 Cosmetics: The Legislative Ban
The main argument in support of a ban is ethical - the human benefit resulting from the invention of new cosmetic ingredients simply cannot outweigh the suffering caused to animals used for cosmetic testing each year. A ban on cosmetic testing would not pose a risk to consumers, as only new ingredients require animal testing, and companies could stick to the 6-8,000 ingredients already on the market until alternative methods had been developed for testing new ingredients. Individual groups can lobby nationally in favour of a ban as part of their cosmetics campaign. The more the public become aware of - and sympathetic to - the issue, the greater the likelihood of success. Although it is, of course, easier to succeed in countries where very little cosmetic testing is carried out in any event! However, every country to ban animal testing for cosmetics adds to the ethical voice in favour of a ban, and forms a helpful precedent. At European Union level approximately 35,000 animals were used in cosmetics testing each year. The European Coalition to End Animal Experiments was formed in 1990 specifically to campaign for a ban on cosmetic testing on animals - although it has now extended its coverage to other animal experimentation issues. It achieved its aim of a European ban in 2003, although this was a phased ban. Whilst the European Coalition was pressing hard for a full ban, it was seeking the following as a minimum: -
These could be useful subsidiary aims for other countries seeking a ban. 
For background information on the fight to achieve a ban on animal tested cosmetics at EU level see the ECEAE Web Site. See also: Existing Legislation of Relevance |