Food giants caught in animal testing scandal

Rabbits, piglets and mice are being killed when heavily pregnant, injected with deadly bacteria and bled to death by food firms testing fashionable superfoods, it has emerged. The experiments involve food giants including KitKat maker Nestle, Unilever - the owners of PG tips - Knorr, Hellmann’s and Yakult, the maker of probiotic drinks. Companies like Unilever, Nestle, Yakult and Danone have allegedly been involved in 'sickening' tests on animals. A spokesman for Nestle said that Nestlé does not use animal testing to develop conventional foods and drinks, such as coffee, tea, cereal and chocolate. Unilever also said it does not test tea or tea-based products on animals.  If tests are required by law for safety reasons, they are kept to a minimum and carried out by third parties. (Daily mail, 2013)

Reference

Macrae, F. and Rowe, N. (2013) ‘Food giants caught in animal testing scandal’, Daily mail, 21 June, Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2345276/Food-giants-Nestle-Unilever-caught-animal-testing-scandal.html (Accessed: 19 February, 2014)

An Ugly Dilemma for Beauty Companies

Lisa Lin claimed that China is the only major market where companies must test their mascaras and lotions on animals. That’s created a dilemma for Procter & Gamble that want to sell in the giant market without alienating consumers in countries where public sentiment frowns on such animal treatment.  Most of the companies need to devise separate formulations for China and Europe or produce China-only items. P&G gets about 18 percent of its annual sales from Asia by its products. P&G, the largest seller of beauty and personal-care products in China, chose it for the global launch of its Oceana skin-care brand in January and has introduced products there under the Pantene and Head & Shoulders lines. P&G, which says it doesn’t test on animals unless required by law, has discussed the benefits of non-animal trials with Chinese authorities, it said in a statement. (Business week, 2013)

Reference

Lin, L. (2013), ‘An Ugly Dilemma for Beauty Companies’, Business week, 26 September, Available at: http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-09-26/cosmetics-makers-dilemma-animal-testing-rules-differ-in-china-europe (Accessed: 18 February, 2014)

Is This an Image of L’Oreal Bunny Testing?

Waffles (2013) discusses an image about animal testing that is alleged to have been used by L’Oreal during the process of testing. There are arguments that the L’Oreal is testing and that is why it was removed in PETA. However, there is little that can be found that links L’Oreal to the rabbit testing. L’Oreal in a rejoinder says that it only submits products for testing in China as mandated by the law and only tests a small portion about 1% of its products on mice and rats. Waffles argues that L’Oreal is faced with a dilemma of adhering to rules in China or its own policies.

Reference

Waffles (2013) ‘Is This an Image of L’Oreal Bunny Testing?’, 30 December, Available at: http://wafflesatnoon.com/2013/12/30/loreal-bunny-testing/ (Accessed: 17 February, 2014)

Beauty Brands and Companies That Do Not Use Animal Testing

Stefani Forster (2013) in this article said that since many of our beloved products are manufactured by large, international beauty giants like L'Oreal, the push for cruelty-free cosmetics is more elusive than you might think. Some governments, such as China, require (by law) that cosmetic products be tested on animals, and a global market often dictates a company’s policies. To L’Oreal, China is a big market for its products like make up, hair shampoo, skin care which decides that L’Oreal cannot give up this attractive opportunity for its expansion even though it may cause a dilemma of Animal Testing.

