Ricky Gervais urges consumers to boycott cosmetic companies using China as 'excuse' to test on animals

                         Ricky Gervais is urging consumers to boycott companies that are testing on animals in order 

                         to expand into Chinese market where it is mandatory.

Louise Gray (2012) in his article argues that the UK and Europe in general has moved away from animal testing. However, with the economic power moving to the east and companies seeking to expand into new markets, most are now torn between adhering to their own policies or testing certain products and ingredients on animals as is the case in China. The big brands such as L’Oreal have also agreed on animal testing in order to sell in China and many of these products are finding their way back to the UK. She argues for the need to end the practice on animal cruelty.

Reference:

Gray, L. (2012) ‘Ricky Gervais urges consumers to boycott cosmetic companies using China as 'excuse' to test on animals’, Telegraph, 31 July, Available at:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/9441090/Ricky-Gervais-urges-consumers-to-boycott-cosmetic-companies-using-China-as-excuse-to-test-on-animals.html (Accessed: 31 December, 2013)

L’Oréal: animal testing alternatives vital but ensuring product safety is a MUST.

Andrew McDougall (2013) argues that L’Oreal is on the correct path by implementing policies and innovative approaches to testing. The move away from animal testing by the firm and the use of alternative testing however presents another challenge, the challenge of safety of the products. Despite the high investments in alternative testing, it is important to ensure that the products developed by the firm are safe for use by humans before availing the products on the shelves. Thus, according to him, the move into alternative testing is commendable but the issue of safety must be ensured in this process to ensure safety of consumers. (McDougall, 2013)

Reference:

McDougall, A. (2013) ‘L’Oréal: animal testing alternatives vital but ensuring product safety is a MUST’, Cosmetics design-europe, 19 December, Available at: http://www.cosmeticsdesign-europe.com/Formulation-Science/L-Oreal-animal-testing-alternatives-vital-but-ensuring-product-safety-is-a-MUST (Accessed: 29 December 2013)

L’Oreal turns attention to testing alternatives in China as it ramps up regional business.

Andrew McDougall (2013) is of the view that L’Oreal has resorted to alternative forms of testing its products so as to effectively operate in China. Being one of the largest cosmetics firms in the world, the firm has come under scrutiny for operating in a nation that upholds animal testing. L’Oreal has resorted to the use of Episkin, a human reconstructed epidermis model as a replacement method for animal testing. The new innovation comes as a result of the increased speed of expansion in the nation by L’Oreal. Animal rights groups welcomed the idea seeing it as a good move by the firm. ( McDougall, 2013)

Reference:

McDougall, A. (2013) ‘L’Oreal turns attention to testing alternatives in China as it ramps up regional business’, Cosmetics design-asia, 20 November, Available at:

http://www.cosmeticsdesign-asia.com/Formulation-Science/L-Oreal-turns-attention-to-testing-alternatives-in-China-as-it-ramps-up-regional-business (Accessed: 27 December 2013)

THE QUESTION OF ANIMAL TESTING

L’Oréal no longer tests on animals any of its products or any of its ingredients, anywhere in the world. Nor does L’Oréal delegate this task to others. An exception could only be made if regulatory authorities demanded it for safety or regulatory purposes.

L’Oreal tries to answer the question of animal testing in its facilities and argues that it no longer tests on animals. The group makes it clear that none of its products or any of its ingredients anywhere in the world. It also argues that it does not delegate the task of testing to other companies. However, the group argues that the only exception is where regulatory authorities demand testing on animals for regulatory purposes as is with the case in China. Thus, the firm argues that it does not engage in animal testing for any of its products and ingredients but this can only take place if mandated by the law. (L’Oreal, 2013)

Reference:

L’Oreal (2013) ‘The question of animal texting’, Available at: http://www.loreal.com/csr-commitments/loreal-answers/the-question-of-animal-testing.aspx (Accessed: 23 December 2013)

SOLD IN CHINA: L’OREAL BUYS BACK INTO ANIMAL TESTING

Elizabeth Culliford (2013) argues that China is a big market for cosmetic products and this has made international players to enter the market.  L’Oreal in particular had won the hearts of many with its policies against animal testing. However, the recent entry of the firm in China is seen as a move to embrace animal testing so as to penetrate the market. Although the firm argues that it does not do animal testing and only relies on science based expertise and alternative methods of testing, there is no guarantee that the firm does not conduct animal testing especially that the Chinese law requires the same. 

