Entry- Exit Inspection and Quarantine Bureau.
Strict safety tests
The Hygienic Standards for Cosmetics, China’s guidelines for safety tests on cosmetics, were introduced by the former Ministry of Health in 2007.
The methods specified by the regulation, which is based on guidelines drawn up by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, require that all cosmetic products be subjected to 17 animalbased toxicological tests, such as those for acute oral toxicity, acute eye irritation, skin sensitization and a combined test for chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity.
The skin sensitization test uses 20 guinea pigs as samples and a further 10 as “controls”, that is, they don’t undergo the tests. Cosmetics are repeatedly applied to a shaved area on the subject animal’s back, the condition of the skin is then compared with its control and any changes are noted.
In the combined chronic toxicity/carcinogenicity test, both the test and control groups comprise 100 animals, a 50-50 split of males and females. The tests are conducted continually throughout the animals’ life spans, usually about a year.
Li Hua, president of Animal Guardians, a nongovernmental animal rights group, said the problems associated with the protection of lab animals stem from the fact that the general public knows little about what happens in the labs.
“Even animal right activists such as my organization are unable to gain access to inside information, so the industry is effectively closed to outsiders,” she said.
Improvements in animal welfare were first introduced by the Ministry of Science and Technology, which issued China’s first guidelines on the humane treatment of lab animals — including advice on breeding, transportation and the conduct of the experiments — in October 2006.
Since then, the authorities in a number of areas, including the provinces of Guangdong and Hubei, and Beijing, have formulated their own regulations.
Compared with the laws and regulations in Western countries, though, some species have been omitted from the list covered by the test regulations, according to He Zhengming, a researcher with the National Institutes for Food and Drug Control.
In an article published in 2011, he noted that the national and local standards include the most-commonly used species, but fail to cover animals such as Mongolian gerbils and domestic cats.
Search for alternatives
The EU ban on animal testing has forced producers to accelerate research into alternative technologies. The move is unlikely to have an immediate impact on companies with production units in China, though, because products tested before the ban came into force will remain on the shelves in Europe.
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, a facsimile of human skin constructed from Asian keratinocytes, the dominant cells in the outer layer of the skin.
In a news release, the company said EpiSkin 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, especially those related to corrosion and irritation of the skin. In Europe, the product has already been certified for use.
In 2011, the CFDA embarked on a project to identify alternatives to animal testing.
The project, headed by He Zhengming, is examining the possibility of setting up a special body to research alternatives to toxicological tests on animals. The group also reports on the latest developments in ongoing research methods and the application of alternative research and testing, plus conditions in laboratories.
Both He and the CFDA declined invitations to be interviewed on the project’s latest findings.
Jiao, the expert from Guangdong Entry Exit Inspection and Quarantine Bureau, said that the alternative methods have drawbacks. “The methods are still immature in terms of testing new ingredients in cosmetics, especially the methods of testing for chronic diseases,” she said.
Many cosmetics companies warmly greeted the proposal to phase out mandatory animal tests among Chinese producers.
“We know that many Chinese people have already tried Lush products and liked them, so we would love to be able to sell in China,” said Jones from Lush Retail.
The Body Shop also welcomes the signals from the Chinese authorities and looks forward to selling its products in China one day, company spokeswoman Louise Terry told CNN.
However, the companies insisted they would not make their products available in China until the requirement for mandatory animal testing is abandoned.
If it comes to pass, the move could also be instrumental in allowing Chinese cosmetics to be marketed in Europe. The regulatory requirement for animal- based tests have long been an obstacle to that ambition, according to Peter Li, Humane Society International’s China policy expert, who said the society has been in contact with the CFDA since June 2012, most recently in September.
“We tried to convey the following message: China can regard the adoption of the established non-animal testing methods used in the European Union as a way of reducing costs, reducing animal suffering, and addressing the loss of market access for Chinese cosmetics,” he said.
However, a total ban on animal-based tests proposed by some producers and animal rights groups has drawn criticism, even within the EU.
Cosmetics Europe, a trade association that represents the interests of the European cosmetics industry, said the ban is potentially harmful.
“By implementing the ban at this time, the European Union is jeopardizing the industry’s ability to innovate, particularly for SMEs (small and mediumsized enterprises),” said Bertil Heerink, Cosmetic’s Europe’s director general, in a statement at the time the ban came into force. Contact the writers at email@example.com and firstname.lastname@example.org
Rabbits are often used as test subjects for cosmetic products.