The video below is about China Animal Testing Complicates L’Oreal Expansion.

http://www.bloomberg.com/video/china-animal-testing-complicates-l-oreal-expansion-aHA3oZkkRPi84XFtW7~2CA.html

  

Reference

Forster, S. (2013) ‘Beauty Brands and Companies That Do Not Use Animal Testing’, Stylelist Canada, 19 June, Available at: http://www.stylelist.ca/2013/06/19/beauty-brands-companies-that-do-not-use-animal-testing/ (Accessed: 15 February, 2014)

Taking a humane look at cosmetics

Wei Xu and Lei Zhang (2013) claimed China is considering ways to reduce animal testing of cosmetics. The draft stated that cosmetics made from ingredients that have already been tested and classified as safe will be exempt from animal testing. L'Oreal, which recently expanded a factory in Hubei province into its largest production base in the Asia-Pacific region, has developed a Chinese EpiSkin model. It can provide solid technical support for the new EU regulations because it can be used as a replacement for human and animal tissue in some tests and the product has already been certified for use in Europe. However, the methods are still immature in terms of testing new ingredients in cosmetics, especially the methods of testing for chronic diseases. For some ‘special use’ products like hair dyes and sunscreens L’Oreal still need to test on animals to meet the Chinese laws.

Reference

Xu, W and Zhang, L. (2013) ‘Taking a humane look at cosmetics’, China Daily, 20 December, Available at: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/business/2013-12/20/content_17186590_4.htm (Accessed: 13 February, 2014 )

Teaching Tip: An Ethical Dilemma for Beauty Companies

Barry Render (2013) claimed that western cosmetics makers are ecstatic about the prospect of continued growth in China’s $32 billion beauty market. China is the only major market where companies must test their mascaras and lotions on animals. That’s created a dilemma for L’Oreal that want to sell in the giant market without alienating consumers in countries where public sentiment frowns on such animal treatment. L’Oreal isn’t about to turn away from China because it gets about 19% of its annual sales from Asia and companies’ shares have been rising as well. Those brands which refuse to do animal tests are blocked from the Chinese market entirely. L’Oreal in a statement said the company always abides with local regulations. Chinese consumer doesn’t think as much about ideals such as animal testing and they care about the price, the brand, and the product.

Reference

Render, B. (2013) ‘Teaching Tip: An Ethical Dilemma for Beauty Companies’, Heizerrenderom, 8 October, Available at: http://heizerrenderom.wordpress.com/2013/10/08/teaching-tip-an-ethical-dilemma-for-beauty-companies/ (Accessed: 12 February, 2014)

Is Your Beauty Worth the Lives of 11.5 Million Innocent Animals?

Jessica Ramos (2014) argues that an individual’s beauty is not worth the lives of 11.5 million innocent animals. In the article, the controversy surrounding the issue of animal testing is highlighted with a research that was conducted for the purpose of establishing the credibility of the animal testing argument. The author argues that large firm’s such as L’Oreal in their rush to enter China have argued that they do not engage in animal testing except when required by the law. However, the author argues that the company is known for not being transparent and therefore not committed to cruelty free products.

Reference:

Ramos, J. (2014) ‘Is Your Beauty Worth the Lives of 11.5 Million Innocent Animals?’ , Care2, 5 February, Available at: http://www.care2.com/causes/is-your-beauty-worth-the-lives-of-11-5-million-innocent-animals.html (Accessed: 10 February, 2014)

L'Oreal contributes to an important step towards validating alternative method in China

The experts from the multicenter study management group highly appraised that this multicenter study based on L’Oreal Chinese Episkin represents the very first validation of standardized and normative animal testing alternative methods in accordance with international standards in China, and this project provides a solid technical support for corresponding to the new regulation in European Union. It created a novel mode for making accordance with the international technical platform of animal testing alternative methods. More than thirty years of research on skin reconstruction and development of predictive methods have been recognized in this day and it is a great step towards the promotion of alternative methods in China by sharing knowledge and tools. This method has already allowed L’Oréal to comply with EU regulation without impact on sustainable innovation and safety and it won’t have any bad influence on L’Oreal expansion on Chinese market.  ( L’Oreal, 2013)

Reference

L’Oreal (2013) ‘L'Oreal contributes to an important step towards validating alternative method in China’, 14 November, Available at: http://www.loreal-finance.com/eng/news/research-innovation-926.htm (Accessed: 9 February, 2014)

The truth about L’Oreal

North Carolina (2012) points out that beauty product giant, L’Oreal, has made a lot of headlines like resuming animal testing to sell new products to the Chinese market but not in the most positive way. L’Oreal has found themselves in hot water with consumers who demand ethical practices and safer products. L’Oreal is the companies who have slyly claimed they are against unnecessary animal testing, while really meaning that they just did not have any need to do so at the time. They are aiming to sell new products in China, they have resumed animal testing, but are lamenting that their hands are tied and they have no other options. They’ve also been craftily stating that they haven’t tested “finished products” on animals since 1989, which really means that they still test ingredients on animals, just not the finished product.

