The Beauty Brains have discussed animal testing and cosmetics on a few occasions. Here they explained how all ingredients on cosmetics were at one time animal tested and how companies can claim not to test on animals when they indirectly do. A number of people have expressed skepticism about those claims. Well, according to this story, here is an anti-animal testing group from the UK that gets it right. Director Dr. Dan Lyons from the group, Uncaged, correctly points out that

Consumers are being misled by the beauty companies, who claim they don’t test their products - but they still test the ingredients, or use a third party to do the testing for them

Why some companies think it is ok to mislead people and claim they are better than other companies because they “don’t test on animals” is a mystery to this brain in training.

–Mid Brain

If you believed everything you heard from animal rights activist groups, you might think that the cosmetic industry could easily stop testing on animals. They have suggested that there are dozens of alternatives to animal testing.

Well, the scientists in the cosmetic industry and readers of the Beauty Brains know that this hasn’t been true. The issue of animal testing of cosmetics is not so simple. In fact, until just recently there were no approved alternatives to animal testing. Instead, companies that wanted to claim “cruelty free” have relied on using formulas that are composed of compounds that had previously been tested on animals or farming the dirty work out to their raw material suppliers.

Animal Testing Alternative?

But there’s some good news on this front. The FDA, EPA, and CPSC have all given approval to two animal alternative testing methods for detecting eye damage. The two new methods include the bovine corneal opacity and permeability assay and the isolated chicken eye assay. These are the first approved animal alternatives that the cosmetic industry can use as proof that their products are safe.

This seems like great news because there is now a real alternative to sacrificing lab animals (like bunny rabbits) for testing whether cosmetics will cause irritation. On the other hand, the tests still involve using animal tissue. The difference is that the tissues are from animals that were previously slaughtered for things like steaks and chicken nuggets.

Beauty Brains bottom line

The incidence of animal testing in the cosmetic industry has been dramatically reduced in the last few decades and it looks to continue to get more rare. Thankfully, scientists are working on alternatives to make this a non-issue. Hopefully, that time comes soon.

Here’s a topic that’s near and dear to the hearts of many of our Beauty Brainiacs: Animal testing!

According to Engadget, the National Institute of Health and the Environmental Protection Agency are joining forces in a 5 year research program to replace the live animals that are used in cosmetic testing with “high-speed automated screening robots.”

There are three very cool things about this story. First, fewer animal tests will be needed in the future. Second, there will be more high speed robots in the future. (Yay robots!) The third, and by far the cutest part of this story, is the picture that accompanies it. It’s a Flikr image of the most adorable rabbit in the universe. Come on, have you EVER seen a rabbit cuter than this one??? (No, Sarah Bellum, we’re not talking about your kind of Rabbit!)

Seriously though, the Beauty Brains are thrilled that more research is being done on alternatives to animal testing.

–Mid Brain

There are sites all over the internet suggesting that animal testing is an abomination and should be halted immediately. They make all sorts of claims that implying that science is a lot further along than it really is.

For example, this site called “Cosmetic Testing Facts” says…

“…the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require animal testing for cosmetics, and alternative testing methods are widely available and lead to more reliable results.”

Are alternatives really better?

But according to the scientists who are actually working on the problem, finding alternatives for animal testing is proving difficult. We’ve previously written about 5 new methods for reducing animal testing, but these tests just can’t completely replace animal testing. For example, there are no alternatives to animal testing for determining whether allergens are absorbed through the lungs.

So, if you are creating a product that will be sprayed from an aerosol, they have to do animal testing to prove that it’s safe.

Also, interesting in this article is that the scientists conclude

“…the end goal of developing tests without animals remains distant as the process of understanding how chemicals interact with human tissue, developing testing alternatives for new chemicals and then validating them is both slow and complex.”

This is certainly different than the claims made by anti-animal testing sites.

Does the FDA require animal testing?

We see this claim fairly frequently. But is it true? According to the FDA, “no but yes.” No, the Food, Drug and Cosmetic act does not specifically require animal testing to establish the safety of cosmetics. However, it does require that you only sell products that are proven to be safe. Unfortunately, the only data that the FDA accepts as proof that your product is safe is …animal testing!

So, while it’s true they don’t specifically say you have to do animal tests to prove safety, it’s the only data they accept as proof.

