None of the Green Oil range has been animal tested. The only animals we test on are you the rider. In the spirit of Anita Roddick, we are against animal testing.
it’s quite a bold claim that the product is not carcinogenic if it (or its components) have not been tested on animals! Whilst their lube might be non-hazardous (according to its own MSDS which described it as non flammable but then provides quite specific fire fighting instructions!). Some of their other products are not – including eg their Apple degreaser which is apparently only carcinogenic in Germany! Whilst that probably tells you more about their marketing and proof reading process it does highlight that sometimes wild claims about product safety are unwise. Eg the lube advises that if it comes into contact with skin you should wash it off with plenty of soap and water – which is presumably what people do with any lube, reducing the risk of exposure to any harmful ingredients. Oddly whilst described as non hazardous the labelling specifically says “DO NOT DRINK” and the safety sheet tells you how to treat accidental ingestion.
which is why I felt the need to respond to this:
I’ll play devil’s advocate.
IF the scientific research is true… Companies continuing to use carcinogenic ingredients in lube is pretty terrible, why shouldn’t a link be drawn?
There’s carcinogens all over the place, since we don’t drink or bathe in lube its risk may be low, whilst not all carcinogens are equally risky. In fact I suspect there is greater risk of exposure from cleaning fluids – which green oil’s comes with plenty of warning labels!
Maybe we’ve got our heads in the sand and it’s about time the science was brought to life with a very high profile (and yes very sad) case.
delighted if people post actual science – but since their product has a secret formula and no public safety testing data we are reliant on the manufacturer’s own assessment. IF something cycling related contributed to Chris’ condition then we should know, but he knows it almost certainly had nothing to do with the oil on his chain (which he probably didn’t even apply himself!). Suggesting it did would detract from other causes which might (but probably didn’t) contribute – like saddle design, nutritional supplements, training regimes, etc. I sell a product with some vaguely better eco claims is not science.
He’s not making light of Hoy’s situation, he’s calling those companies out and also the fact his company (and others) use non-carcinogenic ingredients.
i don’t think he’s making light of the situation, but he is attempting to exploit it for his own commercial gain..