Reference

Carolina, N. (2012) ‘The Truth About L'Oreal’, Beautylish, 11 June, Available at: http://www.beautylish.com/t/rxvzj/the-truth-about-loreal  (Accessed: 7 February, 2014)

China Animal Testing Complicates L’Oreal’s Expansion

While the EU prohibits animal testing, large multi-national beauty companies are facing the reverse challenge in China. In broad strokes, local regulations require such testing for new products introduced in the market, which at nearly 35 billion dollars is quickly becoming the most coveted in the world. Samples of all products must be submitted for testing at local levels. L’Oreal has taken similar stances on the matter – maintaining that animals trials are only conducted where mandated by law or when no other alternatives exist. L’Oreal emphasizes the fact that only 1 percent of its total safety tests involve animals, and that it operates a reconstructed sin lab in China for local tests. Everyone is reportedly ‘actively’ working with local authorities on alternative approval methods. The official government stance is that while there is no adversity to alternative testing, they to reach category expertise cannot be developed overnight. (Edited China, 2013)

Reference

Edited China (2013) ‘China Animal Testing Complicates L’Oreal’s Expansion’, 22 August, Available at: http://editedchina.com/post/59674196269/china-animal-testing-complicates-loreals (Accessed: 6 February, 2014)

Victory against cruelty: Animal test ban finally takes effect after 30 years

                                                                  An EU ban on animal testing has come into effect

Charlotte Meredith (2013) reported the victory for animal welfare campaigners comes after decades of protests against using animals to test the safety of toiletries. EU regulators announced the ban along with a pledge to make more efforts to push other parts of the world, like China, to accept alternatives. Before a ban on animal experiments in the EU in 2009, about 2,000 animals were still being used for testing in France, the Czech Republic, Spain and Romania. As a cosmetics company, L’Oreal has said that it would respect the ban and “no longer sell in Europe any finished product with an ingredient that was tested on animals. However, it doesn’t means they won’t sell their finished products without animal tasting in other countries besides EU like China. The RSPCA will now be taking its message to these countries and companies to ask them to follow our lead and end this suffering.

Reference

Meredith, C. (2013) ‘Victory against cruelty: Animal test ban finally takes effect after 30 years’, Express, 11 March, Available at: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/383425/Victory-against-cruelty-Animal-test-ban-finally-takes-effect-after-30-years (Accessed: 4 February, 2014)

Behind the Brand: L’Oreal

Peter Salisbury (2011) wrote that in 2009, L’Oreal published a report on its sustainable practices, which repeated the claim that it does not test finished products on animals. In this report, L’Oreal said that it has not used animals to test its finished products since 1989, except in the case where national legislation requires it. This is the case in certain countries where L’Oreal operates and in those locations regulations require testing using animals before substances can be registered for commercial use. As L’Oreal operates on an international scale, it is obliged to comply with the current national legislation for products that are manufactured locally and sold locally. L’Oréal do face a tough set of choices; either innovate in order to maintain their market share, or use existing ingredients and allow less ethical competitors to launch new products, or continue developing within the limits of regional legislation.

