Testing cosmetics on animals - Wikipedia Testing cosmetics on animals Animal testing Main articles Animal testing Alternatives to animal testing Animal testing regulations History of animal testing History of model organisms IACUC Laboratory animal sources Pain and suffering in lab animals Testing cosmetics on animals Toxicology testing Vivisection Testing on Invertebrates Frogs primates Rabbits Rodents Issues Biomedical research Animal rights Animal welfare Animals ( Scientific Procedures ) Great ape research ban International trade in primates Cases Brown Dog affair Cambridge University primates Pit of despair Silver Spring monkeys UCR 1985 laboratory raid Unnecessary Fuss Companies Jackson Laboratory Charles River Laboratories, Inc. Covance Harlan Huntingdon Life Sciences UK lab animal suppliers Nafovanny Shamrock Groups / campaigns AALAS AAAS ALF Americans for Medical Progress Boyd Group BUAV Dr Hadwen Trust Foundation for Biomedical Research FRAME National Anti-Vivisection Society New England Anti-Vivisection Society PETA Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine Primate Freedom Project Pro-Test SPEAK SHAC Speaking of Research Understanding Animal Research Writers / activists Tipu Aziz Michael Balls Neal Barnard Colin Blakemore Simon Festing Gill Langley Ingrid Newkirk Bernard Rollin Jerry Vlasak Syed Ziaur Rahman Categories Animal testing Animal rights Animal welfare Cosmetic testing on animals is a type of animal testing used to test the safety and hypoallergenic properties of products for use by humans. Due to the harm done to the animal subjects, this testing is opposed by animal rights activists and others. Cosmetic animal testing is banned in the European Union, India, Israel, and Norway. Contents 1 Definition 2 Methods 3 Alternatives 4 History 5 Non-Profit Organizations 6 Procedures of Animal Testing 7 Legal Requirements and Status 7.1 Places That Have Bans 7.1. 1 Brazil, São Paulo 7.1. 2 European Union 7.1. 3 India 7.1. 4 Israel 7.1. 5 New Zealand 7.1. 6 Turkey 7.1. 7 UK 7.2 Places where prohibitions are considered 7.2. 1 Association of Southeast Asian Nations 7.2. 2 Australia 7.2. 3 Brazil 7.2. 4 United States 7.2. 5 South Korea 7.2. 6 Taiwan 7.3 Other statuses 7.3. 1 China 7.3. 2 Russia 8 Brands that do not test on animals 9 Brands that do test on animals 10 See also 11 Notes Definition Using animal testing in the development of cosmetics may involve testing either a finished product or the individual ingredients of a finished product on animals, often rabbits, as well as mice, rats, and other animals. Cosmetics can be defined as products applied to the body in various ways in order to enhance the body 's appearance or to cleanse the body. This includes all hair products, makeup, nail products and soaps. The United States Food and Drug Administration ( FDA ) continues to endorse animal testing methods. Re-using existing test data obtained from previous animal testing is generally not considered to be cosmetic testing on animals ; however, the acceptability of this to opponents of testing is inversely proportional to how recent the data is. Methods Methods of testing cosmetics on animals include many different tests that are categorized differently based on which areas the cosmetics will be used for. One new ingredient in any cosmetic product used in these tests could lead to the deaths of at least 1,400 animals Dermal penetration : Rats are mostly used in this method that analyzes moment of a chemical, and the penetration of the chemical in the bloodstream. Dermal penetration is a method that creates a better understanding of skin absorption. Skin sensitisation : This is a method that determines if a chemical causes an allergic reaction. The chemical adjuvant is injected to boost the immune system. In the past it was performed on guinea pigs, and applied on a shaved patch of skin. Substances are assessed based on appearance of skin. Acute toxicity : This test is used to determine danger of exposure to a chemical by mouth, skin, or inflammation. Rats and mice are injected in lethal dose 50 % ( LD50 ). This test can cause animal convulsions, loss of motor function, and seizures. Draize test : This is a method of testing that may cause irritation or corrosion to the skin or eye on