You’ve probably heard by now that the European Union has banned animal testing for cosmetics. That’s right as of March 11, 2013, it is illegal to sell products that have been tested on animals or products that are formulated with ingredients that have been tested on animals.
The only real impact on the beauty companies is that they won’t be able to use any NEW raw materials that have been tested on animals. This law doesn’t retroactively ban ingredients (or products for that matter) that were animal tested years ago – those are grandfathered in and can still be sold. So while this could theoretically stifle innovation it’s not going to cause anyone’s existing businesses to grind to a halt.
Why no animal testing is good for you
It’s exciting to think of all the animals that will be spared the excruciating process of animal testing – no one likes to see animals suffer unnecessarily.
Why no animal testing is bad for you
While the EU law makes life safer for animals it makes it less safe for you (at least a little bit.) That’s because the law prohibits specific tests for “carcinogenicity, photoallergy, cutaneous allergy, toxicokinetics, reprotoxicity, teratogenesis, toxicity[—]sub chronic and chronic[—]and photomutagenesis. These are important tests because they’re needed to determine whether the products are safe for human use and there are no non-animal alternatives at this time.”
In other words, when this law is in effect companies will not be able to use the most accurate type of testing to ensure their new products are safe for you to use.
This won’t be an issue for most products but it will be for those innovations that require cutting edge chemistry. So, rather than market products that haven’t been proven safe, companies will probably chose not to market them. Which means you won’t be able to use the latest and greatest beauty breakthroughs.
Eventually, alternative tests will be developed so all in all the testing ban is probably a good thing but we wanted to make sure you’re aware of both sides of the story.
Image credit: http://farm4.staticflickr.com
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
OMG LOOK A BABY MONKEY AND A WHITE BIRDIE SQUEE!
Innovationwise, looks like Asia will go ahead.
With all of the technological breakthroughs that always seem to be occurring, it is surprising to me that they still have not found any other way to test these types of products.
Maybe using animals was just an easy and inexpensive way out. At least now they will be forced to look into different alternatives. I bet that they will find a solution quickly, as they always seem to whenever money is involved.
@Judith: Actually, animal testing is very expensive so I don’t think this is cost driven. Suppliers would LOVE to use cheaper non-animal alternatives where they exist. It’s just that these tests haven’t been created yet for certain parameters, as discussed in the article.
What about human trials? Isn’t that what the legislation is essentially supporting? I don’t think anyone wants NO testing before product releases to the general public, but instead of testing on animals, do the tests directly on people (ie. volunteers/paid testers), like with drug studies.
Or at least, that’s how I’ve always looked at the argument on animal testing.
Testing on humans is already done for some irritations tests. (They’re called Repeat Insult Patch Tests, or RIPT for short.) However, to my knowledge, there are no tests done on humans to evaluate if a cosmetic ingredient is toxic, carcinogenic, or likely to cause birth defects.
Maybe this is why many European companies, like L’oréal, are moving their R & D centers to Asia and USA. Example:
http://www.asianscientist.com/tech-pharma/loreal-advanced-research-center-in-astar-biopolis-singapore-2012/
And I’m wondering how you can find alternative tests without using animals – since you need animals to compare with the alternative tests…
Yeah, I’ve got to agree with you here. Animal testing isn’t something I support, and I try my best to avoid products that have been tested on animals.
Honestly, I am all for innovation but also for finding new cheaper non animal alternatives, no one WANTS to test on animals but they also don’t want to buy an unsafe product.
It looks like a lot of women in Europe will be ordering the newest products from the United States and Asia now. I wonder if banning animal testing for new drugs is next – technically it is the same principle – animal testing is either ethical or it is not. And then I wonder how many people are going to lose their lives because no carcinogenicity studies were done.