EU Set to Ban Animal Testing for Cosmetics Forever

EU Set to Ban Animal Testing for Cosmetics Forever

www.adnkronos.com

Campaign pioneers The Body Shop and Cruelty Free International celebrate after 20 years of activism After over 20 years of campaigning, ethical beauty retailer The Body Shop and non-profit organisation Cruelty Free International are finally celebrating the end to animal testing for cosmetics in Europe with the anticipated announcement that the import and sale of animal tested cosmetic products and ingredients is to be banned in the EU on 11 th March 2013.

(visit the link for the full news article)

This is massive news!

Cruelty Free International Chief Executive, Michelle Thew said: "This is truly an historic event and the culmination of over 20 years of campaigning. Now we will apply our determination and vision on a global stage to ensure that the rest of the world follows this lead."

If this doesn't put a smile on your face I don't know what will! You don't have to be a hippy to appreciate that testing cosmetics on animals is cruel and unethical. Even testing drugs on animals is unethical in my opinion but at least doing that is actually for a good cause (for the most part..) not just straight up vanity as with the cosmetics industry.

Great stuff!

www.adnkronos.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

reply to post by TechUnique


Good. I think testing product is very old fashioned anyway. They have the technology now where they can grow human skin in a lab and test it that way. I worked for a company that specializes in cosmetics and skin care and they showed us the video during training. I don't understand why all companies do not do it this way. Leave the animals alone.

Originally posted by skepticconwatcher
reply to post by TechUnique

 

Good. I think testing product is very old fashioned anyway. They have the technology now where they can grow human skin in a lab and test it that way. I worked for a company that specializes in cosmetics and skin care and they showed us the video during training. I don't understand why all companies do not do it this way. Leave the animals alone.

They most likely do not do it that way because it would be much cheaper to test on animals. Any unethical practice on a company's part tends to be down to money

Oh well they'll HAVE to start getting with the times. Hopefully the rest of the world will follow suit. This truly is unprecedented!

reply to post by TechUnique


I can't wait to see how those who see the EU as the devil incarnate will interpret this one....

All I can say is, no matter what the reason (and I believe it to be public pressure), it is a very welcome move.

Hopefully this means they will switch to testing on humans as it is cheaper and so many humans could really use the help.

Woo Hoo! It's about time! This is huge news! It is literally world changing. Anyone who says otherwise has no clue.

Now, we have to find out what China says about this, because animal testing for cosmetics is mandatory there, which is why people made such a stink about Urban Decay trying to sell there last year. UD said they were trying to sell there to let China know how bad animal testing is, but fans put up such a fight that UD eventually backed down, realizing that putting animals at risk to try to save animals was not going to help them.

Currently, both Lâncome and Estée Lauder, and all the companies that fall under them, sell in both Europe and China. That means that this new law is a conflict of interest for them. It's possible that these French-based cosmetic corporate giants will have to move elsewhere, and vegan cosmetic companies, such as Urban Decay, will take over popularity there. Get ready to pay through the nose for your favorite vegan brands.

This also means that the theatrical and film industry will no longer be able to access their preferred brand, MAC, which is a subsidiary of Estée Lauder. In other words, theatre and film will either sue and cause further economic collapse in Europe, or these industries will fall with the cosmetic monstrosities, because they are extreme brand snobs.

I hope so. Revelon stopped testing in the 90's. It would be so good to have cruetly free products available instead of having to hunt them down.

Maybe I'm just dumb but I never understood how they test cosmetics on animals.

They don't need to feed them the cosmetics : they aren't required to be non-toxic orally.

What could they ever put that is new that could suddenly be bad : They must have a pretty big list of what works/what doesnt, whats dangerous/whats not.

Are the animals abused when they suffer the evil consequences of wearing skin lotions, mascara and shampoo?
: my dogs and cats usually don't like to take their bath but they get used to it.

Why would they need to test in absurd, deadly and evil ways products that are made to "enhance" beauty?

I mean, I love animals and I want their full happiness but I don't see whats so wrong with animal testing for cosmetics. Cancer/bacteria/virus experiments on animals are much more evil yet, all we see is that we shoudn't be abusing animal for COSMETICS testing.

I really don't get it, someone enlighten me on why the testing practices done on animal for cosmetics are ban worthy enough?

reply to post by theMediator


Because when they do these tests they rub these cosmetics into the animals eyes, mouth, throat, ears, possibly even their genitals. When products are in early stages there are many chemicals that could possibly cause irritation, inflamation, boils, ulcers, blindness, deafness, possibly even death.

It's a cruel practice and if you don't see it that way then it sucks to be you.

Yes, this is good news.

As a woman who wears cosmetics, I think the cosmetic industry is out of control. How many many more colors or formulas of eyeshadow do we really need? There has been plenty of testing on the chemicals they now use, so how about just limit yourself to producing product with know ingredients? How hard can it be?

The concept of what makes a woman beautiful in today's society really bothers me. The focus on the perfection of physical beauty needs to come down a few notches anyway. In reality, the latest shade of eye shadow is not going to do all that much anyway.

Just.... Yay! YAY!! This is the best news yet in 2013, thanks for the awesome news Tech

I've actually been waiting around 25 years for this to happen. When I was about 10 I went around the local village with a petition against animal testing for cosmetics. After I got a few hundred signatures I sent it off to the local MP, who duly sent it off to the European Commission in Brussels. And although I got a response back from Brussels, it was just a photocopied letter full of legal jargon that not only could the 10 year old me not understand but my parents were at a loss to explain it to me aswell...

If I had thought back that it would take 25 years for this to happen, I would have cried.... But better late than never

S&F

Originally posted by theMediator
Maybe I'm just dumb but I never understood how they test cosmetics on animals.

They don't need to feed them the cosmetics : they aren't required to be non-toxic orally.

What could they ever put that is new that could suddenly be bad : They must have a pretty big list of what works/what doesnt, whats dangerous/whats not.

Are the animals abused when they suffer the evil consequences of wearing skin lotions, mascara and shampoo?
: my dogs and cats usually don't like to take their bath but they get used to it.

Why would they need to test in absurd, deadly and evil ways products that are made to "enhance" beauty?

I mean, I love animals and I want their full happiness but I don't see whats so wrong with animal testing for cosmetics. Cancer/bacteria/virus experiments on animals are much more evil yet, all we see is that we shoudn't be abusing animal for COSMETICS testing.

I really don't get it, someone enlighten me on why the testing practices done on animal for cosmetics are ban worthy enough?

They take the products and put them in the animals eyes - purposely - to test just how bad a reaction a human might have. They do make the animals eat the products as well. The products contain a number of things that, if digested, would be carcinogens. Chemical reactions from mixtures also burns the fur and skin of the animals.

The difference between testing on cosmetics and for medical purposes is that cosmetics testing is not needed because, like you said, they have a list of what works and what doesn't, plus they have alternatives and other ways to test chemical reactions. Furthermore, cosmetics are not needed if they are not for medical use, like CoverFX is (although that brand still doesn't test on animals). Medical testing is fine because they can save people's lives, and sometimes the lives of other non-human animals. Testing cosmetics, not so much.

Here's the info you need to know about animal testing for consumer products:
www.aavs.org...
Please, educate yourself. These companies purposely do things they know will injure those poor rabbits. It's sad and sickening. Rabbits are the sweetest animals on the planet, are extremely smart and compassionate - I speak from experience.

More info:
www.leapingbunny.org...
www.crueltyfreeinternational.org...

List of cruelty-free cosmetics:
www.mybeautybunny.com...

Proud to support cruelty free!