Not resolved

The letter from their CEO is a very egoistic letter. I don't care if their self-centered CEO don't feel guilty when he eats meat or use animal products(thats what the letter said) , who cares about him personally?

He did not say they don't use animal testing on none of their products. Why sending such a self-centered letter that CEO talked about his personal values?

He doesnt seem to get that animals die for his animal products and animal testings, he said he doesn't feel guilty when he eats meat because those animals are already dead!!! He doesn't seem to understand market is about demand/supply and can't seem to see his part in it.

Shouldn't companies have a minimum IQ requirements for their CEOs?

They should be ashamed of sending such a redicilus letter insulting their customers intelligent.

If you care about environment and/or animals don't buy from them. There are more ethical companies who will proudly say they never test on animals or even use any animal products.

Do You Have Something To Say ?
Write a review


You will be automatically registered on our site. Username and password will be sent to you via email.
Post Comment

If you want people to take you seriously, perhaps use proper grammar and spelling. Just say'n.


Melaleuca has more ethics in their baby finger nail then any other company I know. PETA needs to be the one giving their heads a shake...as do you!


typical Melaleuca nasty insults with no integrity ! You just proved the point of this comment. Obviously, the writer needs to do some research on their own and not just follow what Melaleuca tell them or sell them or give them to sell!


They know is a fact all all melaleuca and its workers can do is to insult those expose them, they know this comment is a fact. They need to stop torturing dogs and cat and rats and other animals and become more civil.

But all they do is to come here and insult anyone who give a *** or has any compassion to animals Melaleuca torments and torture. You obviously have access to a computer, do your own research and watch some videos to see what they do to animals. If you so sure "they have that much integrity in their baby finger nail "Why dont you ask your so called "ethical " company to send you a video and description of what they do to animals and their labs , if they are as ethical as they made you believe they are. Of course, they would never do that for you, because they don't have the integrity and honestly to tell you what happens really beyond their close doors.

They dont want you to know the facts. There are clean and green companies who never test on any animals and we can shop from them to not participate in animal cruelty that is unnecessary!Now, these days you can even buy green and cruelty products even from amazon or target or even Walmart, that are less expensive that the unethical Melalueca!


just be aware to distract from the issues, the Melaleuca grammar police will soon show up. They can never address the issue so they distract and insult ! That is how much integrity they have.


You should really check your grammar and spelling before you talk about IQ tests.


spelling police from melaleuka


Is because they don't have anything important to say .


Dex, if you were smart, you could respond to the issues, and not to be just the grammar police again.


I am writing in response to your questions regarding Melaleuca's position on animal testing. Let me begin by telling you how much we appreciate having you as a Melaleuca customer and by reassuring you that Melaleuca has never tested its personal care or home care products on animals, nor will we ever do so!

Melaleuca is absolutely against cruelty to animals!

We have never allowed nor will we ever tolerate the cruel treatment of any animal in the forwarding of our business. I grew up on a farm and throughout my childhood I had several animal friends whom I affection for and who I feel returned that loyalty and affection, including several dogs, cats, cows, a horse, and a baby pet hawk that I raised after it had fallen from its nest. I nurtured that hawk until it was old enough to turn loose. Animals have played an important role in my life, and today my wife and I (and our kids) own two dogs, a cat, and several cows and horses.

I have a confession to make: While I will usually carry a spider outside and turn it loose rather than smash it, as I write this letter, I am wearing a leather belt and leather shoes, and yesterday I had a hamburger for lunch and fish for dinner.

I am not a vegetarian, nor do I put animals on the same plane as humans. If I had to make a choice between animals and people, in my book, people come first.

Our first run-in with PETA occurred in 1993. That year we were preparing to bring out a new dog shampoo. In its annual questionnaire, PETA asked us once again to commit to not test any of our products on animals.

We told them that we would not, except, of course, we planned to test our new dog shampoo on dogs; i.e. wash a few dogs to make sure it performed properly. PETA insisted that any testing was prohibited--even shampooing dogs! We argued at length that we were not hurting the dog, only shampooing it.

They argued back that rules were rules and if we could not fill out their form with an absolute statement that "we will never test any product on animals," then we would not qualify to be on their cruelty free list. We found that absurd! And we were eventually removed from their list in 1997.

Since then, PETA has found us in violation of their policies in two other instances. One instance occurred when a company called Natural World was advertising that its cleaning products were safe for children to play with and even drink.

Melaleuca had concerns that at least one of these products appeared to be potentially harmful, and that children may be harmed by drinking it.

Melaleuca commissioned a laboratory to test the safety of one of Natural World's products on ten rats. The rats died a horrible death. The test proved that the "safe for children" product was deadly poison. Natural World was forced to cease its "safe for children" claim.

In retaliation, Natural World turned over the results of the tests to PETA. Our position is that we potentiall saved several children from serious injury, and perhaps even death. PETA's position is that a rat's life is as valuable as a child's life, and that no child is worth sacrificing an animal. That sounds preposterous to me, but it is the absolute position of PETA.

In Melaleuca's quest to enhance and prolong life, we have been devoloping a product called Provex CV, a product that will greatly increase cardiovascular health. Our research and progress to date indicate that we may have found a natural product that will greatly reduce the risk of heart disease, the number one killer in America. The University researching the merits of this product has now done several human tests to prove Provex CV's effects on platelet activity and LDL cholesterol oxidation in the blood. The Ethics Committee at this University, along with most other universities, will not allow human tests to be done on a product until the product has been proven safe and effective on animals.

Prior to performing human studies to prove Provex CV's effectiveness, Melaleuca commissioned that the product be tested on dogs first. All of these tests proved very successful, and the testing that was required to be performed on dogs stopped. The result is that we now are able to test on humans and we feel that mankind has been greatly helped with a product that will prolong human life and ultimately vastly lower the risk of heart disease. PETA's position is much different than ours.

