US states join global push to ban animal-tested cosmetics

US states join global push to ban animal-tested cosmetics

LAS VEGAS (AP) — A growing number of U.S. states are considering a ban on the sale or import of cosmetics that have been tested on animals, as advocates argue testing products such as lotions, shampoos and makeup on rabbits, mice and rats is cruel and outdated.

The cause has gained support from consumers and many cosmetics companies, but the biggest hurdle is China, which requires that cosmetics sold in its large, lucrative market undergo testing on animals.

California, Nevada and Illinois all saw new laws take effect this year that ban the sale or import of animal-tested cosmetics. The laws, which apply to tests performed after Jan. 1, aren’t expected to cause much disruption for the industry because many companies already use non-animal testing. Instead, they draw a line in the sand that puts pressure on the U.S. government to pass a nationwide ban and help end China’s requirement that most cosmetics sold in that nation of more than 1.4 billion people undergo testing on animals by Chinese regulators.

China’s policy applies to all imported cosmetics, including makeup, perfume and hair care products, along with some “special use” goods produced in China, such as hair dye, sunscreen and whitening products that make functional claims.

Animal-tested cosmetics already are banned in Europe, India and elsewhere. A ban in the United States, one of the world’s largest economies, would put further global pressure on China to end its policy and push Chinese cosmetics companies to rely on non-animal tests if they want to sell their products in the U.S.

“We’re not trying to create an island out here in Nevada,” said state Sen. Melanie Scheible, who sponsored Nevada’s law. “We are trying to join a group of other communities that have stood up and said, ‘We don’t support animal testing.’”

Animal-rights groups like Cruelty Free International and the Humane Society of the United States hope to get more states to pass bans this year. Legislation has been introduced or will soon be made public in Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York and Virginia, according to Cruelty Free International, and a national ban has been introduced in Congress since 2014, though the bipartisan measure has been slow to advance. The most recent version introduced in November marks the first time the country’s leading cosmetics trade group, the Personal Care Products Council, has become a vocal backer of the ban, support that should ease lawmaker concerns about business opposition.

The California, Nevada and Illinois laws create exemptions for any cosmetics that were tested on animals to comply with regulations of a foreign government — an exception that acknowledges the reality that most companies will see their products tested on animals if they sell in China.

China is a “big complicating factor,” said Monica Engebretson, who leads public affairs for Cruelty Free International in North America. “That’s put companies that want to enter that Chinese market in a real bind.”

Scheible said her aim in Nevada was not to punish those multinational corporations but to raise awareness and put pressure on other governments, like China, to act. “A lot of people thought that we no longer tested on animals at all,” she said. “They thought that this was already a thing of the past.”

The bans in all three states require cosmetics sellers to use non-animal tests to prove their products are safe. Many international companies are already doing that after the European Union passed a series of similar bans on animal testing, culminating with a 2013 ban on the sale of animal-tested products.

Supporters note that science has advanced, allowing companies in most cases to use non-animal alternatives — such as human cell cultures or lab-grown human skin and eye tissue — to test whether a product or ingredient is safe.

For example, EpiDerm, a synthetic skin tissue made by Massachusetts-based MatTek Corp., is created from cells taken from skin donated during procedures such as breast reduction surgery, circumcision and tummy tuck procedures.

Products can be applied to synthetic tissue to determine whether they cause skin irritation, damage, sensitivity or other issues. That can be used in place of a testing a product on the back of a shaved rabbit, animal rights supporters say.

Some of the biggest names in personal care and beauty, including Avon, Unilever and Procter & Gamble, have used MatTek’s tissues for testing. Carl Westmoreland, a safety scientist with Unilever, said the European Union ban drove more innovation in non-animal testing. Companies like Unilever, trade groups and advocates are among those working with Chinese regulators and scientists to push for new rules, helping to familiarize them with procedures and results from non-animal tests.

“They have been changing and are continuing to change,” he said, noting China in recent years has allowed some cosmetics produced within the country to avoid animal testing. Francine Lamoriello, executive vice president for global strategies at the Personal Care Products Council said it’s a slow process, but Chinese regulators are working to accept non-animal tests.

“They’re having conferences. They really seem to be quite motivated to do as best as they can to accept and validate certain methods,” she said. The Personal Care Products Council supports most of the state legislation but is pushing for a nationwide law instead of a patchwork of rules across the country.

Similar to the state laws, the proposed ban before Congress would exempt cosmetics required to undergo testing in China. It would allow those products to be sold in the U.S. as long as sellers relied on additional, non-animal tests to show they are safe.

