Browsing Tag

eu ban

Beauty & Cosmetics

Campaigners Condemn Industry’s Legal Bid to Weaken EU Cosmetics Animal Testing Ban

Campaigners Condemn Industry’s Legal Bid to Weaken EU Cosmetics Animal Testing Ban

There is breaking news in the potential changes to the EU ban on animal testing! On November 25, 2014 Logical Harmony posted about about how an Industry Bid Could Overturn the EU Cosmetics Animal Testing Ban. In the most recent update from Humane Society International, that bid has been approved to go on to the European Court. The bid is seeking to allow EU cosmetics companies to use results from new animal testing conducted in non-EU countries to meet non-EU regulations. This has major implications for animal testing and would greatly weaken the current animal testing ban in the EU.


#BeCrueltyFree Campaigners Condemn Industry’s ‘Greedy’ Legal Bid to Weaken EU Cosmetics Animal Testing Ban

Legal action is betrayal of EU consumers, says Humane Society International

LONDON – (12 Dec. 2014) Animal protection campaigners Humane Society International are concerned that the High Court today decided not to dismiss a legal bid by ingredient suppliers to the cosmetics industry to undermine the EU’s historic cosmetics animal testing ban. The legal action, which is now referred to the Euoropean Court of Justice, could now take two years to resolve, and if ultimately successful could risk once again condemning rabbits and other animals to painful eye, skin and force-feeding tests for ingredients used in cosmetics.

Humane Society International’s #BeCrueltyFree campaign team was at the High Court for the judgement. #BeCrueltyFree is the world’s leading initiative for a global end to animal testing for cosmetics. The high-profile campaign – which has the backing of stars such as Sir Paul McCartney and Leona Lewis – was instrumental in securing implementation of the EU ban on sales of animal-tested cosmetics on 11 March 2013, and culminated with a rabbit flash-mob outside the European Commission in Brussels to present nearly half a million petition signatures.

The High Court action was brought by the European Federation for Cosmetic Ingredients, a trade association representing more than 100 specialty chemical producers who supply ingredients to cosmetics manufacturers. EFfCI claimed that when new animal testing is carried out in non-EU countries to meet non-EU regulations, cosmetics companies should be allowed to use those animal test results to develop or sell cosmetics in Europe, even if the animal testing was done after the EU ban came into force. Today, the judge ruled that EFfCI should be able to take its claim to the European Court – whose ultimate decision will have effect across the European Union.

If ultimately successful at the ECJ, EFfCI’s claim could destroy the EU ban because it would effectively allow a company to test its cosmetics ingredients on animals outside the EU for non-EU regulatory purposes, and still use and sell that ingredient in cosmetics within the EU market.

Susie Wilks, HSI’s #BeCrueltyFree Policy Advisor, said from the High Court: “The industry’s legal action could be a potential disaster for animal welfare and is a betrayal of the clearly expressed desire by EU consumers to end cruel and needless animal testing for cosmetics no matter where in the world that animal testing is taking place. EFfCI’s case would undermine both the spirit and the letter of the EU ban, effectively allowing companies to continue testing cosmetics on animals abroad, and importing them back into the EU. We hope the ECJ will see fit to reject this case and find in favour of a strong and comprehensive ban.  

“Whilst the rest of the world looks to the EU’s historic test ban as a pioneering example of animal-friendly regulation that promotes modern science and safeguards consumer safety, industry has taken this greedy and self-serving legal case that could condemn animals to suffering simply so that EFfCI can sell more cosmetics ingredients to its customers. Testing cosmetics on animals is morally wrong and scientifically unnecessary; innovative new beauty products using existing ingredients can be created without new animal testing, and it is clear that the future of safety regulation lies in adoption of more human-relevant non animal tests.. So the industry should be ashamed that it is attempting to turn the clock back on a world-leading law that says an animal’s life is worth more than a new face cream. ”

It is unknown whether EFfCI was acting alone, or whether its member chemical or cosmetics companies benefiting from the anonymity of their trade association membership are behind the legal challenge. EFfCI’s Associate Members include the UK’s BACS Personal Care Group representing around 120 members including Marks & Spencer and The Co-operative Group – both certified as cruelty-free by the international Leaping Bunny standard.

HSI’s Susie Wilks said: “As this legal action has been fronted by a trade association, it’s impossible to know which companies are really behind it. If cruelty-free company associate members were unaware that their trade association is attempting to undermine the EU’s cosmetics animal testing ban, we would expect them to be very alarmed indeed and make their objections known.”

