MAC Cosmetics Is No Longer Cruelty-Free
Is MAC Cosmetics no longer cruelty-free? For a long time, one of the most well-known cruelty-free brands has been MAC Cosmetics. It was also a common rumor in the vegan community that all of their products are also vegan. Sadly, things have changed and MAC Cosmetics is no longer cruelty-free.
Known for their bright and bold collections as well as their wide range of classic shades, MAC seems to have something to offer to everyone. This is why they have been such a popular and iconic brand over the years. They have always heavily marketed that they are cruelty-free as well. Sadly, the MAC Cosmetics cruelty-free stance has changed. Keep reading for more details.
Is MAC Cosmetics no longer cruelty-free?
MAC Cosmetics is not cruelty-free.
MAC Cosmetics is owned by Estee Lauder. This cosmetics giant has openly tested on animals for a long time and has recently come under fire for conducting secret tests on cosmetics in China. It was this controversy that sparked me to check in with MAC about their status as a cruelty-free company who offers vegan options. By some standards, MAC being owned by Estee Lauder is enough to not consider them cruelty-free. However, I’ve always found it best to support the cruelty-free brands and let people make their own decisions about the parent companies.
Sadly, in my recent response from MAC, I noticed a change that affects their status as a cruelty-free company. In order for Logical Harmony to promote a company as cruelty-free, I want to make sure that there is no testing on animals at any point during the production of the products or in the materials used to create the products. This includes by the company itself or third parties that may provide ingredients. If a company can’t give a straight response to those questions, I don’t endorse them and I don’t feature them on Logical Harmony.
Normally I post the entire email response from companies, but this email from MAC has a disclosure that prohibits me from doing so without permission. I have emailed asking for permission to copy the entire email but have received no reply. So I am only going to re-post one sentence here, and it’s the only sentence that matters.
M.A.C has a longstanding policy to not test on animals, nor ask others to test on our behalf, except when required by law.
“Except when required by law” is a phrase often used by brands who are selling their products in markets, such as China, that do require animal testing to sell there. Since these tests are done by a 3rd party, the brands often still try to claim to be cruelty-free. This means that MAC, long known for being cruelty-free, does test on animals. I emailed them back asking for clarification on what the terms for “required by law” are but have not received a reply. I also noticed that while PETA has endorsed them in the past, MAC has been removed from their list of companies who don’t test on animals. It’s not on the list of companies who do test, but it being removed from the don’t test list says a lot.
Because of this response, Logical Harmony will no longer be featuring any MAC Cosmetics products. All previous posts featuring MAC will be deleted or have the brand removed from the post. This just shows how important it is to support the vegan cosmetic companies out there. Cruelty-free may mean no testing on animals, but there are animal ingredients used in the production that do cause harm to animals to produce. “Cruelty-free” is far from actually being free from cruelty to animals. Cruelty-free products are featured on Logical Harmony as a step for people who are concerned about becoming animal-friendly but aren’t ready to transition to vegan cosmetics.
So what can you do?
- If you are concerned about buying cruelty-free cosmetics, please no longer purchase MAC items.
- If you are a cruelty-free blogger, please don’t feature MAC on your blog anymore. Please do a post about their change in testing policies and spread the word to your readers!
- Promote this post on social networking sites to let your friends know!
- Let your friends who use MAC know about the change!
- I urge you to contact MAC yourself and ask them to change their stance on animal testing!
I also urge you all to consider trying cruelty-free brands. There are so many out there who produce amazing products without any harm to animals!
Cheap Mac Makeup Wholesale,Mac Makeup and Mac Cosmetics save 60% off,Discount Mac Cosmetics wholesale online now!
Ever since MAC ceased to be cruelty-free, I ceased to be their customer/addict. Prior to that, I LOVED their stuff, and waited with bated breath for the next collection, bought back-ups of LE items, etc.
BUT I won’t anymore. Will NOT.
Makeup just isn’t that important.
Besides, I’ve found *terrific* alternatives, often for a fraction of the price.
For example, many of Milani’s lipsticks are Every. Bit. As. Good. As. MAC’S. They don’t have the shade range that MAC does, but I can deal.
This is extremely disappointing! I WAS a huge fan of Mac makeup 🙁
Same here, Zoe, but I dropped them, along with Bobbi Brown, Prescriptives, Origins, and Clinique, several years ago, and I don’t miss them AT ALL!
Milani lipstick and glosses are EVERY BIT AS GOOD AS MAC PRODUCTS, and are not only cruelty-free but a fraction of the cost.
As a hard core gazillion percent VEGAN… I was devastated by this news, AND the news of Urban Decay being purchased by diabolical L’Oreal… (although apparently UD is still keeping its PETA approval… I hope PETA removes it eventually)… I have $500 worth of UD products and returned them ALL to Sephora, and then sold my remaining Sephora GCs at 50% (figured I’d just give up on Sephora too)….
I recently was told about the cosmetic company called “100% Pure” – none of their products have even been tested on animals because nothing is artificial – their most processed ingredient is beeswax (not vegan, but it’s not in every product…) – NO DAIRY or insect stuff… the colours are made from fruits…
Just an FYI! I ordered from them, I am praying they are as good as these seem because I so desperately want to support an independent, cruelty-free, vegan(ish) brand with my $$$ . …our money is the most powerful way we show our values!!
XOXO Good luck friends…
This is lame that they changed like. who would change just out of the blue like that!!!!!!!!!!