California was first to pass the legislation in 2018, a move that’s part of the state’s pattern of wielding its status as the world’s fifth-largest economy to push change. “That’s the beauty of doing things in California,” said Judie Mancuso with the group Social Compassion in Legislation who pressed for that state’s ban. “You set the stage, you set the standard, and others grab it and grow.”

Associated Press researcher Shanshan Wang in Beijing contributed to this report.

Source: US states join global push to ban animal-tested cosmetics




VICTORY! California Cruelty-Free Cosmetics Act Now Law






 

California bill banning sale of animal-tested cosmetics goes to governor 

A proposal that passed the California Legislature on Friday would impose the nation’s strictest laws on animal testing for cosmetics.  Senate Bill 1249 would make California the first state to outlaw the sale of cosmetics tested on animals.

The ban applies to animal testing of a cosmetic or its ingredients conducted after 2019, but would allow exceptions to comply with Food and Drug Administration or foreign agency requirements.

In the final days of the session, legislators amended SB 1249 to narrow the ban’s scope, focusing on animal testing conducted by the cosmetic manufacturer or suppliers. The earlier version, which met significant opposition, applied even when the group conducting the animal testing was unrelated to the cosmetics company. That version would have prevented companies from using ingredients where animal tests were required for non-cosmetic reasons, including testing to ensure a chemical does not cause cancer.

“The supply-chain focus has helped to remove the majority of significant opposition,” said the bill’s author, Sen. Cathleen Galgiani (D-Stockton).

Lawmakers also removed a provision that would have put a 2023 expiration date on the foreign regulations exemption.

Central to the debate was China, where imported cosmetics are tested on animals. Opponents of SB 1249 said the measure would prompt companies to move manufacturing to China, eliminating American jobs.

Supporters, however, said the Chinese law was weakly enforced and likely to change before the foreign regulations exemption expired. They pointed to animal-free companies that have successfully managed to market products to Chinese consumers.

The bill’s new language keeps the foreign regulations exemption in place indefinitely, as long the manufacturer does not use animal testing evidence to guarantee the product’s safety in California. After the changes were made, the Personal Care Products Council, which opposed the previous version, expressed its support.

Other backers included…

FINISH READING: California bill banning sale of animal-tested cosmetics goes to governor after last-minute changes shrink its scope






 

FAQs | Coty

COTY INC. STATEMENT ON ANIMAL TESTING

Coty Inc. is a leader in the global beauty industry. We have developed a portfolio of notable brands and offer innovative products of outstanding quality for which we are committed to maintaining the highest possible standards of consumer safety.  Before we place a product on the market, we assess it thoroughly to ensure that it is safe for human use and for the environment and that it complies with all applicable laws, rules and regulations. Our safety assessment of cosmetic ingredients is based on the use of recognized alternatives to animal testing, the use of existing safety data and, increasingly, the sharing of such data with other industries.

We do not perform, nor do we ever commission any third parties on our behalf to perform, testing of our products or ingredients on animals. COTY voluntarily ceased testing finished cosmetic products on animals in 1991, long before the official European ban on such testing in 2004, and we have been actively involved in the research and development of alternatives to animal testing for many years. COTY is a party to SEURAT-1,  the single largest Private-Public Partnership initiative aimed to develop alternatives to animal testing of cosmetic products, with a total contribution of €50 million funded in equal by the European Commission and the cosmetics industry, which managed to provide sufficient ground for setting the strategy and strategic collaboration that will be essential for the development of further alternative methods, e.g. for systemic toxicity.

It is common knowledge that China is currently the only country that requires mandatory animal tests on all cosmetic products imported into the country. However, we have been actively involved in the dialogue with the Chinese authorities and regulators, including through our membership to the China Association of Fragrance Flavor and Cosmetic Industries (CAFFCI). As a result, China has recently started to investigate ways to replace animal testing and has sought the assistance of European scientists.

The common goal of all these efforts is our aim to completely replace animal testing.


DO YOU MAKE VEGAN PRODUCTS?

There is no legal definition of a vegan or vegetarian cosmetic product, and we do not specialize in products without animal-derived ingredients. We encourage consumers to read package labels closely and see the full extent of ingredients. Specific information on what an ingredient is and how it is used, as well as safety information for approximately 90% of all ingredients used in cosmetic and personal care products on the market today, is continually updated and publicly available on http://www.cosmeticsinfo.org

FINISH READING: FAQs | Coty