The VegNews Animal Testing Legislation Controversy: A Response to the Response

[NR]

Whether you’re a vegan, vegetarian, animal-rights activist, or combination thereof, you got there because you asked questions. You questioned yourself about why you loved some animals and ate others, and you questioned others about why humankind uses animals for clothing, for medical testing, or for entertainment. Questioning the status quo is exactly why many of us are the people we are today—and we should never let that quality go, especially questioning those who would hold a place of influence in the vegan/vegetarian and animal-rights community. This is why I was compelled to question VegNews’ judgment and journalistic standards with their Skin Deep article from the June/August 2011 issue.

In my article, “VegNews Magazine Piece Endorses Animal Testing Legislation,” I questioned Jennifer Chen’s work—of which lacked research, credibility, and shockingly, gave a voice to legislation efforts that would cost hundreds of thousands of animal lives to satisfy the re-testing requirements of H.R. 2359, the “Safe Cosmetics Act.” It’s important that you know more about what drove me to write the article, and the facts that clearly demonstrate the lack of effort and honesty in Chen’s Skin Deep piece. If you wrote VegNews asking for a response to my article, you probably got something like this in reply,

----- Original Message -----
From: Elizabeth Castoria
Date: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 1:06 pm
Subject: Letter to VegNews
To: ………………………

Hi ……,

Thanks so much for your note, and we're more than happy to offer
a response. Of course, VegNews does not support animal testing.
The author of the article on toxic cosmetics, a VegNews staff
member and accomplished journalist, researched this story
tirelessly and did an excellent job reporting on the lack of
regulation in the personal care industry.

One sentence in the article mentions the Environmental Working
Group, and it is not an endorsement. We simply state that the
group conducted a survey rating commercial sunscreens, and
included many cruelty-free brands in that survey. That's all.
Feel free to read the article here, starting on page 80:

http://veg.gy/niYME

Should you have any further questions, please let us know!

Most sincerely,
Elizabeth

I removed the recipient’s name, as a reader forwarded the email (thank you!) Castoria’s response surprised me, especially the claim that we’ve had no correspondence, or that I didn’t respond to their efforts to answer my questions on Facebook. Castoria was the first person to write back to me regarding my concerns over the Skin Deep article...

Continue on at This Dish is Veg: The VegNews Animal Testing Legislation Controversy: A Response to t....