Cosmetics & Household Products

Cosmetics and household products tests on animals

Despite huge public opposition, thousands of animals are still used every year in European laboratories to test cosmetic and household products and their ingredients. This includes tests for skin or eye irritation, skin allergy, poisoning studies, genetic damage, and birth defects. These procedures cause completely unnecessary pain and suffering to animals, producing results that can not even be interpreted with confidence because of fundamental differences in the way that species react to chemicals.

Thousands of ingredients have already been shown to be safe and harming animals to develop more is simply unjustifiable. Where new ingredients are to be used, investment and support for cutting-edge non-animal testing methods is crucial.

To enable consumers to make an informed ethical choice, the ECEAE runs the European arm of the international Humane Cosmetics Standard and Humane Household Products Standard — the only internationally-recognised schemes that allow consumers to easily identify cosmetics and household products that have not been tested on animals.

For more details, visit www.gocrueltyfree.org »

How many animals are used?

The most recent set of official European statistics (from 2005) report that 5,571 animals were used for cosmetics tests. Animal testing also takes place for household products, such as washing up liquid or floor cleaner, where 1,219 animals were reported as having been used.

However the figure for household products must be treated with extreme caution as this relies upon those doing the testing to categorise their tests for household products and their ingredients. Companies and contract testing organisations might not necessarily be aware of the intended primary purpose of the chemical at the time of the testing, or household product ingredient tests may simply be being labelled beneath another more generic category. The figure is therefore an illusion — we maintain that there can be no doubt that thousands more animals are used every year in testing ingredients which end up in household products.

The good news: sale and marketing of cosmetic ingredients to be banned

Thanks to years of campaigning led by the ECEAE and with other animal protection organisations — and the support of hundreds of MEPs — bans on the sale and marketing of cosmetics whose ingredients have been tested on animals are imminent:

from 11 March 2009: a ban on animal testing of cosmetic ingredients within the EU; a ban on the marketing of cosmetic products and ingredients tested using animals (for the majority of tests)
from 11 March 2013: a full ban on all animal testing for cosmetic products and ingredients

In recognition of the moral imperative to end unnecessary animal suffering, the bans will be implemented regardless of the availability of non-animal methods. Unsurprisingly, therefore, the bans have led to a dramatic increase in investment in the development of new non-animal techniques; in the first few months of 2007 alone, the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methodologies (ECVAM) formally approved five new non-animal approaches.

Regrettably there have been attempts by some in the cosmetics industry to lobby and mount legal challenges to undermine the implementation of the testing and marketing bans. The ECEAE will continue to fight for the integrity of the Directive — as well as continuing to raise awareness of the use of animals in similar types of testing, not least household products.

The impact of REACH

There had been concerns that the new REACH legislation would conflict with the Cosmetics Directive. However, thanks to a campaign by the ECEAE and other organisations, a last-minute amendment was secured which specifically exempted cosmetics ingredients from REACH.

With household products the picture is less clear. Unlike with cosmetics, there is no robust definition of a "household product" and no specific legislative framework that relates to them. REACH is still in the relatively early stages of implementation and this is just one of many issues that the ECEAE will monitor closely.

How can I help?