Wednesday, 13 March 2013

Europe bans animal testing of cosmetics

Animal testing of cosmetics is now banned in Europe! This is great news and certainly something worth celebrating. However, there is still some way to go if all animal testing is to be ended. The current ban doesn't extend to ingredients testing, which falls under a piece of outdated legislation called REACH. 

In principle, REACH is a good piece of legislation. REACH rules tell a company exactly which tests they need to do for each ingredient – it lists the non-animal tests that must be used and then the animal tests to be used if there is no alternative. The rules were supposed to be updated regularly to add any new non-animal alternatives as they are developed. It was hoped that eventually this would mean that no animal tests were ever needed, as new non-animal tests are developed over time.

The bad news is REACH has not been updated since it was written in 2007. Since then many non-animal alternatives have been developed and also some animal test refinements (which mean that fewer animals need to be used and killed). By not adding these to the REACH testing guidelines, REACH are breaking their own rules – and many animals (perhaps even millions) are dying in tests because companies cannot use the non-animal alternatives until the legislation lists them as suitable for use.

You can find out more here


Lush (makers of cruelty free handmade cosmetics) have created a short animation explaining REACH and why it mattters.
As ever, red text contains hyperlinks that take you to other webpages where you can find out more. 

11 comments:

The Weaver of Grass said...

No animal testing is justified Juliet in my opinion. We have no right.

Christina said...

Signed and shared. We are past this and it is time to give up all animal testing.

Ms Sparrow said...

It's barbaric that testing on live animals still exists!

P. M. Doolan said...

i must admit to being confused - there is a difference between cosmetics and cosmetics ingredients??

Sallie (FullTime-Life) said...

This is good news -- or at least the beginning of it!

Crafty Green Poet said...

PM Doolan - I think it's finished products (eg an eyeshadow) vs the ingredients that go into that finished product. It is confusing though and the recent media reports haven't helped, because often they tend to focus on only one element.

Draffin Bears said...

Hi Juliet,

Thanks for sharing this and I agree with you animal testing should be banned.
Also love your winter wonderland photos, hope you manage to stay warm

hugs
Carolyn

Larry said...

That's good news. It doesn't seem right to use animals for testing but I was never sure what the alternatives were.I just googled to learn that there are methods to test products that work just as well as using animals. In some cases testing is done when it's not even necessary. It just comes down to money.

bunnits said...

a good thing

Rabbits' Guy said...

It is an endless struggle of vigilance ...

Dartford Warbler said...

Very good news. It has taken so many years to get to this.