If the FDA didn’t require animal testing of cosmetics, no one would continue to do it.

The Cruelty Free Cosmetic Con

These days, you’ll find hundreds of companies, big and small, touting their products as being “cruelty free” or “not tested on animals”. But the truth is, this is not the whole truth. While it is perfectly legal to make claims that your whole product is not tested on animals (if it’s not), these same companies are using raw materials that were tested on animals by the raw material suppliers. No, the products weren’t tested on animals, but all the component materials were.

Beauty Brains bottom line

We here at the Beauty Brains can’t wait for the day when cosmetics and personal care products are no longer tested on animals. Hopefully, researchers will find useful alternatives. It’s just incredibly troubling that many companies are out there misleading consumers, tricking them into believing some products are more “ethical” than others because they aren’t tested on animals. All the products you use were at some point tested on animals.

Is he bold or is he crazy? Here’s an Oxford-based neurosurgeon who is publicly calling for more animal testing. He’s even advocating the use of animal testing for cosmetics! This happened during a speech in front of a rally organized by Pro-Test, a group that supports animal testing for research. I wonder how this story would’ve played out if it happened in the United States.

Does animal testing upset YOU? Or do you think the testing prevents human suffering? Leave a comment and let the rest of the Beauty Brains community know what you think.

Animal testing of cosmetics is a controversial topic and frequent source of questions for the Beauty Brains. We were thrilled to report recently on five newly developed test methods that will reduce the amount of animal testing done by the beauty industry. We applaud the industry for taking steps in the right direction!

But while animal testing in cosmetics and pharmaceuticals gets a lot of attention, similar testing done by the beverage industry has gone without much notice. Until now. The New York Times just announced that Coke and Pepsi have agreed to curb their animal testing after pressure from PETA. I didn’t realize the extent of soft drink testing on animals until I read the Times account. They gave two examples that seemed particularly ourtrageous: A Coca-Cola scientist worked on a study, financed by Nutrasweet, that involved cutting open the faces of chimpanzees to test nerve impulses reactions to sweeteners. And perhaps even more appalling is the example from Roll International, makers of Pom Wonderful pomegranate juice, who had been testing their juice to see if it could relieve artificially induced erectile dysfunction in rabbits.

The Beauty Brains are anxious to see the development of more validated, non-animal test methods for cosmetics AND other industries!

Nicky wants to know: What’s the latest scoop on animal testing? I’ve read your earlier posts on testing cosmetics on animals but I’m still worried that cosmetic companies abuse too many bunnies and such. The Right Brain replies:

Nicky, your question could not have come at a better time. We just read a press release from the Scientific Advisory Committee of the European Center for the Validation of Alternative Methods (also known as ECVAM) who announced that there are 5 new methods of testing skin and eye irritation that previously had to be done on rabbits. That means that products like hand soaps, face creams, and make up (among many, many others) can now be safely formulated and tested with out harming a single hair on a hare.

But it gets better: one test mimics human skin so well that it will COMPLETELY replace testing on rabbits. Two of the other tests can identify severe eye irritants which will eliminate the need for live rabbit eye test. And, another new test for skin allergies will cut animal testing in half, saving up to 240,000 mice. All these test methods came about as a result of joint work between the US and the European Union. Thanks guys!!

The Beauty Brains are thrilled to see that effective, scientifically valid alternatives to animal testing are becoming increasingly popular in the cosmetic industry. And that means that in the near future Nicky won’t have to wonder if any furry little creatures gave their lives to test her favorite eyeshadow, lipgloss or blush.

Earlier in the year we discussed on The Beauty Brains the recent buy out of The Body Shop by cosmetic giant L’Oreal. Well, six months later the founder is still defending herself against claims of being a sell-out. Company found Anita Roddick continues to hold the belief that she did the right thing and that L’Oreal is an honorable company.

The main issue, L’Oreal continues to test their cosmetic products on animals. The Body Shop had a strong anti-animal testing reputation, so it would seem that the two companies couldn’t mix. But this is business. Money is ultimately the most important for all companies. Anita says she ultimately sold the company because she didn’t want to die rich. She preferred to do something constructive with the money. Well, we’ll keep an eye on Anita and see what constructive thing she does with the hundreds of millions of dollars she received from the sale.

