Demand Eco-Friendly Household Goods Company Stop Testing On Animals

Target: Frank VanderSloot, President and CEO of Melaleuca

Goal: Ask household goods company Melaleuca to stop testing its products on animals.

Melaleuca sells natural household goods which are labeled as eco-friendly and cruelty-free. However, when a consumer recently asked the company if it had ever conducted animal testing, the president and CEO responded by saying that some testing on animals had been conducted. VanderSloot claimed that his company only tested on animals when it was necessary, but that a series of tests on rats had been ordered to ensure product safety of a household cleaner. He admitted that the ten rats in the test “died a horrible death.”

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) has listed Melaleuca as a company that does test on animals. Though VanderSloot disagrees with PETA and claims his company is as cruelty-free as possible, he has admitted to ordering other tests on animals. In addition to the tests on rats, Melaleuca commissioned tests on dogs for some of Melaleuca’s new cardiovascular products and the company plans to continue testing this line of products on animals in the future.

Animal testing is a cruel and outdated practice, and many viable alternatives are available. Human volunteers, stem cells, and using pre-existing research have enabled many companies to remain truly cruelty-free. Please ask Melaleuca to stop testing its products on animals.


Dear Frank VanderSloot, President and CEO of Melaleuca,

Your company claims to be cruelty-free. However, in response to a recent consumer question about your company’s position on animal testing, you admitted that Melaleuca has commissioned animal subjects to test your products. Ten rats were used to test a cleaning product and all of them “died horrible deaths.” Consumers who purchase cruelty-free products expect that no animal testing was conducted for the products being purchased.

In addition to the rats, dogs have been used as test subjects for your new cardiovascular products. Not only have you ordered testing for these products, but according to your response, Melaleuca plans to continue testing these products on animals as deemed necessary. Animal testing is an outdated and cruel practice for which many viable alternatives exist. Human volunteers, stem cells, and the use of preexisting research are all alternative methods of ensuring the safety of your products. While your company does not conduct animal testing for your cosmetic or hair products, which is commendable, there is no need for innocent animals to suffer for your household goods or vitamins either.

In order to truly be a “cruelty-free” company, Melaleuca must commit to stop all animal testing. Please stop testing your products on animals.


[Your Name Here]

Photo Credit: Novartis AG via Flickr

Sign the Petition

  • Only your name will be displayed. By signing, you accept our terms and may receive updates on this and related causes.
FacebookCare2 NewsTwitterEmailShare


  1. Finally a petition on household products 😀

  2. Julie Nich says:

    Stop test on animals !

  3. Gee Golly Gosh, my babies and children have been exposed to ALL of Melaleuca’s cleaners and household brands for 11 years now, they have even ingested them internally accidentally on many occasions and they are all alive and well.even our dogs, cats, and animals have all been around our cleaners and mosquito repellents, bug sprays, and fly sprays for our kittens, puppies, and horses. They are ALL still alive and kicking. This post is FALSE on all levels and is completely made up!! PLEASE I pray ask what cleaner caused your rate to die a horrible death? I am sure I have it in my home and have used it on my children. The TRUTH is always good enough. Stop spreading your Lies people.

    This is Melaleuca’s policy on animal cruelty – From
    the July 1997 Melaleuca Country:

    Our Position: Firm But Not Extreme

    In our quest to enhance lives by providing superior
    products, we are sometimes asked about our position on
    cruelty to animals – especially in regards to testing
    products on animals. Our position is quite clear: We
    are absolutely against cruelty to animals. There is no
    excuse for it, and those who participate in any type
    of animal cruelty should be prosecuted and held
    accountable under the law.

    I have special feelings toward animals. I grew up on a
    farm. Animals have been a major part of my life since
    I was a toddler. The closest neighbor with kids my age
    lived over three miles away, so instead of playing
    with other kids, my sister and I played with our pets.
    For fun, I often slept in the barn with my jersey cow
    and her calf. In many respects our pets really were
    our best friends. Our parents taught us to care for
    and respect animals. We were taught to use them
    wisely. We used our horse to pull the hay wagon and to
    help drag logs out of the forests for the stove. I
    milked one or two cows every morning, and I was
    allowed to sell the cream for spending money. We
    always had steak and eggs and bacon to eat. It was a
    good life!

    We believe that animals were placed on the earth for
    the benefit of mankind, and that we have a
    responsibility to treat them kindly and to care for
    them properly. We used to hear stories of various
    tests on animals performed by manufacturers of
    household products, like spraying dish soap or laundry
    detergent or even bleach into the eyes of rabbits or
    rats to determine the effects of these products on the
    eyes. These tests are unnecessary and cruel! I think
    these tests are morally wrong! Melaleuca has long
    taken the position that we will not test our personal
    care or household products on animals. We feel that is
    the proper position to take, and you will find us
    adhering to this policy without hesitation.

    We feel, however, that there are extremes to every
    argument. We do not adhere to the extremes. For
    example, we respect animal right groups, but we will
    not join forces with them to prevent the consumption
    of beef, pork, chicken, etc. Nor do we take the
    position that all scientific use of animals needs to
    be stopped. We do take the position that societies
    should require that all such testing be humane and
    without subjecting the animals to cruel situations.

    Some things get carried much too far. I remember when
    we were contemplating developing a pet shampoo; an
    animal rights group that wanted to know if we tested
    our products on animals contacted us. They were
    updating a list of companies that promised never to
    test on animals, and they planned to make that list

    I expressed our desire to be included on that list,
    but that it would have to specify that we would not
    test on household or personal care products, since we
    planned soon to introduce a pet shampoo, and we
    obviously would need to bathe our own dogs before we
    went to market to determine whether we had a superior
    product. We specifically wanted to determine if we
    could get the dogs’ coat to shine like we desired. I
    feared that would be deemed animal testing. I was
    informed that it indeed would fall under “animal
    testing,” and we were not allowed on the list. (We
    finally did make it on the list several years after we
    came out with the ProCare Pet Shampoo. I have never
    figured out how they expected us to develop a dog
    shampoo if we were not allowed to wash a dog with it

    My point is this: for those who have asked where
    Melaleuca stands on the issue, we believe in caring
    for and protecting animals. You can count on us to
    stand by our promise to never test our household or
    personal care products on animals.

    On the other hand, while we respect the attitudes of
    those who take a more extreme posture in regards to
    animals being equal to humans, we do not share that
    position. For example, we do not find error in wearing
    leather shoes or in having an occasional hamburger at

    I hope this answers the questions about where
    Melaleuca stands on this issue. While we do not expect
    everyone to agree with us, we felt it appropriate to
    let you know exactly where we stand.


    -Frank L. VanderSloot

    • I was a Rep for Melaleuca in 2005-2006. When I got wind of animal testing, I called their headquarters and spoke directly to the Manager of Product Development. They informed me that they DID in fact, test a cardiovascular supplement on dogs. I was told it they were dogs with underlying heart conditions. Whether this part is true or not I do not know.
      They also withheld info about animal by-products, which led me to leave the company. While I respect “proprietary” reasoning, you have to let your customers who are vegan or prefer no animal ingredients know what’s in there. I wasn’t asking for the recipe.
      Again, this was 10 years ago, so perhaps things have changed.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Facebook Comments


193 Signatures

  • Brett Wolff
  • Doris Telles
  • Ama Cristina Granados-Nava
  • penny banks
  • Nitzan Steiman
  • Geri Mason
  • Darlene Roepke
  • Lynn Juozilaitis
  • Jazlyn Flores
  • Richard Ohlendorf
1 of 19123...19
Skip to toolbar