The UK could allow animal testing of cosmetic ingredients for the first time since 1998 | Animal experiments

[ad_1]

An animal welfare charity said ministers opened the door to expanding the use of animal testing to include ingredients used in cosmetics for the first time in 23 years.

Cruelty Free International (CFI) said animal testing of ingredients used exclusively in cosmetics – which were banned in the UK in 1998 – may be required, after the Home Office told it the government had “reconsidered its policy”.

In a letter, the government said it was in line with a decision made last year by the European Chemicals Agency’s (ECHA) Appeals Board, which said only some ingredients used in cosmetics needed to be tested on animals for safety. .

The Home Office has insisted the UK law on animal testing remains unchanged, but activists have warned that accepting the ECHA ruling could lead to a much wider use of animal testing.

ECHA ruled that German chemical company Symrise had to perform animal testing on two ingredients used only in cosmetics to meet chemical regulations, eliminating EU restrictions on animal testing for cosmetic ingredients. The ingredients are widely used in a range of cosmetics.

In a letter sent to the CFI and seen by the Guardian, the Home Office said it aimed to “clarify its position publicly now through the official publication of an updated policy and regulatory guidance”.

The CFI warned that by aligning it with the ECHA decision, the UK would “create a gap” in its leadership in animal testing.

In response, a government spokesperson said there had been no change to the legislation and that a ban on the use of animals to test off-the-shelf cosmetics was still in effect.

“Under the UK Environmental Protection and Worker Safety Regulations, animal testing may be permitted, when required by UK regulators, on single or multi-use components. However, such testing can only be done where there are no non-animal alternatives. “.

“The government says that even ingredients used only in cosmetics, and which have a history of safe use, can be subject to animal testing in the UK,” said Dr Katie Taylor, CFI’s Director of Science and Regulatory Affairs.

“This decision blows a loophole in the UK’s longstanding leadership not to animal testing of cosmetics and makes fun of the country’s quest to be at the forefront of research and innovation, once again relying on harsh and unwarranted testing dating back more than half a decade.”

In 1998 the then Labor government used its own legislation as an example as it sought the practice of animal testing for cosmetics banned across the European Union. A ban on EU testing of finished cosmetics was introduced in 2004, and such testing of cosmetic ingredients was banned in 2009.

Keri Postlow-White, CFI’s director of public affairs, said the letter indicated that the UK would not stick firmly to a ban on animal testing after Brexit.

Dr Julia Ventim, Head of the Center for Safety and Environmental Assurance at Unilever, one of the world’s largest cosmetics manufacturers, said there has always been uncertainty about how to comply with EU legislation on chemicals and cosmetics. She said the UK’s plan to comply with Symrise’s decision was a “retrograde step”.

According to Fentem, there are only about 100 cosmetic ingredients that may be subject to animal testing under chemical regulations.

Before the ban on animal testing, most of these ingredients underwent some form of animal testing to evaluate things like skin and eye irritation. But Taylor said legislation for the chemicals, at least in the case of Symrise, requires additional testing in animals, including investigations into the ingredient’s effects on a developing fetus.

She said that many chemicals intended for cosmetics have been around for decades and have not led to problems, but that new legislation for the chemicals may require companies to perform such extensive testing on animals “just to tick the boxes.”

A 2020 survey from a UK charity found that 84% of respondents would not buy a cosmetic product if they knew it or one of its ingredients had been tested on animals.

Symrise appealed the ruling to the European Court of Justice on scientific grounds.

Ventem said cutting-edge methods that can ensure the safety of cosmetics without using animals already exist. “And then you have these regulations that are not consistent with the science that we have.”

She said the UK’s move marked a complete reversal of leadership not to animal testing of cosmetics. “This is a nod to the consumer looking to put logos on the packaging about sustainability, not testing on animals, vegans, etc… Basically, it’s the house of cards, and everything about cruelty-free products is falling apart.”

[ad_2]