This paradox is what happens when a company tries to claim it is “morally superior” to the rest of the industry. The truth is The Body Shop claimed they didn’t test on animals. The only reason they could say this is because they used ingredients that other people had tested on animals. As we’ve said before, companies that say they don’t test on animals are not telling you the truth. Animal testing is still being done in this industry and will be until there are suitable alternatives. Cosmetic companies can not legally sell products that are not safe. The only way they can prove they are safe is to have data from animal testing to show they are.

Right now, no matter what anyone has told you, there are no acceptable alternatives to some animal testing. If you are really ethically bothered by animal testing you better stop using cosmetics or start making your own.

Sandy asks…Can you please elaborate more about how no ethical companies would sell a product without testing on animals? How, then, can some companies label themselves as animal-testing-free? Wouldn’t these same animal-testing-free companies then be unethical or even illegal to misrepresent their position?

And the Left Brain chimes in…
Ah Sandy, you pose some excellent questions! Let`s see if we can adequately respond.

Animal Testing Cosmetics

First to clarify, we didn’t say no ethical company would sell a product without testing on animals we said There are no ethical companies that can sell products that haven’t been tested!

The reason is because cosmetic companies are legally required through trade and consumer protection laws to prove their products are not toxic or dangerous. Specific rules vary from country to country, but in places like the U.S., Japan, and most of the EU safety standards often require animal testing to prove a product’s safety. As alternatives to animal testing are developed such as computer modeling, or cell cultures, the laws are being changed, but this is a slow process. In most cases these alternatives are not accepted as adequate proof so there is no legally acceptable form of safety testing except on animals.

Animal Testing or Not?

Companies can say they haven’t tested their products on animals because they probably haven’t. Unscrupulous companies will contract out the work so they don`t actually test anything themselves. They use the data of the testing house & claim that they don`t test on animals. Those that really don`t test on animals can say so by using the following strategies.

1. They only use ingredients that have already been tested on animals. In the cosmetic business, if all the component ingredients are safe, you generally don`t have to test the mixtures. They rely on their suppliers to do the dirty work and then they can say they don`t test on animals.

2. They don’t use combinations of chemicals that haven’t been animal tested .

3. They do patch testing on human volunteers to make sure the formulas are safe.

But the bottom line is, the ingredients have been tested on animals even if the particular cosmetic haven’t. The companies that tout animal testing free positions exist off the backs of companies who’ve done all the testing before them.

Look at a company who is one of the most vocal advocates against animal testing, The Body Shop (at least they were until L’Oreal bought them out). Here is an ingredient list from one of their high quality shampoo formulas.

Water, Sodium Cocoyl Isethionate, Sodium Methyl Cocoyl Taurate, Stearic Acid, Honey, Coconut Acid, Glycerin, Acrylates/Palmeth-25 Acrylate Copoymer, Bertholletia Excelsa (Brazil) Nut Oil, Sodium Chloride, Sodium Isothionate, Olea Europea (Olive) Fruit Oil, Phenethyl Dimethicone, Phenoxyethanol, Disodium Lauryl Sulfosuccinate, Zea Mays (Corn) Starch, Cetearyl Alcohol, Benzyl Alcohol, Fragrance, Lanolin, Polyquaternium-10, Methylparaben, Aminomethyl Propanol, Cocamidopropyl Betaine, Hydrogenated Castor Oil, Hydrolysed Wheat Protein, PG-Propyl Silanetriol, Polyquaternium-7, Propylparaben, Bertothelia Excelsa (Brazil) Nut Amino Acids, Wheat Amino Acids, Disodium EDTA, Tocopherol, Potassium Sorbate, Butylparaben, Ethylparaben, Isobutylparaben, Titanium Dioxide

You can bet that nearly every one of these ingredients has at one time been tested on an animal. But it’s also probably true that THEY didn’t test THIS FORMULA on any animals so they aren’t breaking any advertising laws when they say their products aren’t tested on animals.. Ethical? Not any more or less than any other cosmetic company. Illegal? Not technically. Disingenuous? You decide that for yourself. But remember, this is the beauty business. You can’t believe everything you read on the bottle.

Beauty Brains bottom line

Finally, animal testing is not a thing that cosmetic companies want to do. It is expensive, morally contentious, and terrible for a company’s public image. The incidence of testing is certainly much less than in the past.

For more information, check out this entry from the Wikipedia.