Reference: 
Culliford, E. (2013) ‘Sold in China: L’Oreal buys back into animal texting’, The World Of Chinese, 26 September, Available at: http://www.theworldofchinese.com/2013/09/sold-in-china-loreal-buys-back-into-animal-testing/ (Accessed: 22 December 2013).

Consumers 'being misled' over cruelty free cosmetics

Amy Bainbridge (2013) reports that consumers are being misled by the notion that there are cruelty fee cosmetics. An investigation carried out by consumer choice in Australia has proved that firms are misleading consumers about their animal testing policies. It argues that companies have allowed their products to be tested on animals in order to gain entry into the lucrative Chinese market. L’Oreal in particular says it is committed to advancing the cause of alternative methods of testing but its products are still tested on animal which has given it greater access to the Chinese market. The consumer group is thus developing a non-animal test for cosmetics.

Reference:

Bainbridge, A. (2013) ‘Consumers 'being misled' over cruelty free cosmetics’, ABC news, 6 May, Available at:http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-05/claims-consumers-being-misled-over-cosmetics/4669122 (Accessed: 21 December, 2013)

Boycott The Body Shop

Nature watch (2013) is arguing consumers in the EU to boycott the Body Shop, a subsidiary of L’Oreal. The reason for this is that as much as the EU has implemented a cosmetics testing ban, the firm’s profits are used to fund L’Oreal’s operations in China through a research facility that tests products on animals. It urges consumers to boycott the firm because L’Oreal has shown impressive performance in China as revenues are above expectations and this reinforces the concern that the firm is indeed testing products on animals before selling them in China. Thus, consumers ought to shun the firm because of the same.

Reference:

Natual watch (2013), ‘Boycott The Body Shop’, Available at:

http://naturewatch.org/campaign/the-body-shop-boycott (Accessed: 20 December, 2013)

How Cruelty-Free Are Your Cosmetics?

PETA asks the question “how cruelty-free are your cosmetics?” PETA in this article argues that as much as companies are promoting and marketing their products as cruelty-free, some companies are paying for animal testing in China. L’Oreal operations in China seem to stem from the same as much as the firm markets its products as cruelty free. PETA argues that there is need to support firms that are working against animal testing. PETA also urges consumers to buy only those brands that are not tested on animals so as to encourage others to adopt cruelty free operations. (Claire Fryer, 2013)


Reference: 
Fryer, C. (2013) ‘How Cruelty-Free Are Your Cosmetics?’, PETA Australia, Avaliable at: http://www.peta.org.au/the-issues/experiment-on/how-cruelty-free-are-your-cosmetics/ (Accessed: 19 December, 2013)

L'Occitane and Yves Rocher: The big-name beauty brands among those ditching cruelty-free animal testing policies to sell their products to China

Going global: Big-name beauty brands have changed their animal testing policies so they can start 

selling their products in China (posed by model)

l            By law, all human cosmetics sold in China must first be tested on animals

l            Lucrative Chinese beauty sales rose by 18 per cent to £10bn last year

l            Cruelty Free International chief executive 'disappointed' to see brands 'letting animals pay the price' for their profit-chasing

Suzannah Hills (2012) argues that the big names in the cosmetics industry the world over are ditching cruelty-free animal testing policies so as to sell to China. The Chinese law demands that all human cosmetics first be tested on animals. The growth in the Chinese cosmetics industry to £10bn has attracted international players. L’Oreal is among these firms and it has entered the Chinese market through another firm which means it upholds animal testing. The argument is that it is disappointing to let animals pay the price for the firm’s profit chasing and hence there is need to prevent animal testing.