animals, dermal sensitization, airway sensitization, endocrine disruption, and LD ( which refers to the lethal dose which kills 50 % of the treated animals ). Skin corrosivity or irritation : This method of test assesses the potential of a substance causing irreversible damage to the skin. It is typically performed on rabbits and involves putting chemicals on a shaved patch of skin. This determines the level of damage to the skin that includes itching, inflammation, swelling, etc. Alternatives Cosmetics manufacturers who do not test on animals may now use in vitro screens to test for endpoints which can determine potential risk to humans with a very high sensitivity and specificity. Companies such as CeeTox in the USA, recently acquired by Cyprotex, specialize in such testing and organizations like the Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing ( CAAT ), PETA and many other organizations advocate the use of in vitro and other non-animal tests in the development of consumer products. By using safe ingredients from a list of 5,000 which have already been tested in conjunction with modern methods of cosmetics testing, the need for tests using animals are negated. EpiSkin TM, EpiDerm TM and SkinEthic are each composed of artificial human skin as an option for alternative testing. Artificial skin can imitate the reaction actual human skin will have to a product and the chemicals it contains and can be altered to mimic different skin types and ages. For example, using UV light on EpiSkin can cause it to resemble older skin and adding melanocytes will turn the skin a darker color. This helped create a spectrum of different skin colors that are then used to compare the results of sunblock on a different variety of people. To address potential issues with other parts of the human body, research companies such as NOTOX have developed a synthetic model of the human liver, which is the main organ to detox the body, in order to test harmful ingredients and chemicals to see if the liver can detox those elements. Research companies can also use body parts and organs taken from animals slaughtered for the meat industry to perform tests such as the Bovine Corneal Opacity and Permeability Test and Isolated Chicken Eye Test. History In 1937, a mistake was made that ended up changing the pharmaceutical industry drastically. A company created a medicine `` to treat streptococcal infections '', and without any scientific research the medicine was out on shelves. This medicine turned out to be extremely poisonous to people, leading to large poisoning outbreaks followed by over 100 deaths. This epidemic led to a law being passed in 1938, called the U.S. Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act, enforcing more rigorous guidelines on cosmetic products. After this law was passed companies looked to animals to test their products, in turn, creating the first encounters of cosmetic animal testing. Non-profit organizations This `` Leaping Bunny '' indicates that cosmetic products with this logo have not been tested on animals. Cruelty Free International : Cruelty Free International and its partners manage the certification of all the companies across the world looking to be cruelty free. Companies producing beauty and household products which do not to test their products on animals for any market can request membership of The Leaping Bunny Program, which allows that company to feature Cruelty Free International 's Leaping Bunny logo on their products. This program sets global standard of operations and sales. Companies headquartered internationally can obtain certification from Cruelty Free International. Companies headquartered in the United States and Canada can obtain certification from The Coalition for Consumer Information on Cosmetics ( CCIC ) In 2013, over 500 companies were certified. However, some company 's certifications were revoked after it was discovered they continued to test on animals in Asia. Humane Society International : This is a global animal protection organization that works to help all animals -- including animals in laboratories. Procedures of animal testing See also : The Three Rs ( animals ) There is a strategy used in animal testing laboratories titled the ' Three R 's : ' Reduction, refinement, and replacement ' ( Doke, `` Alternatives to Animal Testing : A Review '' ). Reduction : This approach is built upon the ethics to have a minimal number of animal subjects being tested on for current and later tests. Refinement : This suggests that the planned distress and pain caused to an animal subject to be as little as possible. This approach focuses on making a home for the animals before entering testing grounds in order to elongate the life of laboratory animals. Discomfort to animals causes an imbalance in hormonal levels which create fluctuating results during testing. Replacement : This provides the opportunity to study the response of cellular models, but in other words, replacement searches for alternatives that could be done rather than testing on animal subjects. Legal requirements and status This section needs to be updated. Please update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information. ( December 2015 ) Due to the strong public backlash against cosmetic testing on animals, most cosmetic manufacturers say their products are not tested on animals. However, they are still required by trading standards and consumer protection laws in most countries to show their products are not toxic and not dangerous to public health, and that the ingredients are not dangerous in large quantities, such as when in transport or in the manufacturing plant. In some countries, it is possible to meet these requirements without any further tests on animals. In other countries, it may require animal testing to meet legal requirements. The United States and Japan are frequently criticized for their insistence on stringent safety measures, which often requires animal testing. Some retailers distinguish themselves in the marketplace by their stance on animal testing. Legal Requirements In Japan Although Japanese law does n't require non-medicated cosmetics to be tested on animals, it does n't prohibit it either, leaving the decision to individual companies. Animal testing is required mainly when the product contains newly - developed tar colors, ultraviolet ray protective ingredients or preservatives, and when the amount of any ingredient regulated in terms of how much can be added is increased. Japanese Brands such as Shiseido and Mandom have ended much, but not all, of their animal testing. However, most other leading cosmetics companies in Japan still test on animals. Places that have bans Brazil, São Paulo São Paulo in Brazil, banned cosmetic animal testing in 2014. European Union The European Union ( EU ) followed suit, after it agreed to phase in a near - total ban on the sale of animal - tested cosmetics throughout the EU from 2009, and to ban cosmetics - related animal testing. Animal testing is regulated in EC Regulation 1223 / 2009 on cosmetics. Imported cosmetics ingredients tested on animals were phased out for EU consumer markets in 2013 by the ban, but can still be sold to outside of the EU. Norway banned cosmetics animal testing the same time as the EU. India In early 2014, India announced a ban on testing cosmetics on animals in the country, thereby becoming the second country in Asia to do so. Later India banned import of cosmetics tested on animals in November 2014. Israel Israel banned `` the import and marketing of cosmetics, toiletries or detergents that were tested on animals '' in 2013. New Zealand In 2015, New Zealand also banned animal testing. Turkey Turkey `` banned any animal testing for cosmetic products that have already been introduced to the market. '' UK Animal testing on cosmetics or their ingredients was banned in the UK in 1998. Places where prohibitions are considered Association of Southeast Asian Nations The Association of Southeast Asian Nations ( ASEAN ) is potentially `` making strides toward ending cosmetics testing on animals. '' Australia In Australia, the End Cruel Cosmetics Bill will be introduced to Parliament in March 2014, which would ban local testing, which generally does n't happen there, and importation of cosmetics tested on animals. In 2016 a bill was passed to ban the sale of cosmetics tested on animals, which will come into effect in July 2017. Brazil Brazil 's legislation will vote on a nationwide animal testing for cosmetics ban