Reference

Salisbury, P. (2011) ‘Behind the Brand: L’Oreal’, Ecologist, 10 August, Available at: http://www.theecologist.org/green_green_living/behind_the_label/1008667/behind_the_brand_loral.html (Accessed: 3 February, 2014)

China may change rules on animal tests for cosmetics

China is considering changing the rules to allow the sale of some cosmetics without requiring them to be tested on animals, opening up the mainland market to international firms opposed to the practice. Under the potential changes, “non-specialized cosmetics” manufactured in China — such as shampoos, soaps, nail products and some skin products — could be sold from June next year without undergoing animal testing, according to the China Food and Drug Administration. This may enable firms which do not allow the practice, such as British cosmetics retailer The Body Shop, owned by L’Oreal, to enter the country’s 134 billion yuan (US$22 billion) cosmetics market. The Body Shop welcomes the signals that the Chinese authorities are adopting a new approach to cosmetic testing. (China, 2013)

Reference:

China.org.cn (2013) ‘China may change rules on animal tests for cosmetics’, 14 November, Available at: http://www.china.org.cn/china/2013-11/14/content_30597257.htm (Accessed: 1 February, 2014)

L'Oreal donates $1.2million to help abolish animal testing but welfare groups say the company should stop the practice NOW

Cruelty-free: Cosmetic giant L'Oreal has donated $1.2million to an EPA program that will investigate the safety of chemicals without the need for animal testing

Hannah Rand (2012) reported that L'Oreal has taken a step further to stopping the testing of their beauty and fragrance products on live animals. The company has donated $1.2million to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to help improve the testing of safe chemicals. The move will lessen the amount of experiments that need to be done on animals – potentially even making the emotive practice obsolete. Chemical testing is more expensive than experiments on animals, which is why only a handful of cosmetic companies go completely 'cruelty-free'. And, as a result, there are potentially many chemicals on the market not being used that may already be completely safe, EPA official David Dix told NY Daily News. The money will be used to fund EPA testing of a system called ToxCast, which according to the EPA is the most up-to-date method.

Reference

Rand, H. (2012) ‘L'Oreal donates $1.2million to help abolish animal testing but welfare groups say the company should stop the practice NOW’, Dailymail, 15 March, Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2115572/LOreal-donates-1-2million-help-abolish-animal-testing-welfare-groups-say-company-stop-practice-NOW.html (Accessed: 30 January, 2014)

China May Ease Animal Testing Rules, Opening The Door For International Cosmetics Companies

Huffington Post (2014) reports of the possibility of China easing animal testing rules in order to allow for international cosmetics companies to operate in the nation. This has come as a result of the pressure from the EU that has banned the sale of cosmetic products and foods that have been tested on animals. Cosmetics retailer L’Oreal may get a chance to operate in the nation as a result of this. However, animal rights groups argue that this may not be the end of animal testing in the nation as there are ingredients used for cosmetics may still go through an approval process that involves animals.

Reference:

Huffington Post (2014) ‘China May Ease Animal Testing Rules, Opening The Door For International Cosmetics Companies’, 23 January, Available at:  

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/13/china-animal-testing-rules_n_4265643.html (Accessed: 28 January, 2014)

Companies resume animal tests for China’s market

Ad-International (2013) argues that there is a growing trend among firms today to adopt animal tests. The trend has been witnessed as a result of the increasing need to venture into the Chinese market. The major cosmetics companies such as L’Oreal which had implemented non-animal testing policies are no longer categorized as cruelty free and this is because of expanding into China where animal testing is mandatory. China is years behind on this issue and has shown little interest in stopping the vice. The author argues of the need to maintain pressure globally so as to end the issue of animal testing.

Reference:

Animal Defenders international (2013) ‘Companies resume animal tests for China’s market’, 7 March, Available at: http://www.ad-international.org/publications/go.php?id=3049 (Accessed: 26 January, 2014)

Cosmetics Giant Faces China Dilemma

China digital times (2013) argues that L’Oreal faces a major dilemma as it plans to enter China and this is because of the requirement by China to conduct tests on animals. According to the author, the EU has forbidden animal testing but the practice is ripe in China given the influence of Chinese legal requirements. Therefore, it will be difficult for the firm to avoid using animal testing in order to get their products approved for sale in the Chinese markets. However, the firm is working with Chinese authorities in order to develop alternative approval methods which will help ensure entry into the market.

