Skip to Main Content

Animal Testing Breaks Hearts

Written by PETA | July 17, 2009

Here’s your first look at PETA’s newest campaign: “Animal Testing Breaks Hearts.”

We first launched “Animal Testing Breaks Hearts” as a youth-oriented peta2 campaign, but the reaction from everyone, regardless of age, was “Awww!

So below are pictures of our first “Big PETA” “Animal Testing Breaks Hearts” campaign event. We promise more to come. So who knows? You just might be greeted by our giant, loveable rat on your next trip to the pharmacy. He’s traversing the U.S. and letting everyone who crosses his path know that reducing animal suffering is as easy as refusing to buy products from companies that test on animals.


Our giant rat won the hearts of North Carolina residents—who could support an industry that harms such cute animals?
Animal Testing Breaks Hearts
To make it easy for shoppers, we distributed free shopping guides that list companies that don’t test on animals.
Animal Testing Breaks Hearts
Personal-care and household products are force-fed to animals and smeared into animals’ eyes during tests.
Animal Testing Breaks Hearts
Tons of locals, including an Aveda Institute student, urged shoppers to buy only cruelty-free products.
Animal Testing Breaks Hearts


So next time you head to the store to stock up on cosmetics and household products, arm yourself with PETA’s free shopping guide and don’t go breakin’ any hearts.

Written by Liz Graffeo

Commenting is closed.
  • Lisa R says:

    Let me see. I drive a family car that I try to keep in good shape and safe working condition after all I ride this car often and so do my children. A great sale on car tires comes around and I read “these tires have been tested in numerous bicycles without any malfuctions or any wear buy today!!” mmm would I go and pick a set for my car?. Need I say more?

  • miafarrah says:

    TomYou would not say that if they were testing product on you would you? I have seen on t.v. for realprisoners that have developed a real closeness to stray animals in the prison yard and have fell in love with themreally because that’s all they had in life and learned to appreciate them.Can’t say that for all of them though! Anyhowwhat is the difference between harming and mutilating a animal for cleaning solutions ect..and for self profit and monetary gain so they can maintain a high lifestyle? Than to go out on the street or where ever and kill a animal and break the lawthey would get charged with animal cruelty.But it’s ok for them to get a grant and be allowed to kill animals in laboratoriesyeah it really makes no sense to me what so ever.Many many tests are done needlesslyas i said for profitso mr Tom what can you say about companies such as the very rich Proctor Gamble where they tests for cosmetic reasons?It’s so ridiculous to think people are so much “higher” than animals to take and use them as they choose and have their way with them.Get off your throne you aholes!

  • John Smith says:

    It is great that people are maiking this choice.

  • Helen Dighton says:

    Rev. Meg Schramm is an example to us all. If we want things for our own use we should all be prepared to be tested on.

  • Rev. Meg Schramm says:

    I am not in jail not a rapist or a murderer. I am however a voluntary human subject helping test a new diabetes medication. I thought I would put my beliefs into action. If anyone else wants to do this all you have to do is look for advertisments for test subjects…sometimes you will here requests for subjects on the radio also. I am very well aware some medications are tested on animals before they are tested on humans…I wish it were not that way and I would be willing to be a test subject even if I were the first being it was given to.

  • Shawna Flavell says:

    Tom Actually about 90 percent of products that pass animal trials fail in humans. Our genetic makeup is so different from that of animals that testing on them is unnecessary cruelty. Nonanimal testing alternatives such as human clinical and epidemiological studies autopsy reports cadaverbased experiments and computer simulators are faster more reliable and more humane than animal tests.

  • Derek, MD says:

    Tom Unfortunately animal testing is woefully inadequate in predicting safety to human patients and in fact many of the results are misleading to boot. Animal testing of any kind is cruel inhumane and remarkably UNessential.

  • Rachel Miller says:

    I hate this! It makes me feel horrible that there is labs testing on animals this very moment. I dont understand how any of the workers dont see what they are doing wrong how can they look in the eye’s of these animals and continue to work on them. They dont have a heart and all i can say is what goes around comes around. This needs to change there has to be other ways!!

  • janet says:

    I agree testing should be done on rapists murders and convicts on death row..that would be cruel inhuman..and against their rights???…it’s about time these tax sucking convicts did something to help society…what about animal rights?? stop testing on innocent helpless…they were not created to be tourtured by humans..

  • JUDI says:


  • Gloria says:

    I know this might sound harsh but I think they should perform cosmetic testing on convicted murderers and rapists. THOSE are creatures that have proven “not human” and have done horrible things to people…What did a little bunny ever do??? Nothing. It’s inhumane to test on people??? But it’s humane to murder someone?? Hmmm… Society has it all backwards.

  • Tom says:

    While I agree that animals shouldn’t be used to test items such as cosmetics some animal testing is essential. It is impossible to use computer models to ascertain the real world effects of new medications or or medical procedures. therefore animal testing is essential to ensure the safety of the human population at large.

  • ashlyn says:

    Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww. That is soooo cute! It seems like a great way 4 people 2 understand animal testing.

  • Trojan says:

    Nice one!!

  • Ural User says:

    If the world magically banned all animal testing then who would taste test pet food? Pet medications? What about those? Just because tapeworms have feelings does not mean that I want to let them have their parasitic ways on my cat. If we can’t get rid of testing on animals then can we at least push to test more on humans? If the product is meant for humans then it’s logical to replace Guinea pigs with humans.

  • Nate P. says:

    If you guys wanna see a real inhuman thing that they are doing to cats in this small town in Pa that I live near go to this website Just read what one of the towns councilmen said its horrible. They are trapping cats and hunting them because they say there is too many. Mind you this is a small ruarl mt. town. Please help them they cant help themselves…

  • Brien Comerford says:

    Any person with a semblance of intelligence knows that animal testing is cruel and ineffectual. Research should be exclusively performed on human tissues human stem cells and human skin cells.

  • Penny says:

    The chimp being held down in the cage by the intern doing whatever he was doing while the chimpstruggling for his life arms flayling crying out for help..he was trying to save himself and he couldn’t. The intern would not give up..the chimp powerless was’s heartwrenching..IT HAS TO STOP!!

  • Rev. Meg Schramm says:

    I never understood what good testing products such as cosmetics on animals does. If it’s not supposed to get in your eyes on your skin in your mouth or down your throat it will probably hurt or kill you. How smart do you have to be to figure that out?