HSI estimates that between 100,000 – 200,000 rabbits, guinea pigs, mice and other animals suffer each year in cosmetics tests globally. These involve rabbits being restrained and having chemicals dripped in their eyes, guinea pigs having raw chemicals applied to their shaved skin, and rodents having chemicals pumped directly into their stomach in huge and even lethal doses. Such animal testing, and the sale of cosmetics so tested, is now outlawed throughout the 28 countries of the EU, EFTA countries, Israel and India. #BeCrueltyFree campaigning has also resulted in legislative proposals for similar bans in Australia, Brazil, New Zealand, Taiwan and the United States.

Facts

  • #BeCrueltyFree is the largest campaign in the world to end cosmetics animal testing, supported by stars such as Leona Lewis, Rick Gervais and Melanie C
  • More than 1 million #BeCrueltyFree pledges have been signed so far for a worldwide end to cosmetics cruelty
  • There are more than 600 cosmetics companies certified as cruelty-free under the international Leaping Bunny scheme
  • An estimated 8,000 or more cosmetic ingredients are already available and in widespread global use. Companies can manufacture cosmetics without animal testing by combining existing ingredients with histories of safe use — for which no new testing is required — with state-of-the-art non-animal tests
  • An ever-growing number of non-animal tests are available and accepted by regulatory authorities worldwide, including the human reconstructed skin models EpiDerm™ and EPISKIN™ for skin irritation, the Fluroescein Leakage test for eye irritation, and the 3T3 Neutral Red Uptake test for sunlight-induced phototoxicity.
Beauty & Cosmetics, Hair Care, Nail Care, Skin Care

Industry Bid Could Overturn EU Cosmetics Animal Testing Ban

Industry Bid Could Overturn EU Cosmetics Animal Testing Ban

When I received this update from Humane Society International, I was completely shocked by what I was reading. If the EFfCI gets what they want, EU cosmetic companies can use the results from new animal testing in their ingredients. This is a big step back from the current EU ban on animal testing. I try to not share updates from organizations too often but felt that this one was too important to not post.


Campaigners Await High Court Decision on Industry Bid to Overturn EU Cosmetics Animal Testing Ban 

(24 Nov. 2014) At the High Court today, animal protection group Humane Society International condemned an attempt by EFfCI, ingredient suppliers to the cosmetics industry, to undermine the EU’s historic cosmetics animal testing ban. The Court has deferred its judgment, expected in a few weeks.

HSI’s #BeCrueltyFree campaign is the world’s leading initiative for a global end to animal testing for cosmetics, which was instrumental in securing implementation of the EU ban on sales of animal-tested cosmetics on 11 March 2013. The campaigners held a rabbit flash-mob outside the European Commission in Brussels to present nearly half a million petition signatures. #BeCrueltyFree is backed by stars such as Sir Paul McCartney, Leona Lewis and Melanie C.

The High Court action was brought by the European Federation for Cosmetic Ingredients, a trade association representing more than 100 specialty chemical producers who supply ingredients to cosmetics manufacturers. EFfCI’s legal challenge is seeking to allow EU cosmetics companies to use results from new animal testing conducted in non-EU countries to meet non-EU regulations. HSI says this would undermine EU legislation banning the sale of ingredients tested on animals after 11 March 2013, and would mean that almost no animal testing would actually be prohibited.

Emily McIvor, Policy Director for HSI’s #BeCrueltyFree campaign, said from the High Court: “The cosmetics industry’s legal challenge on the EU’s historic cosmetics animal testing ban, is self-serving and greedy. Consumers will be outraged that industry is trying to undermine this world-leading ban that says subjecting rabbits and other animals to painful and lethal testing for cosmetics is unacceptable, no matter where in the world it takes place. We urge the Court to reject industry’s case and uphold the EU ban on cosmetics cruelty.”

It is unknown whether EFfCI was acting alone, or whether its member chemical or cosmetics companies benefiting from the anonymity of their trade association membership are behind the legal challenge. EFfCI’s Associate Members include the UK’s BACS Personal Care Group representing around 120 members including Marks & Spencer and The Co-operative Group – both certified as cruelty-free by the international Leaping Bunny standard.