Reference:

Hulls, S. (2012) ‘L'Occitane and Yves Rocher: The big-name beauty brands among those ditching cruelty-free animal testing policies to sell their products to China’, Mail online, 1 August, Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2181468/Big-beauty-brands-dropping-cruelty-free-animal-testing-policies-sell-products-China.html (Accessed: 17 December, 2013)

L'Oreal buys back into tests on animals

The SMH (2013) reports that L’Oreal’s expansion into China has a hidden cost for rabbits and mice. Being a manufacturer of shampoos and lipsticks, it means that the firm will have to implement animal testing despite rules that forbid animal testing in the EU. In China, companies are required to submit samples of their products to be used for tests at local laboratories, according to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. PETA estimates at least 72 animals are used for each product. L'Oreal says less than 1 per cent of its total safety tests on cosmetics ingredients involve animals. Xu Jingquan, the secretary general at the All-China Federation of Industry and Commerce argues that in China consumers do not think much about ideals such as animal testing, all they care about is the price, the brand and the product. Thus, mandatory animal testing will continue to form a big part of the cosmetics industry in China.

Reference:

SMH (2013), ‘L'Oreal buys back into tests on animals’, 24 August, Available at:  http://www.smh.com.au/world/loreal-buys-back-into-tests-on-animals-20130823-2sgzu.html (Accessed: 16 December, 2013)

China considering easing rules on animal testing for some cosmetics

Adan Jourdan and Clare Baldwin (2013) reports that, China is planning in easing rules on animal testing for some cosmetics.  From 2014, the non-specialized cosmetics that are manufactured in China for example, shampoos, soaps, nail products and some skin products could be sold without having to be tested on animals. This is seen as a plus for firms such as L’Oreal that has been planning to enter the market although this will mean that the firm has to manufacture the products in China and only deal with specific product lines as opposed to selling a wide range of cosmetics in China. Animal rights groups welcomed the proposed changes, but said that this would not mark the end of animal testing in China as ingredients used for cosmetics may still have to go through an approval process involving animal tests.

Reference:

Jourdan, A. and Baldwin, C. (2013) ‘China considering easing rules on animal testing for some cosmetics’, Reuters, 13 November, Available at:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/13/china-cosmetics-animaltesting-idUSL2N0IU0BZ20131113 (Accessed: 15 December 2013)

China Animal Testing Complicates L’Oreal’s Expansion

Photographer: STR/ AFP via Getty Images

A Chinese researcher injects a monkey with an experimental solution at a laboratory in Guangzhou. China is the only major market that requires brands to test their mascaras and lotions on animals.

Bloomberg News (2013) argues that L’Oreal’s expansion into the $32 billion beauty market in China through acquisition of Magic Holdings International limited. However, this expansion into China is stifled by European Union’s rules on animal testing while China requires such trials. L’Oreal is thus faced with a dilemma of whether or not to enter the market without alienating consumers in markets where public sentiments demand humane treatment of animals. In China, firms are mandated by law to submit samples of products to be used for tests at local laboratories where an estimated 72 animals are used for each product. Market researcher Mintel says at least 4,249 beauty and personal care products were introduced in China over the past 12 months. That would translate into more than 300,000 animals used in tests over the past year, according to Bloomberg calculations based on the Mintel and PETA estimates. China’s beauty and personal care market will expand to $34.8 billion this year, Euromonitor estimates, from last year’s $32 billion.

Reference:

Bloomberg News (2013) ‘China Animal Testing Complicates L’Oreal’s Expansion’, 22 August, 

Available at:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-08-21/rabbits-pay-the-price-as-l-oreal-to-p-g-expand-in-china.html (Accessed: 14 December 2013)