by the end of March 2014. United States In March 2014, the Humane Cosmetics Act was introduced to the U.S. congress which would ban cosmetic testing on animals and eventually would ban the sale of cosmetics tested on animals. The bill did not advance. South Korea South Korea is also potentially `` making strides toward ending cosmetics testing on animals. '' Taiwan In 2015, Taiwan launched a bill proposing a ban on cosmetic testing on animals. It passed in 2016 and goes into effect in 2019. Other statuses China China passed a law on 30 June 2014 to eliminate the requirement for animal testing of cosmetics. Though domestically - produced ordinary cosmetic goods do not require testing, animal testing is still mandated by law for Chinese - made `` cosmeceuticals '' ( cosmetic goods which make a functional claim ) which are available for sale in China. Cosmetics intended solely for export are exempt from the animal testing requirement. Russia In 2013, the Russian Ministry of Health stated `` Toxicological testing is performed by means of testing for skin allergic reaction or test on mucous tissue / eye area ( with use of lab animals ) or by use of alternative general toxicology methods ( IN VITRO ). In this manner the technical regulations include measures which provide an alternative to animal testing ''. Brands that do not test on animals This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. ( April 2016 ) Company Market Products Yearly Revenue Urban Decay Cosmetics 3.7 billion ( 2015 ) LUSH LUSH Cosmetics, personal care 350 million ( 2014 ) Colgate - Palmolive Tom 's of Maine Toiletries, personal care 1 million ( 2014 ) John Paul Mitchell systems Paul Mitchell Hair products, personal care 600 Million ( 1999 ) NYX Cosmetics 3.7 billion ( 2014 ) Hain Celestial Alba Botanica Personal care, cosmetics 2.7 million ( 2014 ) Hain Celestial Avalon Organics Personal care, home goods 2.7 million ( 2014 ) Brands that do test on animals This section does not cite any sources. Please help improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. ( April 2016 ) Company Market Yearly Revenue Product Industry Animal Testing Market Segment Avon Products, Inc Avon US $9.955 billion ( 2013 ) Cosmetics, perfumes, clothing, toys Fashion Yes Mass Market Chanel SAS Chanel 6.7 billion ( 2014 ) Perfume, Haute, Couture, Ready - to - wear, Accessories Fashion Yes Luxury Coty, Inc OPI $7 billion ( 2015 ) Nail Polish Beauty Yes Value for Money Johnson & Johnson Neutrogena $6 billion USD ( 2005 ) Cleansers, Cosmetics, Hair Product Consumer Packaged Goods Yes Value for money LVMH Moet Hennessy - Louis Vuitton Sephore $4 billion ( 2013 ) Cosmetics Beauty Yes Value for money Mary Kay holding Corporation Mary Kay US $2.9 Billion ( 2011 ) Cosmetics, sunscreen Cosmetics and personal care products Yes Value for money Procter & Gamble Covergirl $57 million Cosmetics Fashion Yes Mass See also Animal testing on invertebrates Animal testing on non-human primates Animal testing on rodents Cosmetics Notes Jump up ^ Engebretson, Monica ( 16 March 2014 ). `` India Joins the EU and Israel in Surpassing the US in Cruelty - Free Cosmetics Testing Policy ''. The World Post. ^ Jump up to : Fox, Stacy ( 10 March 2014 ). `` Animal Attraction : Federal Bill to End Cosmetics Testing on Animals Introduced in Congress '' ( Press release ). Humane Society of the United States. Archived from the original on 2014 - 03 - 11. ^ Jump up to : `` Cruelty Free International Applauds Congressman Jim Moran for Bill to End Cosmetics Testing on Animals in the United States '' ( Press release ). 5 March 2014. Jump up ^ https://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/GuidanceRegulation/LawsRegulations/ucm074201.htm ^ Jump up to : `` Testing ''. American Anti-Vivisection Society. Jump up ^ `` Kunde oder Vertriebspartner werden ''. VEGAS Cosmetics ( in German ). 16 June 2015. Jump up ^ www.nst.com.my/lifestyle/flair/2017/09/276688/cruelty-free-cosmetics. ^ Jump up to : Bainbridge, Amy ( 17 March 2014 ). `` Australia urged to follow EU ban on animal testing ; Greens to move bill in Senate this week ''. Australian Broadcasting Corporation News. Jump up ^ Merali, Zeeya ( July 28, 2007 ). `` New Scientist ''. Human skin to replace animal tests. 