Nurture/Mad Oils Same Color?

[dibbles]

First off, I hope I'm posting in the right section.

Awhile ago I ran across a thread (I think it was maybe posted by Newbie) showing micas from Nurture and Mad Oils that are the same. I have searched and can't find it. There were photos of color comparisons.

While I don't mind having larger quantities of my favorite colors, it is disappointing when I order what I think is a new color to try, and it turns out to be one I already have from the other supplier.

So, I thought I'd share the micas I have found to be alike, and if anyone else knows of other like colors between these two vendors, I know I would appreciate the information. Also, feel free to correct me if you disagree with my opinion.

Nurture Khaki Yellow = Mad Oils 3 Olive Martini
Nurture Red Vibrance = Mad Oils Spicy Red Tomato
Nurture Apple Green = Mad Oils Maniacle Pea
Nurture Raspberry Red = Mad Oils Voo Doo
Nurture Mango Tango = Mad Oils Tangerine Dream

ETA: I just saw that Nurture's Spring Green is OOS and discontinued! Any comparable to that at MO?

 

[snappyllama]

Carrie at Nurture mentioned that some of her colors are the same as Mad Oils.

I think NSS Teal (older version) was the same as MO Peacock.

NSS Spring Green looks like MO Lorne Green from the pictures. I have the Lorne Green, but not the Spring green to compare in person though.

 

[dibbles]

Thanks Snappy. I was thinking Loren Green was pretty close too.

 

[Cosmo]

Hi all! We did used to carry the same colors, but don't anymore. We dropped the supplier completely because of ethical (mainly animal testing) concerns. We went through a long process of matching similar colors with spectrophotometry. I can say our colors are now better and deeper in hue, meaning they have more color concentration and you can use less. We did have to discontinue some colors that we couldn't match closely like Khaki yellow, Spring green, Turquoise and Teal. We felt it was the right thing to do.

 

[snappyllama]

Hi all! We did used to carry the same colors, but don't anymore. We dropped the supplier completely because of ethical (mainly animal testing) concerns. We went through a long process of matching similar colors with spectrophotometry. I can say our colors are now better and deeper in hue, meaning they have more color concentration and you can use less. We did have to discontinue some colors that we couldn't match closely like Khaki yellow, Spring green, Turquoise and Teal. We felt it was the right thing to do.

Thanks Carrie, that's good to know!

 

[dibbles]

Hi all! We did used to carry the same colors, but don't anymore. We dropped the supplier completely because of ethical (mainly animal testing) concerns. We went through a long process of matching similar colors with spectrophotometry. I can say our colors are now better and deeper in hue, meaning they have more color concentration and you can use less. We did have to discontinue some colors that we couldn't match closely like Khaki yellow, Spring green, Turquoise and Teal. We felt it was the right thing to do.

Thanks for the reasoning Carrie. I am glad to know that animal testing was the reason behind discontinuing colors, and support your decision 100%.

 

[TeresaT]

Hi all! We did used to carry the same colors, but don't anymore. We dropped the supplier completely because of ethical (mainly animal testing) concerns. We went through a long process of matching similar colors with spectrophotometry. I can say our colors are now better and deeper in hue, meaning they have more color concentration and you can use less. We did have to discontinue some colors that we couldn't match closely like Khaki yellow, Spring green, Turquoise and Teal. We felt it was the right thing to do.

Thanks for this information. It's good to know that some big businesses still put ethics ahead of the almighty dollar. I'm not an activist by any stretch of the imagination; however, I never understood the logic behind force-feeding a rat 1,000 times its weight in a questioned substance per day for 100 days to determine if there are any ill effects. Well freakin' DUH!! Apples are good for you; but you certainly don't want to eat 10 pounds of apples a day for 20 years. In my mind, that's pretty much the same thing.

Saying a substance is a "carcinogenic" because a laboratory rat got cancer by being force fed or injected with that substance at thousands of times more than any human would consume or use in a lifetime is not very logical to me. Not in the 21st Century when there are far more modern and more accurate ways of determining the effects of "stuff" on human tissues. But I guess rats, mice, dogs and rabbits are much cheaper and far more renewable than the modern technology.

I'm just sick of seeing all of the so called "naturalists" that google a product or ingredient, see one poorly researched (and poorly written) article by some fear-mongerer, and decide that individual is THE expert on the subject and toss perfectly safe and effective products to the wayside because it caused cancer in a rat when fed at 1752 g/kg body weight for 100 days and the recommended dosage for humans is .5 mg/kg body weight. I can see how a person could be afraid that taking 45 mg of said product would cause detrimental effects to their health. Nothing screams "gonna get cancer" like 0.00158733 of an ounce of a product. :think:

Sorry, everyone. I never meant to turn this into a rant.

 

[Cosmo]

Thank you all for the support! I can't tell you how much I appreciate it!

Teresa, I agree with you. The extent of testing can be ridiculous! Seriously, the thought of testing done on my dog really upsets me. I have a chubby loyal dachshund that I love like a child! I love animals, and have 8 rescues (aka mini zoo). Sometimes I can relate to animals more than people. So animal testing....just no.