that ironically saves MANY animals. I don’t’ know much about their testing products on animals or the animals being killed after. Either way I hoping it is very few. People and animals will always be tests subjects. You loose some to save millions more, that is just reality and as sad as it is, we need to be thankful. What would happen if they could just release al products without any testing?????

September 22, 2013 at 11:36 am
(56) Todd says:

Who cares if they test on animals? Its better that they do that, than test on people. Just because some companies test on animals doesn’t mean many are killed. You animal rights people are completely irrational, and psychopathic. You bash P&G but provide no proof that they do any animal testing. Its very irresponsible of you to post this propaganda.

December 14, 2013 at 7:04 pm
(57) James says:

What I gather from all this nonsense is that dawn itself is a wonderful product. One that is saving animals. I wonder how many insects everyone posting steps on together during the course of a year…………… o… M g…. Everyone is a terrible person now…

March 19, 2014 at 10:49 pm
(58) Robin says:

Okay, obviously I’m responding a bit late but this is just infuriating. To those of you missing the point, clearly this article is slightly above your head, intellectually and perhaps you shouldn’t bother reading posts like this. This is not meant to focus on the commercial or the cleaning of from an animals fur – this article was meant to bring attention to the fact that Procter & Gamble (the makers of Dawn) are hypocrites because they still test their products on animals in labs but are trying to pretend they give a shit about animals. Are you still with me? To those of you who make such ignorant comments such as, “Who cares if they test in animals, blah, blah, blah.” No one is asking you to respect another species right to get to live a life without being strapped to a board and having chemicals dropped into their eyes. No one is asking you to stop for a minute and realize that it’s not just rodents being tested on but your every day family dogs and cats by having cleaning chemicals pumped directly into their stomachs to see how long it will take for them to die from it so they can print it on your pretty little label for you. That being said, just because you don’t give a shit about said animals doesn’t mean that in 2014 a huge company such as this should still be using such horrific and nasty practices to test their chemicals. Don’t expect us “crazy animal activists” to stop giving a shit because you don’t. Why don’t you just stick to what you know, hamburgers, TV and SUVs.

Leave a Comment

Line and paragraph breaks are automatic. Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title="">, <b>, <i>, <strike>

©2014 About.com. All rights reserved.