Tammy Faye dead

[PeppyGPhiB]

All those stores and brands with signs and labels saying "Not tested on animals"? They're lying.

Everything put in commercial cosmetics (even the "organic" ones) has been tested on animals. The FDA mandates it. So how does The Body Shop and everyone else get away with their misleading statements? Well, technically they're telling the truth...they didn't actually hold a bunny still and apply mascara to its eyelashes. But all the chemicals that make up that mascara has at one time or another been tested on animals.

In my opinion it's a very dishonest marketing practice.

[Munchkin03]

You guys, I am so sad because of this. Ever since I was a little girl growing up on the Redneck Riviera, I loved Tammy Faye. This was a woman who didn't let some eye makeup get in the way of a good cry!

First Anna Nicole, and now Tammy Faye? What a year.

[Soliloquy]

Originally Posted by 33girl

That second link is very obviously a site to get you to buy a certain brand of "organic" cosmetics and toiletries. Hardly impartial.

The fourth link contains links to click on which get you back to...the second link.

"Organic" and "natural" does not mean safe or good for you. A dog is obviously a "natural" thing, but if you're allergic to dogs, it isn't good to be around one, is it? I bought some "natural" mascara from The Body Shop once and had a terrible reaction to it.

Don't buy the organic is good/chemicals are Satan hype. It's ridiculous.

Beat me to it. Thanks.

There are some reasonable inferences people can make, then there are unreasonable ones. This whole hijack just really rubbed me the wrong way. I mean to even suggest or "throw out the idea" that too much makeup can create toxins in one's body that can generate cancer is simply offensive. Or then again, maybe I'm just touchy about it because I'm a cancer survivor and I don't like the idea that because I wore make-up, I bought it upon myself. Maybe, Senusret, that is the reason I am being condescending towards a concept that literally makes no sense. I don't understand how logic can lead a person to infer that make-up weakened one's immune system enough to bring on colon cancer. I mean c'mon.. it's make-up!! MAKE-UP!!!! Millions of women wear it! Heck, maybe even billions. No reported cases of cancer causing blush yet, and with those kind of numbers using a product, it would have happened by now.

Also, Daemon, your logic of "too much of something" isn't a scientfic statement. There was a time when people thought that too much tuna fish could cause cancer. The only time "too much of something" effects people's health would be things like exposure to nuclear radiation, asbestos, and other scientifically proven harmful agents. Now if Ms. Faye had been exposed to an agent like that, and you had mentioned that might have been a contributing factor (yes, I can read thank you very much) to her death, you might be correct. Anyway, your links are not scholarly proof that provide you a basis to tell me in 10 years "I told you so."

Honey, I personally know that cervical cancer is also generated by causes other than HPV. I was just making a contrasting statement to demonstrate a point

[Senusret I]

Originally Posted by Soliloquy

Or then again, maybe I'm just touchy about it because I'm a cancer survivor and I don't like the idea that because I wore make-up, I bought it upon myself.

Dude, he never said that.


But earlier, you said:

Originally Posted by Soliloquy

Are you really naive enough to believe that make-up companies would be in business if their products were toxic?

Well hell, tobacco companies are still in business.

Look, far be it from me to be insensitive to a cancer survivor, but if it bothers you this much, then maybe you don't need to be in this discussion. There are several, if not plenty of people on this board and in this discussion who are cancer survivors or have been directly affected by it. And don't try to limit discussion because of your perception of whether people's opinions are scientific enough. Given the Tuskegee experiments, I have every right to be skeptical of any and everything related to science.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by Soliloquy

Beat me to it. Thanks.

There are some reasonable inferences people can make, then there are unreasonable ones. This whole hijack just really rubbed me the wrong way. I mean to even suggest or "throw out the idea" that too much makeup can create toxins in one's body that can generate cancer is simply offensive. Or then again, maybe I'm just touchy about it because I'm a cancer survivor and I don't like the idea that because I wore make-up, I bought it upon myself. Maybe, Senusret, that is the reason I am being condescending towards a concept that literally makes no sense. I don't understand how logic can lead a person to infer that make-up weakened one's immune system enough to bring on colon cancer. I mean c'mon.. it's make-up!! MAKE-UP!!!! Millions of women wear it! Heck, maybe even billions. No reported cases of cancer causing blush yet, and with those kind of numbers using a product, it would have happened by now.

Also, Daemon, your logic of "too much of something" isn't a scientfic statement. There was a time when people thought that too much tuna fish could cause cancer. The only time "too much of something" effects people's health would be things like exposure to nuclear radiation, asbestos, and other scientifically proven harmful agents. Now if Ms. Faye had been exposed to an agent like that, and you had mentioned that might have been a contributing factor (yes, I can read thank you very much) to her death, you might be correct. Anyway, your links are not scholarly proof that provide you a basis to tell me in 10 years "I told you so."

Honey, I personally know that cervical cancer is also generated by causes other than HPV. I was just making a contrasting statement to demonstrate a point

All those are good points but I never said anything to the tune of "scientific evidence states..." as a matter of fact....as I recall when I first brought it up...I asked if there were any experts on what I mentioned, please come forward.

Too much of something is good logic whether u like it or not...

If you drink too much alcohol u may get alcohol poisoning

You smoke too much you may get lung cancer.

You eat too much you may develop obesity or heart problems

You take too many drugs you may become addicted.

You do too much of ANYTHING there may be consequences are repercussions for whatever it is you do and I don't need a Ph. D. +1000 pages to prove that as scientific...it's called common sense.

The links weren't meant to be 100% proof...they did the same thing that I just did....stated that it's quite possible that exposure to too much makeup COULD BE toxic to your health.

Fact is, we may never know what brought on her cancer since her body has already been cremated but with everything else that she had going on (stress from running a highly visible TV ministry, stress from a divorce, stress from drug abuse.....shoot...just plain ol' stress....) she was BLESSED to live as long as she did!

[Taualumna]

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

All those stores and brands with signs and labels saying "Not tested on animals"? They're lying.

Everything put in commercial cosmetics (even the "organic" ones) has been tested on animals. The FDA mandates it. So how does The Body Shop and everyone else get away with their misleading statements? Well, technically they're telling the truth...they didn't actually hold a bunny still and apply mascara to its eyelashes. But all the chemicals that make up that mascara has at one time or another been tested on animals.

In my opinion it's a very dishonest marketing practice.

Yes and no. When, say, The Body Shop tells you that they don't test, it means that The Body Shop itself doesn't test. Companies DO make purchases from other companies that may or may not have tested.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by Senusret I

Dude, he never said that.


But earlier, you said:



Well hell, tobacco companies are still in business.

Look, far be it from me to be insensitive to a cancer survivor, but if it bothers you this much, then maybe you don't need to be in this discussion. There are several, if not plenty of people on this board and in this discussion who are cancer survivors or have been directly affected by it. And don't try to limit discussion because of your perception of whether people's opinions are scientific enough. Given the Tuskegee experiments, I have every right to be skeptical of any and everything related to science.

I agree. People have brought their own baggage to this thread and completely taken Daemon's posts either personally or completely out of context.

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

I agree. People have brought their own baggage to this thread and completely taken Daemon's posts either personally or completely out of context.

^^^^^ Thank you very much, kindly ^^^^^