States back growing campaign to ban animaltested cosmetics
LAS VEGAS — A growing number of U.S. states are considering a ban on the sale or import of cosmetics that have been tested on animals, as advocates argue testing products such as lotions, shampoos and makeup on rabbits, mice and rats is cruel and outdated.
The cause has gained support from consumers and many cosmetics companies, but the biggest hurdle is China, which requires that cosmetics sold in its large, lucrative market undergo testing on animals.
California, Nevada and Illinois all saw new laws take effect this year that ban the sale or import of animaltested cosmetics.
The laws, which apply to tests performed after Jan. 1, aren’t expected to cause much disruption for the industry because many companies already use nonanimal testing. Instead, they draw a line in the sand that puts pressure on the U.S. government to pass a nationwide ban and help end China’s requirement that most cosmetics sold in that nation of more than 1.4 billion people undergo testing on animals by Chinese regulators.
Animaltested cosmetics already are banned in Europe, India and elsewhere. A ban in the United States, one of the world’s largest economies, would put further global pressure on China to end its policy and push Chinese cosmetics companies to rely on nonanimal tests if they want to sell their products in the U.S.
“We’re not trying to create an island out here in Nevada,” said state Sen. Melanie Scheible, who sponsored Nevada’s law. “We are trying to join a group of other communities that have stood up and said, ‘We don’t support animal testing.’ ”
Animalrights groups like Cruelty Free International and the Humane Society of the United States hope to get more states to pass bans this year.
Legislation has been introduced or will soon be made public in Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, New York and Virginia, according to Cruelty Free International, and a national ban has been introduced in Congress since 2014, though the bipartisan measure has been slow to advance. The most recent version introduced in November marks the first time the country’s leading cosmetics trade group, the Personal Care Products Council, has become a vocal backer of the ban, support that should ease lawmaker concerns about business opposition.
Supporters note that science has advanced, allowing companies in most cases to use nonanimal alternatives — such as human cell cultures or labgrown human skin and eye tissue — to test whether a product or ingredient is safe.
For example, EpiDerm, a synthetic skin tissue made by Massachusettsbased MatTek Corp., is created from cells taken from skin donated during procedures such as breast reduction surgery, circumcision and tummy tuck procedures.