Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Deception in advertisements
Advertising manipulation
Advertising manipulation or information
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Deception in advertisements
Canada’s Labeling Laws enforce fur farm manufacturers to state when fur is being used in merchandise. However, the type of fur is not required. The United States and most other western countries have banned sales of cat and dog fur. However, Canada does not have limitations on fur imports or exports, excluding endangered species. China’s fur farm employers often mislabel cat and dog fur as “rabbit”, “raccoon”, or any other species to make them more sellable when sending them to other countries. This mislabeling leads its way into countries that do not allow it, and in result, they are getting false representation.
From 2000 to 2008, the United States and most other western countries such as Australia, Europe, and Switzerland have all banned the import, export, and sales of dog and cat fur. However, it is still legal in Canada. Canada’s Textile and Labeling Laws demand fur farm manufacturers to state when fur is being used in merchandise. However, is not required to state the type of fur. Canada’s government refuses to change the current legislation. Even with the banning in other countries, there was still a loophole in the federal law. Any fur garments that have a price value lower than $150 are allowed to be unlabeled. Therefore, products that have any type of fur trim or detail (merchandise that comes from China or Canada) can easily get into countries that do not allow it, “leaving consumers in the dark as to whether they are buying faux or animal fur” the Humane Society of the United States claimed. This so-called loophole is cheating the system and giving these countries exactly what they did not want. These Labeling Laws were not working and needed to be acted on to improve the banning and false labeling before it got wor...
... middle of paper ...
...ered, “If the garments don’t sell within six months send me an email and I can send labels that say mink.”
Before the laws were strengthened requiring all fur merchandise be labeled correctly, mislabeling was occurring frequently. Consumers in countries that banned certain furs were unknowingly purchasing items with false marketing.
If they continue to enforce the requirements for Truth in Fur Labeling Act, then no more dog or cat fur will make it into our country. If other countries adopt these laws as well, then maybe China will be forced to stop using these animals for fur.
The Truth in Fur Labeling Act does its purpose in forbidding the import, export, and sales of cat and dog fur products. It also prohibits any mislabeled merchandise from being imported and sold. These laws and acts improve our industry by keeping them humane and truthful for our consumers.
Chang, Emily. "Inside the Cat and Dog Meat Market in China." CNN. Cable News Network, 09 Mar. 2010. Web. 04 Mar. 2014
The practice of using misleading labelling that still complies with law has been done for some time. Still, legislation has been moving forward, starting in December 2002 when nutrition labelling was enforced in the Food and Drugs Regulations, which has since been amended in 2005 (HealthCanada). Whilst the government is taking a proactive stance towards labelling (partly due to consumer lobby groups), companies in the food industry are still able to produce misleading and/or uninformative labelling through simple manipulation of the English language and interpretation of law. Below, current legislation will be discussed, followed by company practices and the organic food market.
One objection Norcross states in his essay is that “perhaps most consumers are unaware of the treatment of animals, before they appear in neatly wrapped packages on supermarket s...
Sadly according to the Humane Society International (HSI) article About Animal Testing “in the United states alone around 26 million animals are tested each year for medical and commercial research” (HSI) even though animal testing is not required to ensure that the cosmetic being sold are safe. From those 26 million animals being tested most are not protected by the federal Animal Welfare Act. The animal welfare act does not include birds, rats and mice bred for research, and it doesn’t include cold-blooded animals. Animals testing should be banned because the animals tested suffer immensely, also animal tested is unethical, and because there are many alternatives.
... or register for their use; pet owners, agriculture use, and retail pet stores are not under the control of the federal law (Explanation). Also under the AWA, there are regulations on how animals can enter the chain of commerce to eliminate the use of stolen animals (Explanation). Research facilities have to abide by legal restrictions on the imposition if pain during experiments; they must create an animal care
In many parts of the world, animals are being used in laboratories are still suffering and dying to test cosmetics. In
The strongest argument against the dog meat industry centers on the treatment of the dogs that are often killed by ?beating, strangling, [and] boiling? instead of more humane methods such as electrocution. Unnecessary cruelty against animals is universally considered wrong, and is in many cases illegal, and that is what makes this argument effective. Saletan addresses this argument logically, with the simple fact that in the interest of humane treatment of dogs ?South Korean lawmakers are proposing to legalize, license, and regulate the industry.? This simple fact exposes a fundamental hypocrisy within the opposing viewpoint. Saletan argues that it is the same activists who base their arguments on ending cruelty against dogs who are trying to keep new, more humane methods from being adopted. The activists condemn and deplore cruel ...
United States. House of Representatives. Committee on Agriculture. “Puppy Uniform Protection and Safety Act.” Thomas Library of Congress. Government Publication Office. 27 Feb. 2013. Web. 14 Nov. 2013
‘It’s impossible to sell animal stories in the USA’ ” (11 Famous, November 18, 2011).
5. 1994: Calvin Klein becomes the first popular clothing designer that says he won’t use any fur in his design, after PETA supporters’ protests and meeting with PETA representatives.
Simple household items such as lotions, shampoos and cosmetics aren’t very expensive and are within reach of the public, yet the public is not knowledgeable of the fact that the products that they use everyday are put through a series of tests which involve the use of harmless animals. Several large commercial companies do not make products for animals; they decide that using these harmless creatures for the testing of their products, could be harmful to animals, still go forward with these types of procedures on an everyday basis. Although these animals are unable to defend themselves or show signs of any form of consent for the near death procedures, these companies find this as a cheap solution for testing their products before placing them on the market. There are many other alternatives to testing animals, such as embryonic stem cell research. Animal experimentation is wrong and it can be avoided, but companies which are greedy for money choose not to.
...products on animals. The conflict is that even though the public is strongly against testing on animals, manufacturers are required by trade standards and consumer protection laws to show that their merchandise is not toxic and dangerous to public health, especially when it is in large quantities for shipping (“Testing Cosmetics on Animals” pars. 3).
America focuses heavily on its livestock and crops earning us a major role in global trade as a farming nation. Unfortunately this has led to some poor choices in treatment of our animals. Many farmers who believe in animal rights say that it started back when farmers only tended to fewer animals, “Ownership of farm animals became concentrated in fewer hands, and flocks and herds grew larger. As a result, the individuality of animals was lost to their owners and they began receding from most people's everyday life” (Namit 29). When people lost their connection to the animals that provided their food, the quality of the animal's lives began to dramatically decrease. Consumers constantly pushed farmers to their limits with high quotas. To keep up with demands agriculturalists turned to some unorthodox practices to keep costs low and still maintain their annual quotas; “To raise efficiency and cut costs, farm animals began to be engineered for abnormally rapid weight gain, fed unnatu...
Cook, Kate and David Bowles. " Growing Pains: The Developing Relationship of Animal Welfare Standards and the World Trade Rules. " Review of European Community & International Environmental Law 19.2 (2010): 227-238. Academic Search Premier -. EBSCO. Web.
The exotic pet trade is a vast industry and is one of the largest sources of criminal earnings. These animals are smuggled and sold in stores, auctions, or on the internet. Many animals do not even survive the long journey from their habitats; and the ones that do usually suffer ...