Reference:

China Digital Times (2013), ‘Cosmetics Giant Faces China Dilemma’, 22 August, Available at: http://chinadigitaltimes.net/2013/08/cosmetics-giant-faces-china-dilemma/ (Accessed: 24 January, 2014)

Cosmetics: Because it’s no longer worth it

Foreign cosmetics-makers are scaling back their ambitions in China

According to the Economist (2014), beauty is big business in China. However, the world’s biggest cosmetics firms are moving away from the market citing a number of issues. L’Oreal has cited that it will stop selling its Garnier line of beauty products in China as a change in strategy. However, this is seen as a way of avoiding the mandatory animal testing the firm is subjected to in the Chinese market in this line of products. The animal testing issue is costing the western firms and causing them numerous public relations problems back home. The withdrawal of the line is seen as a promise to cruelty free products.

Reference:

Economist (2014) ‘Cosmetics: Because it’s no longer worth it’, 11 January, Available at:

http://www.economist.com/news/business/21593466-foreign-cosmetics-makers-are-scaling-back-their-ambitions-china-because-its-no-longer-worth (Accessed: 22 January, 2014)

L'Oreal launches ambitious green plan, but stumbles on animal testing regulations

L'Oreal has unveiled its ambitious sustainability plan.

James Russell (2013) argues that L’Orel has launched an ambitious green plan but the problem is that it has stumbled on animal testing regulations. The company in its plan for the next 16 years plans on slashing water use and waste to landfill and ensure that it secures 1 billion new customers. The problem however is the issue on animal testing where the firm argues that it has less than 1% of safety assessments that are conducted on animals. Another issue is the entry into China which demands samples of products for animal testing. It is only if the firm can deal with the issue that it will benefit from the plan.

Reference: 
Russell, J. (2013) ‘L'Oreal launches ambitious green plan, but stumbles on animal testing regulations’, The New Zealand Herald, 29 October, Available at:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/environment/news/article.cfm?c_id=39&objectid=11148198

(Accessed: 20 January, 2014)

E.U. Bans Cosmetics With Animal-Tested Ingredients

                                                                                            Julien Warnand/European Pressphoto Agency
                                          Tonio Borg, the European Union's commissioner for health and consumer 
                                         policy, said in a draft announcement that Europe was trying to set an example.

James Kanter (2013) reports on the Ban of cosmetics with animal tested ingredients in the EU. The EU while introducing the ban indicated that there is a need for firms across the world to stop animal testing and promote alternatives. The author argues that although the ban will affect many companies that are engaged in the vice, third world countries may just form the next destination for firms that use animals for testing. China has continued to hold onto animal testing with larger cosmetic companies such as L’Oreal being required by law to obey. The EU is urging global acceptance with a push for China to implement the same.

Reference: 

Kenter, J. (2013) ‘E.U. Bans Cosmetics With Animal-Tested Ingredients’, The New York Times, 11 March, Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/11/business/global/eu-to-ban-cosmetics-with-animal-tested-ingredients.html?_r=0 (Accessed: 18 January, 2014)

L'Oreal expands to China, buys back in to cosmetic testing on animals

The pedestrian notes that the recent expansion of L’Oreal into China has brought back the dark days of animal testing. The firm has acquired Magic’s holdings international in China and this move is seen as a good entry strategy into China. However, the cost of this entry is that the firm will be subjected to animal testing, a policy that the firm has strived to delink itself from. China demands animal testing for every new cosmetic product and this will impact negatively on the reputation of the firm. However, the Body Shop refused to expand because of its insistence on cruelty free products. (Pedestrian, 2013)

Reference:

Pedestrian (2013) ‘L'Oreal expands to China, buys back in to cosmetic testing on animals’, 24 August, Available at: https://www.pedestrian.tv/news/arts-and-culture/loreal-expands-to-china-buys-back-in-to-cosmetic-t/c12d5c88-d462-4c61-9833-2b60bd63bd8e.htm (Accessed: 16 January, 2014)

New EPA - L’Oreal Partnership Could Help End Animal Testing for Cosmetics

Wayne Pacelle’s (2012) argues that animal testing is painful to animals and cannot be justified ethically or scientifically. However, there are thousands of cosmetics on the shelves that have gone through this process. L’Oreal is working towards eliminating the practice completely in its operations. This is seen through the EPA-L’Oreal partnership that could see the end of animal testing in cosmetics. In this new plan, the firms have resorted to developing an EPA’s non-animal chemical evaluation tool and Toxicity Forecaster. The aim is to ensure that there are no tests conducted on these animals to ensure ethical responsibility in their operations.

References:

Pacelle’s, W. (2012) ‘New EPA-L’Oreal Partnership Could Help End Animal Testing for Cosmetics’, Typepad, 12 March, Available at: http://hsus.typepad.com/wayne/2012/03/new-epa-lor%C3%A9al-partnership-could-help-end-animal-testing-for-cosmetics.html (Accessed: 13 January, 2014)

L’Oréal contributes to an important step towards validating alternative method in China

Web wire reports that L’Oreal’s anti animal testing policies have resulted in major innovations at the firm’s laboratories in China. The firm has developed an alternative method to animal testing in China. The multi-center study developed an alternative method which is seen as the very first validation of standardized and normative animal testing in accordance with international standards in China. This is seen as an important step given the continued requirements by the Chinese government on animal testing. The model of epidermal has been critical for L’Oreal in proving its animal testing efforts. (Web wire, 2013)

Reference:

Web wire (2013) ‘L’Oréal contributes to an important step towards validating alternative method in China’, 15 November, Available at:

http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=182854#.UwHKW2KSwoM (Accessed: 11 January, 2014)

The Body Shop and Tom’s of Maine: Still Cruelty-Free

PETA in their article have examined firms that are cruelty free. The author argues that a series of companies are still testing on animals. However, the Body Shop having been acquired by L’Oreal still maintains its cruelty free practices. The author argues that buyers want compassion across the board and hence it is mandatory for them to stop animal testing. Despite the expansion of L’Oreal into other countries, the author argues that they can still maintain and implement their cruelty free policies and encourage nations such as China to implement such policies because the number of compassionate markets are also expanding. (PETA, 2013)

Reference:

PETA (2013) ‘The Body Shop and Tom’s of Maine: Still Cruelty-Free’, Available at: http://www.peta.org/living/beauty/body-shop-tom-s-maine/ (Accessed: 9 January, 2014)

L'Oreal Invests $1.2 Million Into Researching Animal Test Alternatives

Cosmetic giant partners with the EPA to test chemical toxicity without animals.

The Sprague-Dawley lab rat lives for an average of three years during which time the animal is exposed to countless forms of painful and invasive testing without any painkillers. (Photo: Mauro Fermariello / Getty)

Jocelyn Heaney (2012) is his article reports of the progress made by L’Oreal in terms of stamping out the practice of animal testing. The firm has invested $1.2 million into a project that aims to research on the alternatives available to animal testing. The cosmetic giant has partnered with EPA to test chemical toxicity without the use animals. This is seen as a good move and one that is likely to impact on the company’s policies and practices regarding animal testing in China based on its commitment against animal testing. However, the regulatory issues present a problem for the firm because they are mandatory.

Reference:

Heaney, J. (2012) ‘L'Oreal Invests $1.2 Million Into Researching Animal Test Alternatives’, take part, 12 March, Available at:

http://www.takepart.com/blog-series/paw-and-order/2012/03/13/loreal-sinks-12-million-finding-alternatives-animal-tests (Accessed: 8 January, 2014)

Boycott L'Oreal For Torturing Animals!

