Robin Lorentzen signed Tell the FDA to Cut Animal Cruelty Out of Cosmetics 2016-01-30 13:03:12 -0800Robin LorentzenGOAL: 2,450 signatures
For every 1,000 signatures, NationofChange will send a letter to the Food and Drug Administration, demanding they ban animal testing for cosmetics.
[Update 2/16/17: We have sent another letter to the FDA with 2,000+ of your signatures. We will continue to send letters every 1,000 signatures. Thank you!]
While “cruelty-free testing” is mandatory in Europe, in the U.S., there are no regulations regarding the testing of cosmetics. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), who oversees the industry, does not approve such products before they go on the market. And according to the FDA, cosmetic authority is solely the responsibility of cosmetic manufacturers.
Therefore, to see to it that their products and the products’ ingredients are safe for human use, a majority of cosmetics are tested on animals. But as a country, we must ban animal-tested cosmetics.
Not only does moving away from animal testing make good economic and trade sense since the EU recently banned the sale of animal-tested cosmetics, it is time we protect animal rights.
With many alternatives to the commonly required safety tests, animal testing is no longer necessary.
There are sophisticated non-animal research methods which are more accurate, less expensive and less time-consuming than certain animal-based research methods. Alternatives include computer simulators and imaging techniques, epidemiological studies (studies of human populations), clinical research, in vitro research (in a test tube) and replacing animals with human cells in safety tests.
While three states—California, New Jersey and New York—passed laws mandating that available alternatives to animal tests be used, the U.S. currently has no federal law prohibiting animal testing.
With many toxic and carcinogenic ingredients found in cosmetics, not only are animals' health at risk their rights are in question. It is time we protect animals and encourage modern science in response to the interests of consumers. Tell the FDA to ban animal testing for cosmetics.
GOAL: 1,516 signatures
For every 1,000 signatures, NationofChange will send a letter to the EPA demanding that they completely ban BPA from all food and drink packaging.
[Update 12/10/2016: We have surpassed 1,000 signatures! NationofChange has sent the first letter to the EPA. We will continue to send a letter with your signatures for every 1,000 signatures we receive.]
The primary source of exposure of bisphenol A or BPA is through the diet, yet the FDA allows this toxic chemical, which is linked to cancer and other diseases, to be used in most food and drink packaging. While the FDA banned the use of the chemical in baby bottles and children's cups, the FDA must protect the American people in its entirety.
BPA is an endocrine disruptor, which interferes with the processing of natural hormones within the human body, and is determined to be very hazardous to human health, according to Medical News Today (MNT).
Evidence proves the chemical to be harmful and links it to infertility, depression, ADHD and autism among several other diseases, but BPA is consistently present in plastic water bottles, epoxy resins that coat the inside of cans, some dental fillings and sealants and paper receipts. We can't avoid it.
According to a study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 95 percent of adult urine samples contain BPA. This shocking statistic confirms the need to completely ban this chemical from daily exposure for the health and safety of humans.
It is time Americans are protected from "unwittingly consuming a dangerous chemical."
Let's take action and tell the FDA to completely ban BPA from all food and drink packaging.
Robin Lorentzen signed Stop Oprah from Featuring Monsanto Ads in Her Magazine 2015-08-08 13:34:07 -0700GOAL: 10,992 signatures
As one of the most influence people in the world, it was once thought that Oprah Winfrey was an advocate for the organic and GMO Free Movement. After recently learning about her "growing affinity for organics"—not only does she own an organic farm on Maui, Hawaii, Oprah recently branded her own organic food line called “Oprah’s Organics”—it was thought that she could "propel the organic and GMO Free movement to the next level."
But this all surprisingly changed when the talk show host and media mogul became part Monsanto's "burgeoning multi-million dollar advertising campaign" inside her best-selling, worldwide magazine, O. While Oprah didn't come out in support of Monsanto, we can't help but think she sold out to one of the "biggest land polluters and most hated companies in the world."
It's time we call her out on it and ask where her true allegiances lie.
In a campaign to get Oprah to reconsider the ads, which are slated for publication in 2015, we must pressure her to pull the ad from her magazine. Oprah's decision to accept a GMO ad after the magazine extensively cover GMO labeling and potential health risks associated with GMOs is absurd. With “more than 100 species of fruits, vegetables and herbs growing" on her organic farm, why are Monsanto’s suicide seeds gracing the pages of Oprah's magazine?
We need to pressure Oprah to put her money where her mouth is and help rid the world of GMOs.
We thought Oprah was on our side! "This is definitely out of character for a woman who owns an organic farm" and has "discuss the dangers of GMOs."
Join our campaign to stop the biotech giant from being featured in the pages of Oprah’s magazine.