Does spending your money on animal free products really make a difference?

I know PETA and other organizations make lists available of products that are "vegan" or free or animal testing. If a person spends money on these products only, only buys animal free food, and essentially boycotts anything that's assciated with animal cruelty can a significant difference be made? How would a person figure out how their smart shopping is making a difference?

We're making a huge impact just by shifting our diet...


Tyson Foods posts 4Q loss By MARCUS KABEL, AP Business Writer
10 minutes ago



Tyson Foods Inc., the world's largest meat processor, on Monday reported a wider-than-expected loss in the fiscal fourth quarter, weighed by one-time charges and losses in the chicken and beef sectors.

ADVERTISEMENT

The Springdale, Ark.-based company forecast a return to profitability this fiscal year, however, after three straight quarters of losses.

"The best thing I can say about fiscal 2006 is, it's over," Richard L. Bond, president and chief executive officer, said in a statement.

Tyson said the loss for the quarter ended Sept. 30 was $56 million, or 17 cents per share, compared with a profit of $117 million, or 33 cents per share, during the same period a year earlier.

Results were hurt by charges of 6 cents per share related to tax and accounting changes and 4 cents per share related a previously announced cost-cutting program.

Tyson said in July it would cut $200 million in costs, including slashing 420 mainly managerial jobs and not filling 430 open positions in its total workforce of about 110,000. It also said it would focus on value-added products, international expansion and improving operational efficiencies.

Fourth quarter revenue was flat at about $6.5 billion in both periods.

Analysts polled by Thomson Financial expected a loss of 4 cents per share for the fourth quarter on revenue of $6.47 billion.

"For most of the year, we were plagued by supply and demand imbalance as well as export market disruptions in our chicken and beef segments," Bond said in a statement. "Despite some continuing problems in the protein sector, during the quarter our core business showed improvement and continued to strengthen."

Tyson said it expects fiscal 2007 earnings per share in a range of 50 cents to 80 cents.

Analysts' consensus estimate for fiscal 2007 earnings is 69 cents per share.

Its shares fell 8 cents to $14.27 in morning trading on the New York Stock Exchange.

Bond said he is "very confident" the company will be profitable again starting in the current quarter.

Tyson saw fourth quarter losses in three of its four segments 鈥?beef, chicken and prepared foods. Only the pork business, which accounted for 12 percent of sales, posted an operating profit, thanks to low prices for live animals.

The chicken and beef businesses were hurt by a glut of meat on the market, a problem that producers have faced all year.

Agricultural economists have blamed the issue on a range of factors, including shifting consumer diets, beef and chicken health scares overseas that reduced U.S. exports and overproduction after high market prices for animals in the past two years.

Tyson is the world's largest chicken producer and also the world's largest meat processing company. Tyson breeds its own chickens but gets other meat from independent producers.

It makes a huge difference. When you buy a cruelty free or "no animal testing" product, you are making a difference because your money is going to companies that use animal free methods. Therefore, you are supporting the cruelty free market. If you but products that test on animals, you are supporting the market for cruelty products.

It is basically just economics and business practice....companies won't change unless they see a desire in the market....if people are showing that they prefer cruelty free products over cruel products, that will encourage them to change.

This change has already happened in many companies, and everyday, companies are slowly making a moving towards more humane ways of creating products. You can find evidence on this if you do some internet searching.

not at all...

I don't think there's any way to "see" the difference you make... and you can't really look at it that way. The difference is made by you AND the thousands of other people not buying this stuff. By spreading the word about the cruelties and such (much like PETA does... only maybe a little more tactfully!) we can only hope that more and more people will refuse to buy products tested on animals, etc.

The difference really isn't made by one person... but each person that chooses to contribute to the cause (I don't mean financially) helps... It's like voting. One vote doesn't matter... but as we saw with this most recent election... when we all get out there and vote... things change. :)

Really, there isn't a way to know if this has lessened until it has actually been stopped. No, ONE person doing this couldn't -really- make a difference on a general level, but that conscious step is helping in the long run because it's possible for them to influence others in the long run.

Supply and Demand...

If we demand animal free products, some one will supply them... If there's enough of us demanding them, then that first some one will get rich and others will start following suit...

By not buying products with animals in them, the reduce the demand for those items, so the producers have to lower the prices to get the products to sell, and keep from losing thier investments... They'll respond by making less of the products to keep the prices and profits per unit up, and thus we've cause fewer animal products to be produced by default...

So, to answer your question... Yes... Every little bit does count, so keep it up.

I think the concept is good and noble, but don't really believe it can make a true difference. Most corporations are going to continue with their current methods of production, and profits are their only motivation. But surely continue, since it's a good cause and maybe years from now, this will be a non issue.

It is hard to determine how much of a difference actually gets made. Although products may not have been tested on animals or have animal byproducts in them they were still produced in a factory that spews out pollutants that most likely kill some animals somewhere. Bottom line, it is hard not to leave some type of imprint on the environment.