Cruelty free: 5th anniversary of EU cosmetics animal testing bans
On 5th anniversary of the EU cosmetic animal testing and marketing bans Cruelty Free International calls for an international end to animal cosmetics testing.
The 6th March in Brussels was the celebration of 5 years since the European Union banned the sale of new cosmetics tested on animals in Europe. To mark the occasion, they urged the EU to build on their trailblazing policy by taking a leading role in ending the suffering of animals in laboratories around the world.
British model and singer Pixie Geldof to join Sirpa Pietikäinen, Member of European Parliament and President of the Animal Welfare Intergroup since 2016, and around 100 MEPs, and EU policymakers, NGOs and cosmetics and toiletries industry representatives to announce a new global action to end cosmetics animal testing worldwide.
They discusses leveraging Europe’s weight towards a harmonised global ban that would create a level playing field for companies across the world. 80% of countries, including China and the USA, still allow or even legally demand that cosmetics should be tested on animals.
Europe, where testing on animals for cosmetics development was banned 5 years ago, has seen a huge growth in innovation and new tecniques deliver more accurate predictability of human reactions. Cheaper and more sustainable, they provide consumers with safer products. A worldwide ban would stop testing being moved from country to country.
This event was an opportunity to discuss not only animal protection, but industrial innovation, international trade and the broader sustainability agenda.
In excess of half a million animals – from rabbits to mice, rats, guinea pigs, and hamsters – are used annually in worldwide cosmetics testing, estimate Cruelty Free International, one of the leading NGOs working to end decades of this practice.
Currently, 80% of countries still practice or legally require animal testing for the ingredients that go into everyday personal care products such as deodorant, lipstick and shampoo; even though studies demonstrate that animal tests predict human reactions by only 40-60% whereas substitutions are accurate 80% of the time.
While modern alternatives are getting cheaper, faster and better at predicting human reactions, industry, regulatory inertia and bureaucracy remain barriers to a switch to non-animal tests.