Again, their position is "Absolutely no testing on animals!" and, "No human life is worth risking an animal's life." Let me refer back to my leather belt and the hamburger I may have had yesterday for lunch. The animals from which my belt and the hamburger came are no longer living. I do not feel any guilt at all for using their products as long as they were killed humanely and did not suffer. In our opinion, whoever would put human life and animal life on the same level, or state that a rat is equal to a child, are just plain overdoing it.

In our quest to save life, we refuse to tell PETA that we will never again test our cardiovascular products on animals. Therefore, believe it or not, PETA has denied Melaleuca's request is that it be listed as cruelty free. Melaleuca has never tested its hair care, skin care, cosmetic or home cleaning products on animals. To do so would be unnecessary and senseless.

We would never knowingly allow any animal to suffer. Melaleuca is definitely cruelty free, even though we do not appear on PETA's list. This has been a rather long answer to a pretty short question as to our stand on animal testing.

I hope you will find our answer satisfactory and that we will have earned your continued loyalty as we continue with our mission to "Enhance the Lives of Those We Touch." Sincerely,....Frank L. VanderSloot...President and CEO


1- I don't care you eat fish and meat or not, You are a CEO of a company but you don't seem to understand there is a connection between Supply& demand. You buy a product (meat and leather) and thus those animals die.

You provide the need for supply by demanding it when you buy it, so please don't play dumb by saying those animals are already dead.

2- There are better and more advanced , and more human ways, for testing your products safety than testing it on rats. The center for alternative testing at John Hopkins University will tell you how un-scientific and unreliable animals testings are. http://caat.jhsph.edu

3- Just because your products killed rats doesn't make it safe or unsafe for children.

pecies differences in anatomy, organ structure and function, toxin metabolism, chemical and drug absorption, and mechanisms of DNA repair—among myriad other differences between humans and other species—can give us inadequate or erroneous information when we attempt to apply animal data to human diseases and drug responses. For example, penicillin is toxic to guinea pigs, aspirin is poisonous to cats, and the recalled diet drug phen-fen caused no heart damage in animals, while it did in humans. neavs

4-According to Dr. Richard Klausner, former Director of the National Cancer Institute, “We have cured cancer in mice for decades—and it simply didn’t work in humans.”

5- I have been Melaleuka customer for years until I got this letter from you.

It shows how uneducated you are about new scientific alternative research methods that are much more reliable than tormenting rats. You actually put kids more in danger by assuming your products are safer unsafe only because they are safe or unsafe on rats. Our biology is different, read number 3

In regard to physiology and biology animals are not "little human " 6- You seem to think anyone who ask you be cruel free , works for PETA. Well, I am not.

Is not about PETA is about your false claim to be cruelty free. You are NOT. 7- Suppose you are an experimenter and are determining if methylprednisolone, a steroid, will help humans with spinal cord injury.

After crushing the spinal cords of many different animals, you test the drug on them. My colleagues and I looked at the published studies (62 in total) and here are the results broken down by species [1]: In Cats: the drug was mostly effective Dogs: mostly effective Rats: mostly ineffective Mice: always ineffective Monkeys: effective (1 experiment) Sheep: ineffective (1 experiment) Rabbits: results were split down the middle Based on these results, can you determine if methylprednisolone will help humans with spinal cord injury?!!: Dr Akhtar, neurologist http://www.huffingtonpost.com/aysha-akhtar/why-animal-experimentatio_b_3997568.html


Sad to say it is truth and they do test on animals. However since many get commission from the company they don't want the truth to come up and will do anything to distract the real issue.

Shame on them. You would think they want to know the truth and let others know it too.

But instead they want to distract the issue in any way they can, including grammar.

Lets not feed the troll.


Sedley this is true. Melaleuca do test on animal on some products.

Some people would love to make this about grammar and spellings, Just for the sake of distraction from the main unethical issue of animal testing by this company.

Some people get commission from the company and they would lose the money if the truth comes up.

So they will keep commenting about anything, just not the real issue; animal testings on dogs and rats.

Lets not feed the troll and help those who want know the truth.


I Just found that Method products not only never test on animals but also all their products are free of animal products. They are much cheaper than Melaluka and easy to look.

You can buy them less expensive from Amazon. Target sell them too but is cheaper on Amazon.


I have used the Method products for my cleaning business. I thought I loved them but I will NEVER use them again.

I have been fighting a reaction to them for over a year now. Raw, blisters, pealing over and over. Thanks to my friend who introduced Melaleuca to me I have been able to stop them from breaking out using there products.

They truly clean like no other, chemical free & do not bother my hands. All products are wonderful.


I received the same letter upon phone request and feel the same way. Will not support this company anymore, like you say, there are honest companies out there!


Thanks for your comment.


If you are going to insult someone, at least get the grammar and spelling correct.


Try to say something of substance, if you can


Us395 , try to say something of substance and don't lower yourself to be a grammar police. Try to write something of importance and then try to write in another language that is not your native language and then judge yourself of what a good spellers you are.

dividing the attention to grammar, rather than to the substance, is an insult to yourself.

The issue is about Melaluka testing on animals while calling themselves a cruelty free company which is deception. customers have the right to know they test on animals before they buy their products.

The letter from CEO is insulting to millions of people who don't want participate in unnecessary cruelty inflicted on billions of animals. If you, US395, can't add to the discussion don't try to divide the attention from the substance by being the grammar police for people whom english is NOT their second language.

Melaleuca Reviews

  1. 86 reviews
  2. 44 reviews
  3. 28 reviews
  4. 24 reviews
  5. 97 reviews
Melaleuca reviews