HSI’s Emily McIvor said: “As this legal action has been fronted by a trade association, it’s impossible to know which companies are really behind it. If cruelty-free company associate members were unaware that their trade association has been attempting to undermine the EU’s cosmetics animal testing ban, we would expect them to be very alarmed indeed.”

HSI estimates that between 100,000 – 200,000 rabbits, guinea pigs, mice and other animals suffer each year in cosmetics tests globally. These involve rabbits being restrained and having chemicals dripped in their eyes, guinea pigs having raw chemicals applied to their shaved skin, and rodents having chemicals pumped directly into their stomach in huge and even lethal doses. Such animal testing, and the sale of cosmetics so tested, is now outlawed throughout the 28 countries of the EU, EFTA States, Israel and India. #BeCrueltyFree campaigning has also resulted in legislative proposals for similar bans in Australia, Brazil, New Zealand, Taiwan and the United States.

Facts

  • #BeCrueltyFree is the largest campaign in the world to end cosmetics animal testing, supported by stars such as Leona Lewis, Rick Gervais and Melanie C
  • More than 1 million #BeCrueltyFree pledges have been signed so far for a worldwide end to cosmetics cruelty
  • There are more than 600 cosmetics companies certified as cruelty-free under the international Leaping Bunny scheme
  • An estimated 8,000 or more cosmetic ingredients are already available and in widespread global use. Companies can manufacture cosmetics without animal testing by combining existing ingredients with histories of safe use — for which no new testing is required — with state-of-the-art non-animal tests
  • An ever-growing number of non-animal tests are available and accepted by regulatory authorities worldwide, including the human reconstructed skin models EpiDerm™ and EPISKIN™ for skin irritation, the Fluroescein Leakage test for eye irritation, and the 3T3 Neutral Red Uptake test for sunlight-induced phototoxicity.
Beauty & Cosmetics, Lifestyle

UK Announces There is No Set Target to Reduce Animal Testing for Research

UK Announces There is No Set Target to Reduce Animal Testing for Research

Last year the EU announced a ban on animal testing for cosmetics ingredients. It was a giant step for cruelty free movements worldwide. This ban meant that items sold in the EU could not be tested on animals in the EU and that ingredients could also not be tested in the EU (find out more about what it means for brands selling where animal testing is required by law). However, it did not cover animal testing used for research or animal testing used for ingredients in household items.

Earlier this week an announcement was made about the future of animal testing for research. Animal rights groups worldwide have a mixed response to the message sent by the government.

The government states that animal testing will still be necessary in some areas – life sciences (illness and disease), animal welfare (minimization of pain, suffering and distress for animals living on farms, zoos, and in labs), and environmental (to understand the potential effect of chemicals on our environment).

The Government is clear that there is a continuing need for properly regulated and ethically conducted research using animals where the harm caused to the animals is justified by the potential benefits, and where no practicable alternative exists. We will continue to make this case and to improve understanding and awareness of this issue.

The report states that this testing will still be conducted on fish, rodents, dogs (mainly beagles), primates, horses, and cats. The report also notes that some primates may be replaced with genetically modified rodents and fish, of which there has been an increase.

The report recognizes the benefits of in vitro methods (non animal testing methods) and that they are more cost effective. They are seeing an increase in research using both in vivo (animal testing) and in vitro methods instead of just animal testing alone. Recent scientific advances for in vitro testing methods are thought to only help decrease the number of animal tests done for research. Yet, the government states more advancements in technologies need to be made in order to further reduce animal testing.

The UK plays a leading role globally in supporting the development and adoption of techniques to replace, reduce and refine the use of animals. For example, the Government has been providing funding to the NC3Rs since it was established in 2005 and the level of that funding has significantly increased since 2010 based upon their record of success. The Government’s research funding bodies (e.g. the Medical Research Council) have funded major initiatives, often in partnership with charities such as the Wellcome Trust, to ensure the UK gives leadership in data sharing to avoid duplication occurring and to help improve understanding, for example about the pathways and causes of disease. Furthermore, a number of government departments and agencies have, in recent years, worked collaboratively to develop and validate new technologies which can replace animal use in safety testing and help reduce risks to the public, the environment, pets and farm animals.

They also want to promote awareness about animal testing that is to be done in areas where no alternatives may exist. Labs are encouraged to document the amount of discomfort they believe animals to be in during testing. This data is planned to be used to further refine these practices, though it’s unclear exactly what that would mean in regards to a potential reduction of animal testing.