195 : 14 -- 14. Jump up ^ Mone, Gregory ( April 2014 ). `` New Models in Cosmetics Replacing Animal Testing ''. Communications of the ACM. 57 : 20 -- 21. Jump up ^ `` Alternatives to Animal Tests : The Humane Society of the United States ''. m.humanesociety.org. Retrieved 2016 - 02 - 12. Jump up ^ Scutti, Susan. `` Animal Testing : A Long, Unpretty History. '' Medical Daily, 27 June 2013, www.medicaldaily.com/animal-testing-long-unpretty-history-247217. Jump up ^ Scutti, Susan. `` Animal Testing : A Long, Unpretty History. '' Medical Daily, 27 June 2013, www.medicaldaily.com/animal-testing-long-unpretty-history-247217. Jump up ^ Scutti, Susan. `` Animal Testing : A Long, Unpretty History. '' Medical Daily, 27 June 2013, www.medicaldaily.com/animal-testing-long-unpretty-history-247217. Jump up ^ `` Frequently asked questions by companies - Cruelty Free International ''. Jump up ^ About Cruelty Free International. Cruelty Free International, d.d. Jump up ^ Leaping Bunny Welcomes Wen ® Hair and Body Care by Chaz Dean as Cruelty - Free. Leapingbunny.org, d.d. Jump up ^ ( 1 ). Eluxe Magazine, d.d. Jump up ^ http://www.hsi.org/about/ ^ Jump up to : `` Be Cruelty - Free Campaign Backed by Global Stars, Launches in Tokyo to End Cosmetics Animal Testing in Japan ( March 17, 2014 ) ''. Humane Society International. Retrieved 12 May 2015. Jump up ^ `` Development of Cosmetics -- Toward Abolishment of Animal Testing ( February 2015 ) ''. JFS : Japan for Sustainability. Retrieved 12 May 2015. Jump up ^ `` Initiatives in Response to Animal Testing and Alternative Methods ''. Shiseido Group. Retrieved 12 May 2015. Jump up ^ `` Approach to alternative to animal experiments ''. Mandom. Retrieved 12 May 2015. Jump up ^ `` São Paulo Bans Animal Testing ''. AFP News. 24 January 2014. ^ Jump up to : `` EU extends ban on animal - tested cosmetics ''. EuroNews. 11 March 2013. Jump up ^ Fynes - Clinton ( 20 March 2014 ), OPINION : Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon 's End Cruel Cosmetics Bill 2014 answers the public 's growing opposition to animals testing, Courier - Mail Jump up ^ Aryan ( 12 March 2013 ). `` Norway ban animal testing of cosmetics ''. The Oslo Times. Jump up ^ Mukherjee, Rupali ( 23 Jan 2014 ). `` Govt bans cosmetic companies from testing on animals ''. The Times of India. Jump up ^ Mohan, Vishwa ( 14 October 2014 ). `` India bans import of cosmetics tested on animals ''. The Times of India. Retrieved 1 December 2015. Jump up ^ `` Import ban on animal - tested products goes into effect ''. The Times of Israel. 1 January 2013. Jump up ^ `` MPs unanimously support animal testing ban ''. Radio New Zealand. 31 March 2015. Jump up ^ `` Animal testing for cosmetics banned in Turkey ''. DailySabah. 27 July 2015. Jump up ^ `` Animal Research Regulations in the UK ''. Retrieved 10 September 2015. Jump up ^ http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/cosmetics-tested-on-animals-to-be-banned-in-australia/news-story/a6362ab50a6146af5c83e60c8e40d93e Jump up ^ `` Taiwan Proposes Animal Testing Ban for Cosmetics ''. Jump up ^ `` Taiwan bans cosmetics animal testing ''. Humane Society International. Jump up ^ ( 2 ) Jump up ^ `` Cruelty Free International wins Russian commitment on non-animal testing ''. Retrieved 12 May 2015. Jump up ^ `` Lush ''. Retail Merchandiser. Retrieved 2016 - 02 - 12. Jump up ^ `` Tom 's of Maine founder reinvents for - profit sustainability in his second company ''. Mainebiz. Retrieved 2016 - 02 - 12. Animal rights Topics Overview Abolitionism Animal protectionism Animal welfare Speciesism Vegaphobia Veganism more... Issues Ahimsa Anarchism Animal cognition Animal consciousness Animal law Animal model Animal rights and the Holocaust Animal product Animal rights movement Animal testing Animal testing on non-human primates Animals in sport Anthrozoology Anti-hunting Bile bear Bioethics Blood sport Cambridge Declaration on Consciousness Carnism Cosmetics testing Chick culling Christianity and animal rights Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation Cormorant culling Covance Cruelty to animals Deep ecology Ethics of eating meat Fox hunting Fur trade Great ape research ban Green Scare Huntingdon Life Sciences Intensive animal farming Ivory trade Livestock Meat paradox Nafovanny