Europe bans animal testing

Everyone has, sooner or later, come across the claim “not tested on animals” on the packaging of cosmetics or in advertising. Technically, however, this sentence only reiterates the obvious. Regulation (EC) no . 1223/2009 , also known as the Cosmetics Regulation , clearly states that “The safety of the ingredients used in cosmetic products can be progressively guaranteed by applying alternative methods that do not involve the use of animals”. 

In fact, testing make- up, creams, soaps and perfumes on animals was outlawed as early as 2004. The 2009 regulation also extended this ban to individual cosmetic ingredients , even if they were developed outside the EU. The various exceptions were gradually eliminated until reaching a total stop in 2013. A victory of civilization , achieved after two decades of assiduous struggles by animal welfare organizations, and after the sacrifice of hundreds of thousands of rabbits, rodents, primates.

A legislative contradiction

A recent study published by the journal Alternatives to Animal Experimentation , however, shines the spotlight on a legislative babel from which both animals and unsuspecting consumers are defeated. 

In fact, the 2009 cosmetics regulation coexists with the Reach regulation , formally regulation no. 1907/2006, which concerns the registration, evaluation, authorization and restriction of chemicals . And the latter can impose tests on animals to define the safety of substances. Which actually happens.

Out of the 3,206 files deposited in the Reach database that somehow concern the cosmetics sector, 419 substances are exclusively functional for the production of make-up, creams, soaps and perfumes. Of these 419, 63 were tested on animals . Legally , perhaps because the ECHA (European Chemicals Agency) was not satisfied with alternative methodologies. 

Citizens deserve clarity

While waiting to unravel this tangle of conflicting rules, the European institutions should at least clarify . If the substances have been tested on animals, the scholars specify, it is right that at least consumers are aware of them , in order to be able to make an informed purchase choice.

To tend, it is desirable that this prohibition is really implemented with consistency and seriousness. All the more so because for years numerous scientific studies have questioned the reliability of animal tests. Regardless of the ethical considerations, in fact, on several occasions they have proved misleading, ending up hindering scientific progress, instead of spurring it on.