Ethical investing conflict

From ANIMAL PEOPLE, November 1995:

Brad Pappas of the Denver-based Rocky Mountain
Humane Investing Corporation disputes the San Franciscobased
Working Assets Capital Management claim that “We
do not invest in companies that use animals to test personal
care products or otherwise treat animals in an inhumane manner.”
Pappas argues that nine firms approved by Working
Assets should fail a humane screen because they use large
numbers of animals in testing: Alza Corp., Biomet, Church
& Dwight, Cincinnati Milacron, Idexx Labs, Melville
Corp., Merck, Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing, and
Pitney Bowes. Pappas also objects to Working Assets’ okay
of American Express, which sells fur by mail-order.
Counters Working Assets social research department
manager Ben Corson, “We consider the type of product
for which testing is performed.” If a company doesn’t test
personal care products, “Working Assets considers the treatment
of the animals used in testing. We look for violations of
the Animal Welfare Act or other well-documented cases of
inhumane treatment.” As to American Express, he said, fur
sales “represent a miniscule amount of its overall revenues.”