Defend the European Union's Cosmetics Ban Deadline

FROM  National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS)

ACTION

Defend the European Union's cosmetics ban by writing to the European Commission and ask them KEEP 2013 deadline and to end the use of animal brutality to "test" cosmetics.

Although the European Commission has recently stated in official communications that the deadline remains 2013, there is speculation that it could propose to postpone the ban by at least five years.

Mr. John Dalli
European Commissioner for Health and Consumer Policy
European Commission
B-1049 Brussels
Belgium
email

INFORMATION / TALKING POINTS

In 2003 the EU introduced a phase-out of cosmetics testing on animals and a complete ban on the sale of cosmetic products containing ingredients tested on animals anywhere in the world - a great victory.

Although the ban on cosmetic ingredients tested on animals has been in place since March 2009, the deadline for replacement of certain animal tests under the marketing ban was extended to March 2013 in order to allow alternatives to be developed and approved.

However, some cosmetic companies still using animals for testing their products have been dragging their feet instead of investing in alternatives, and are lobbying in Brussels to be allowed to continue their horrific tests.

Although the European Commission has recently stated in official communications that the deadline remains 2013, there is speculation that it could propose to postpone the ban by at least 5 years.

In your letter, let Commissioner John Dalli know that:

• There are around 10,000 ingredients available for use in cosmetics, and an infinite amount of products can be made by combining different variations of these ingredients. Many cosmetic companies have shown that they can be both innovative and commercially successful without using ingredients that have been tested on animals.
• Cosmetic testing has been banned in the UK since 1998 and it is unacceptable for European citizens to kill and make animals suffer for products which do not have any medical objectives.
• Animal models are unreliable and do not accurately predict adverse effects in humans. If the animal model cannot provide safe products, then it should be replaced with more efficient human based alternatives, which use human cells and tissues.
• The cosmetic industry has had plenty of time to develop alternatives: postponing the 2013 deadline would reward those companies still using animals for their lack of efforts, and will wipe out the motivation for them to replace those painful tests.

Thank you for everything you do for animals!