Plans are set in place to allow the reduction of animal testing and to promote alternatives and provide support for research done through in vitro methods. This report acknowledges the value in vitro tests have and that more time and money should be spent to enhance the technology for in vitro tests. This being publicly and openly acknowledged by a government is a step in the right direction.

Outside sources say that animal testing for research has actually been increasing in recent years.

The most recent data available show that in 2012, researchers conducted more than 4.11 million experiments on animals—well over 11,000 procedures a day and a rise of 8% over 2011, according to Home Office figures. The rapid growth is caused primarily by the massive use of genetically modified animals. – UK Science Insider http://news.sciencemag.org/europe/2014/02/u.k.-scientists-welcome-new-policy-animal-research

More information about the use of genetically modified animals for research can be found on the BBC website – Sharp rise of 8% in UK animal experiments.

The full policy, Working to reduce the use of animals in research: delivery plan, can be read online in PDF format. If you are reading this post, I urge you to read the full document to get a better understanding of what is being presented, what testing is being done currently, and what it may mean for future animal testing.

It’s laid out in this document what testing is being conducted and the reasons for it. This level of transparency is greatly appreciated by many animal rights groups who say that the transparency alone is worth supporting. What it could mean as far as a reduction in animal testing, and a date in which some reduction may happen, remains unclear.

Beauty & Cosmetics, Hair Care, Lifestyle, Nail Care, Product Reviews, Recipes, Skin Care

What Does the EU Ban on Animal Testing Mean for Brands Selling Where Testing is Required by Law?

What Does the EU Ban on Animal Testing Mean for Brands Selling Where Testing is Required by Law?

The EU Ban on Animal Testing went into effect on March 11, 2013. The ban promised to end animal testing on products sold in the EU – a huge step for animal lovers, animal activists and cruelty free consumers alike. While this ban is a great and huge step in the right direction there is still a lot of confusion about what the ban actually does to stop cosmetic companies from testing on animals. Especially when it comes to brands that state they only test on animals, “when required by law”.

It’s important to remember that the EU ban on animal testing extends only to the European Union. It is not a worldwide ban and it does not dictate the practices that brands have for selling outside of the EU. Before the ban went into effect, many saw it as a great sign that brands testing, “when required by law”, would have to change their ways in order to sell in the EU. However, this is not the case.

As stated by Leaping Bunny – “It is unlikely that the EU will force international brands to pull out of markets with animal testing requirements. Therefore, although it may appear to be inconsistent with the ban, companies may still be testing on animals to fulfill regulatory requirements in other countries.

As stated on Go Cruelty Free, “When the ban takes effect, companies will not be able to animal test new cosmetic products and ingredients on sale in the EU. However, companies can still carry on animal testing cosmetics outside the EU where these cosmetics are also sold outside the EU. There are a number of issues for companies selling their products on the global market. For example, at present, before new products can go on sale in China, they must be submitted for testing to the Chinese authorities, which normally involves a range of animal tests.

In the guest post, Are Cosmetics in the EU Truly Cruelty Free?, it was stated that new collections made for markets where testing is required would not be allowed to be sold in the EU. This matches with the above statement by Go Cruelty Free. Yet, it seems that this line is becoming more blurry since the ban went into effect. As shown in the case of the brand Shiseido, brands that currently test on animals when “required by law” will still be allowed to do so and sell in the EU market.

Brands that test on animals outside the EU will still be able to ship products into the EU for sale. The items available for purchase in the EU may be cruelty free, but the brand itself may not be.

These brands won’t be approved by Leaping Bunny or other groups that certify a true cruelty free status. These organizations will not endorse brands who take part in any animal testing, required by law or otherwise. So you will not see a logo for these organizations on brands who sell there animal testing is required by law. Looking for the Leaping Bunny certification on products is now even more important for this reason.

The list of cruelty free and vegan brands on Logical Harmony will remain a resource for individuals as well. Any brands that conduct any sort of animal testing are not included. This includes testing by a parent company, third party, distributor or where “required by law”. In an effort to be as accurate as possible, brands that are unclear or unresponsive about their stance on animal testing are also no included.

The European Union ban on animal testing is a huge step in the right direction and something to celebrate. Yet, it also shows that this is a worldwide issue that more countries need to be involved in. If we want change to happen, we have to start at home. Support cruelty free and vegan brands, show your support of the EU ban, support organizations that are working to change the laws where you live.