You know what? The go-to response everyone seems to have right now is that ‘China is an emerging market, MAC is simply trying to penetrate this lucrative market and that requires a change in their cruelty-free status in order to comply with Chinese law’. HOWEVER, what that tells me, is that MAC is now owned by a group of executives who are prepared to waive MAC’s previous staunchly cruelty-free stance ‘tested on models, not on animals’ in order to penetrate the lucrative chinese market. Great for business, but to the loyal MAC consumer? SELL OUTS. Big business is NOT what comes to mind when I think of the artistic nature and free thinking policies of MAC. Clearly the brand is prepared to forgo its roots, in order to make a better business decision, blantantly ignoring its previous strong stance on animal rights and animal testing. What does this tell me about the company? They have become just another impersonal corporate conglomerate. I no longer respect MAC. I will not be buying MAC until their policies change or they actively put pressure on the chinese government to change their archaic rules and cease business in China until they do. (A note: as another blogger so aptly put it, MAC is a large enough company to put pressure on the chinese government to change its existing rules, and fast) I do not care about the MAC/estee lauder executives bottom line, I care about a company that makes a strong stand on the welfare of animals and is anti-animal testing. This also makes me question how serious MAC originally were regarding their cruelty-free policy? Was that just to attract all sectors of the western market before adjusting policies to move into China? It smacks of insincerity.
Hi,
Do you have an email template that we can use when contacting companies to see if their products are vegan/cruelty free?
China requires products sold in there country to be tested on animals. China has a growing population of consumers and is the next county set to be an economic powerhouse. The shift you see in animal testing is becouse of the growing demand in China. The pressure needs to be put on China to change its laws. It breaks my heart to see animals tested on, most of them are Begales becouse they are such a loving kind bread. I know first hand, we have two in our family.
Are you talking about bagels and breads? This is a cosmetics discussion, not baking.
You are reading way too much into who is on what list and who is not on what list. If they said that they are not testing on animals, then they are not testing on animals. Every company out there has to include “except when required by law” in their policies whether they want to or not. Some simply may not tell you that they have that clause, but it’s there.
Hi Ana,
Unfortunately, that isn’t the case when it comes to labeling with animal testing. By saying that they test when required by law, they are saying that they do test on animals. Many companies do not test on animals at all and chose to not sell in the very very few markets that require animal testing by law. Only companies that sell in these markets have to include it in their statement. Companies that do not sell their products in these markets do not need to include this statement because they are not testing their products on animals.
The awful truth is this: there are no truly cruelty free cosmetics. That’s if you approach the cruelty-free issue with a very totalitarian view (i.e. you don’t want any of the ingredients to be tested at any point either). Every single cosmetic ingredient has been tested on animals at some point. It has to have been, to be deemed safe by the international laws that govern cosmetics.
So many companies have adopted a policy where they at least don’t test their finished products on animals and this is a good thing. If you can accept that the ingredients have been tested (by someone, somewhere, at some point), then it makes sense to support the companies who don’t test their finished products on animals. Unfortunately some companies still do that – and here’s where the ones trading in China are in an unfortunate position; if they choose to trade there, then they will have to comply to local laws.
Furthermore, the REACH laws in the EU now affect the entire cosmetic industry. Many of the main cosmetic ingredients (colour pigments, base materials, etc) are manufactured only by a small handful of global companies who, if they wish to trade in the EU, have to comply with REACH. This new bureaucratic nightmare is just the latest in many years of requiring some kind of testing for safety – and unfortunately the world still relies on animals to determine acute toxisity and many other safety factors. Many scientists don’t feel that animal tests results can actually be accurately extrapolated onto human beings, so the main problem with animal tests is that they don’t really “prove safety” in humans.
So if you wish to continue using any cosmetics, it’s probably a good idea to support the companies who a) don’t test their finished producs on animals, b) give money towards reasearch into alternatives.
If you want to be TRULY cruelty-free, you need to make your own cosmetics at home from food products (vegetable oils, beetroot dye, corn statch, etc) , or buy from very small craft-type manufacturers who only use these types of ingredients.
Hi Nukapai!
While you are right in that, at some point in history, the majority of ingredients were tested on animals at some point in history. However, it’s not necessary to continue to test these same ingredients on animals like so many brands do during the production process. Companies that now claim to not test the finished product on animals are likely testing during the production or using ingredients that are being tested on animals. This is in the present time frame and not decades ago when all ingredients needed to be tested on animals.
Needed? Do you believe that all of these ingredients should at one time have been tested on animals? If so, do you then also believe that any brand new ingredient should be tested on animals today?
I’ve just heard this very disappointing news about MAC! I am by no means a vegan or hardcore animal rights activist, but at least for vanity products I believe animal testing is completely unnecessary. I’ve been a loyal user for 12+ years, however I will no longer continue to purchase as of now.
I am a former LUSH employee, and while the company has its faults, at least it has the conviction and common sense NOT to test on animals. I’ve been purchasing bath and body products from LUSH as long as I have from MAC, because of this policy.
It’s such a shame that companies are going back to animal testing. Totally disheartening. There are very few alternatives on the market now for cruelty-free cosmetics. I will do my best to support the few holdouts and try to encourage change with my dollars.
I’ve written to MAC customer service to let them know why I’m no longer purchasing their products. Sadly, it probably won’t make one whit of difference but there you go.