Tell L'Oreal to stop using animals for harmful cosmetic testing.

The animal rescue site (2014) in its article urges consumers to boycott L’Oreal because of its practices of torturing animals. The article argues that as much as the animal testing was considered a thing of the past, L’Oreal does not think so and continues to use rabbits as test subjects for its beauty products. The article explains how the procedure is done which involves dropping the chemicals into the eyes of rabbits, shaving and pouring chemicals on their skins and then the animals are euthanized after serving their purpose. The site argues for an end to animal testing.

Reference:

Animal Rescue Site (2014) ‘Boycott L'Oreal For Torturing Animals!’ Available at:

http://theanimalrescuesite.greatergood.com/clickToGive/ars/petition/LOrealRabbits (Accessed: 7 January, 2014)

‘No animal test’ rule to apply to imported cosmetics too

P.T. Jyothi Datta and Purvita Chatterjee (2013) argues that India has enacted a legislation that will see to it that the imported range of cosmetic products have a declaration that they are free of animal tests. The DTAB has recommended these provisions in order to stamp out animal testing. L’Oreal argued that it had stopped animal testing on all its products and hence did not see how the decision could impact on their business. The company argued that unlike China where it has to test its products on animals, it is not affected by the decision in India.

Reference:

Jyothi Datta, P.T. and Chatterjee, P. (2013) ‘‘No animal test’ rule to apply to imported cosmetics too’, Business Line, 5 December, Available at: http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/industry-and-economy/no-animal-test-rule-to-apply-to-imported-cosmetics-too/article5425404.ece (Accessed: 6 January, 2014)

Top cosmetic companies give in to greed and resume cruel animal testing, blame China

Sarka-Jonae Miller (2012) argues that it is all about the money and greed by firms and that is why they have practically discarded their policies against animal testing. After a long period of being cruelty free, some of the biggest cosmetics companies such as L’Oreal have resumed testing on animals with the excuse that the Chinese governments wants them to test on products sold in China. The author argues that there are already thousands of ingredients that have been proven safe for use in personal care products but firms due to greed are looking for ways to manipulate consumers so as to expand to other markets.

Reference:

Miller, S. (2012) ‘Top cosmetic companies give in to greed and resume cruel animal testing, blame China’, Natural News, 27 February, Available at: http://www.naturalnews.com/035078_cosmetic_companies_animal_testing_cruelty.html (Accessed: 5 January, 2014)

Testing no ordeal for L'Oreal

 

According to SCMP (2013), animal testing is a bad practice and sits uneasily with western ethics and practices. However, the Swiss cosmetics giant is mandated by law to assess its products on animals in China. The firm has embraced this practice because of the need to expand to one of the largest cosmetics markets in the world. Thus, as much as the firm has implemented policies that forbid animal testing, it is part and parcel of their operations in countries such as China. Without this, it would have been difficult for the firm to expand to China which permits animal testing by law.

Reference:

South China Morning post (2013), ‘Testing no ordeal for L'Oreal’, 23 August, Available at: http://www.scmp.com/business/companies/article/1298705/testing-no-ordeal-loreal (Accessed: 4 January, 2014)

Stop the use of animal testing recently restarted at L'Oreal.

Bethany Beales (2013) in her article argues that the major contributor to the problem of animal testing is the growing Chinese market. Many companies are eyeing the lucrative industry and hence have resorted to animal testing. L’Oreal from the early 80’s was animal testing free but it move to the lucrative Chinese market has resulted in the firm taking up the product. The firm has put ethics aside and taken up animal testing in order to ensure continuity of its activities in China. Thus, the authors argues for the need for L’Oreal to stop animal testing in its products in China.

Reference:

Beales, B. (2013) Stop the use of animal testing recently restarted at L'Oreal, change, Available at: http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/l-oreal-stop-the-use-of-animal-testing-recently-restarted-at-l-oreal (Accessed: 2 January, 2014)