Nonviolence Open rescue Operation Backfire Pain in animals Pain and suffering in laboratory animals Qurbani Primate trade Seal hunting Slaughterhouse Stock - free agriculture Toxicology testing Veganism Vegetarianism Western Australian shark cull more... Cases Brown Dog affair Cambridge University primates McLibel case Pit of despair Silver Spring monkeys University of California Riverside 1985 laboratory raid Unnecessary Fuss Advocates Academics and writers Carol Adams Tom Beauchamp Marc Bekoff Paola Cavalieri Stephen R.L. Clark Alasdair Cochrane J.M. Coetzee Priscilla Cohn David DeGrazia Sue Donaldson Josephine Donovan Lawrence Finsen Gary Francione Robert Garner Antoine Goetschel John Hadley Will Kymlicka Andrew Linzey Dan Lyons Mary Midgley Martha Nussbaum Siobhan O'Sullivan Clare Palmer Tom Regan Bernard Rollin Mark Rowlands Richard D. Ryder Peter Singer Henry Stephens Salt Steve Sapontzis Gary Steiner Cass Sunstein more... Activists Cleveland Amory Greg Avery Matt Ball Martin Balluch Barbi twins Brigitte Bardot Bob Barker Gene Baur Frances Power Cobbe Rod Coronado Evandro Costa Karen Davis Chris DeRose Robert Enke John Feldmann Bruce Friedrich Juliet Gellatley Jordan Halliday Barry Horne Ronnie Lee Lizzy Lind af Hageby Jo - Anne McArthur Bill Maher Keith Mann Dan Mathews Luísa Mell Ingrid Newkirk Heather Nicholson Alex Pacheco Jill Phipps Craig Rosebraugh Nathan Runkle Henry Spira Kim Stallwood Marianne Thieme Darren Thurston Andrew Tyler Gary Yourofsky more... Movement Groups Animal Aid Animal Legal Defense Fund Animal Liberation Front British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection Centre for Animals and Social Justice Chinese Animal Protection Network Direct Action Everywhere Farm Animal Rights Movement Great Ape Project Hunt Saboteurs Association In Defense of Animals Korea Animal Rights Advocates Last Chance for Animals Mercy for Animals New England Anti-Vivisection Society Oxford Centre for Animal Ethics Oxford Group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals United Poultry Concerns more... Parties AAEVP ( Canada ) Animal Justice Party ( Australia ) Animal Welfare Party ( UK ) PACMA ( Spain ) Party for the Animals ( Netherlands ) Partito Animalista Italiano ( Italy ) Tierschutzpartei ( Germany ) V - Partei3 ( Germany ) People -- Animals -- Nature ( Portugal ) more... Media Books Animals ' Rights : Considered in Relation to Social Progress ( 1894 ) Animals, Men and Morals ( 1971 ) Animal Liberation ( 1975 ) The Case for Animal Rights ( 1983 ) The Lives of Animals ( 1999 ) Striking at the Roots ( 2008 ) An American Trilogy ( 2009 ) more... Films The Animals Film ( 1981 ) A Cow at My Table ( 1998 ) Meet Your Meat ( 2002 ) Peaceable Kingdom ( 2004 ) Earthlings ( 2005 ) Behind the Mask ( 2006 ) The Cove ( 2009 ) Forks Over Knives ( 2011 ) Vegucated ( 2011 ) Speciesism : The Movie ( 2013 ) The Ghosts in Our Machine ( 2013 ) more... Categories Animal advocacy parties Animal law Animal Liberation Front Animal rights Animal rights activists Animal right media Animal rights movement Animal rights scholars Animal testing Blood sports Livestock Meat industry Poultry Veganism Vegetarianism Animal rights portal Retrieved from `` https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Testing_cosmetics_on_animals&oldid=815592153 '' Categories : Animal testing Animal rights Product testing Cosmetic industry Hidden categories : CS1 German - language sources ( de ) Use dmy dates from December 2015 All articles with dead external links Articles with dead external links from December 2017 All articles with unsourced statements Articles with unsourced statements from December 2015 Wikipedia articles in need of updating from December 2015 All Wikipedia articles in need of updating Articles needing additional references from April 2016 All articles needing additional references Talk Contents About Wikipedia Español 한국어 עברית Tiếng Việt 中文 Edit links This page was last edited on 15 December 2017, at 20 : 05. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution - ShareAlike License ; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia ® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. About Wikipedia

Question: when was animal testing for cosmetics banned in the uk
Answer: 1998