"Unilever is against animal testing and funds research into alternatives." Nicely worded. Just a shame it doesn't mean they don't actually test (or have never tested) on animals.
Companies that claim to be against it may not do it on their own premises, but it doesn't mean they don't pay some company to do it on their behalf. Similarly, they may not test a finished product on animals, but you can bet the individual ingredients have been poured down some animals neck for your benefit. A lot of companies use this method to make it sound like they don't test on animals at all, or to back up claims that they are "against it". If you're going to boycott P&G over it, then you should do the same for Unilever, L'Oreal, Garnier, Reckitt Benckiser, SC Johnson, Henkel... the list is endless! Even the biggest pet food makers are guilty of it.
You will be hard pushed to find a multinational of Unilever or P&G's size that isn't involved in animal testing one way or another. I think P&G gets a lot of attention for it just because they are so big. They aren't really any worse than the rest.
