LUSH excuses continue

We know LUSH have confirmed that their Sodium Lauryl Sulphate (SLS), Stearic Acid and Sodium Stearate are the only ingredients they cannot fully trace the sources for and so could be palm oil derivatives.

I asked:

I appreciate you say you’re working on getting information from your suppliers, but you said that in 2009 when you released the palm oil free soap base. If after 6 years they still can’t tell you what’s in their products, why don’t you find a supplier who will? Otherwise, without knowing what’s in it, and where it’s from, there’s more than a small risk it’s from conflict palm oil. Why not just find a supplier who fits with your ethical stance and will guarantee source?

LUSH’s response was:

At the last manager’s meeting, we had a palm oil update. Truth be told we could have eradicated ANY trace of potential palm in our products – as the suppliers exist… BUT they test on animals. So if it wasn’t for our strict, no animal testing policy, we’d be palm free by now.

This poses two questions for me.

  1. If companies such as Method are claiming their SLS is palm oil free, does that mean their SLS is tested on animals?
  2. If Method isn’t testing on animals, is LUSH just peddling more lies?

So confused!

For those who haven’t read the history of my palm oil enquiries with LUSH, check out these posts.




Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s