Lush has had some difficulty creating a line of baby products without doing animal testing - apparently it's really hard to make a no-tears formulation without being able to test it on actual eyes.
Huh. You'd think the basic science would be far along enough at this point that you could test that on people eyes (and that ultimately you'd have to anyway).
yes, but there is a vast difference between the standards for human testing and animal testing. In order to get to human testing stage, there are certain requirements that I suspect they are having trouble meeting without animal testing. Even if people volunteered to be tested, they couldn't do it.
I have Nutty's head!
It's okay. I kept a copy for myself.
That sounds dirty!
I did wash my hair this morning, though.
The geography quiz mocks me.
I feel like I should get points when I'm in the right country, even when I'm on the wrong side of the country. Brazil and China are VERY BIG.
Also big: Canada and Australia.
yes, but there is a vast difference between the standards for human testing and animal testing. In order to get to human testing stage, there are certain requirements that I suspect they are having trouble meeting without animal testing. Even if people volunteered to be tested, they couldn't do it.
I get that. And I believe it -- but its stupid that an actual substance, say, "no stingy 1" can't be accepted as safe at a certain level by virtue of the 40,000 products that its already in.
Traveller IQ is 93 - don't know whether that's bad or good. locked out of the high level though. by my crabby co-worker. pfah.
I just missed qualifying for level 11. Level 9 is when I started to be off on the countries.
Of course, most of that country knowledge comes from the Geography Challenge that someone linked to eons ago: [link]
ETA: Travel IQ 116
My travel IQ was 108 and I was locked out of level 10
