In March 2020, Ethical Consumer searched the Colgate website for information on the company’s policy on animal testing. Colgate's Product Safety Research Policy stated:
"In 1999, we declared a voluntary moratorium on all animal testing of our adult Personal Care Products and the ingredients used in these products. This moratorium remains in effect worldwide.

"Currently, over 99 percent of internal requests for safety assessment of our products are addressed by using available databases and non-animal alternatives. Animal testing is only conducted where specifically required by regulatory agencies or where alternative testing methods are unavailable to ensure the safety of our products. In such limited instances, the tests are conducted only at contract testing facilities that meet both government standards and the more rigorous requirements established by Colgate with input from animal welfare groups."

Colgate-Palmolive was on PETA’s “Working for Regulatory Change” list, which recognizes companies that test on animals only when required by law, that are completely transparent with PETA about which animal tests they conduct and why, and that are actively working to promote development, validation, and acceptance of non-animal methods.

It supported the ban on animal testing in India which came into force in November 2014.

However, because the company policy did not rule out the use of animal testing for all its products the company received Ethical Consumer's worst rating for Animal Testing and lost a whole mark in this category.

Reference:

www.colgatepalmolive.com/en-us/core-values/our-policies/ingredient-safety (9 March 2020)

Hill's Pet Nutrition's website viewed March 2020 contained a policy statement titled 'Hill's Commitment to Animal Welfare'. The statement made a number of positive provisions, such as, "We only use non-invasive, humane research methods" and "We do not participate in studies that jeopardise the health of dogs and cats". "No study will be performed on dogs or cats that requires euthanasia."
The policy also noted that the company strove to find ways to reduce dependence on animal research. However, it did conduct studies in its own Hill’s Pet Nutrition Centre. Therefore Hills received a worst rating and lost a whole mark under Animal Testing.

Reference:

https://www.hillspet.co.uk/ (9 March 2020)

In March 2020, Ethical Consumer searched the databases of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and found that Tom's of Maine was as a cruelty-free company. The company's website viewed and it bore the Cruelty Free logo as well.

Overall, the company was awarded Ethical Consumer's best rating for its animal testing policy.

Reference:

https://www.tomsofmaine.com/products (9 March 2020)

Hill's website (www.hillspet.com) was viewed March 2020. The company sold pet food containing meat assumed to be produced through factory farming because it was not labelled organic or free range. The company therefore lost a whole mark under Animal Rights and a whole mark under Factory Farming.

Reference:

https://www.hillspet.co.uk/ (9 March 2020)

In March 2020, Ethical Consumer searched the Colgate-Palmolive company website and found the following statement, "Tallow is a key ingredient in bar soap production and is a cattle byproduct. Colgate sources tallow from suppliers in North America, Latin America and Europe"

As tallow is a slaughterhouse by-product the company lost half a mark in the Animal Rights category.

Reference:

https://www.colgatepalmolive.com/en-us/core-values/sustainability (9 March 2020)