I agree. I'd never use fabreze. I don't trust proctor and gamble one bit.
bonnie kalmbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think some animals may have truly had reactions to Febreze.
All individuals are different and that goes for pets too. I think
Proctor and Gamble spent a pile of money trying to get people to
think of the possible dangers of their product as an "urban myth",
and they still test on animals so I don't give P&G much credence.
Why not use a safer product like Nature's Miracle?
Bonnie
At 11:22 AM 10/11/02 -0400, you wrote:
>Someone or more than one someone perpetrated a big scare, mostly via the
>internet, on Febreze when it first came out, and the mfr spent loads of
>money proving it didn't harm animals, and eventually even gave free samples
>in the kitty and doggy packs that we rescues get from a promotional company.
> I ended up with hundreds of sample-size Febrezes and I and my friends have
>used more than enough o! f it to know it has hasn't had any visible effect on
>any of our cats (and I have 100 cats . . . ). Of course, I wouldn't spray
>them with it, or let them sit on anything I'd just used it on, any more than
>I'd let them sit on furniture I'd just polished or a floor I'd just cleaned
>that hadn't dried yet, etc., etc. But I don't think there's much wrong with
>Febreze.
"Animals are God's creatures, not human property, nor
utilities, nor resources, nor commodities, but precious beings
in God's sight". - Rev. Andrew Linzey, Oxford University
Do you Yahoo!?
Faith Hill - Exclusive Performances, Videos, & more
faith.yahoo.com
