LEGISLATION

• Chemicals
• Cosmetics
• Lab Animals (86/609)

ISSUES

• Alternatives
• Genetics
• Primates

Cosmetics Testing

7th Amendment to the Cosmetics Directive (2003/15/EC)

	Guinea pigs are used in skin sensitisation tests for cosmetics.

Currently, around 38,000 animals are used for the toxicity testing of cosmetics every year (figure based on 1999 figures from European Commission) within the EU. Many more animal tests are conducted outside the EU for cosmetics that are developed elsewhere, but sold in the EU. The vast majority of cosmetics products, including perfumes, shampoos, toothpaste, hair dyes, skin creams, make-up and deodorants are tested on animals.

Many different types of animal experiments are used to test cosmetics. These include:

• the Draize eye test, where substances are dripped into the eyes of conscious rabbits;
• oral toxicity, where animals are force fed a substance once or repeatedly to see the toxic effects;
• skin irritancy, where a substance is smeared over the shaved back of a group of animals, usually rabbits or guinea pigs.

History

The testing and marketing (sale) of cosmetics has been regulated by European legislation since 1976. The legislation (Council Directive 76/768/EEC) was amended for the 7th time in 2003. The idea of phasing out testing on live animals first entered the legislation in 1992, when the legislation was amended for the 6th time. At that point a ban on the marketing of products tested on animals was adopted, for implementation in 1998, but this was twice postponed. In 2001 the Commission decided to draft a new 7th Amendment. The new amendment suggested removing the marketing ban and replacing it with a testing ban in the EU, which would have allowed products tested on animals elsewhere to be imported and sold within the EU. The decision of the European Commission to try to replace the marketing ban with just an EU-wide test ban shows how Commission thinking can be at odds with both public opinion and the wishes of the European Parliament, as well as a number of EU Member State governments.

After vigorous campaigning by the European Coalition and other animal rights and animal welfare organisations, the 7th amendment to the 1976 Cosmetics Directive was approved after negotiations between the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers. The resulting Directive 2003/15/EC was adopted on 27 February 2003 and published in the Official Journal of the European Communities on the 11th of March 2003.

Core aspects of this directive

The 7th Amendment to the cosmetics Directive entered into force on the day of publication and must have been transposed into national law by the 11th of September 2004. The new Directive introduces a complex set of rules, which are summarised below:

• from September 2004 a ban on testing of finished products within the EU.
• from September 2004, a ban on the marketing of cosmetic products and ingredients tested on animals outside the EU, where 'alternative' tests, validated and adopted in the EU, exist.
  Note: the 'alternative' tests mentioned here are not only non-animal tests, but also tests that 'reduce' or 'refine' animal test methods. This 'ban' is, therefore, far from complete as it only stops the use of a few animal tests).
• from September 2009, a ban on animal testing of cosmetic ingredients within the EU.
• from 2009 a ban on the marketing of cosmetic products and ingredients tested using animals, for the majority of tests and irrespective of the availability of non-animal tests. (Note: this will not mean that animal testing for cosmetics is actually ended, but that most animal testing will be stopped).
• from 2013, a ban on cosmetic products and ingredients tested using three further tests, although this ban could be delayed by new legislation if non-animal tests are not available.

This means that products made in other countries will have to be tested by non-animal methods once these are adopted in the EU. It also means that, until non-animal methods are approved and available for use, alternative methods causing the least suffering to the fewest possible animals must be used in countries testing outside the EU if they wish to sell in the EU. (Cosmetics testing within the EU will also be banned).

In the meantime, the Commission must publish timetables giving estimates of the time needed to replace animal tests. The first of these timetables must be published by 11 September 2004. The Commission must also give an annual progress report to the European Parliament and Council Ministers.

The European Coalition sees the new Directive as a small step in the right direction, but deeply regrets the further postponement of the marketing ban. So long as there is no full and immediate ban on animal testing for cosmetics combined with a ban on the marketing of cosmetics tested on animals, the European Coalition will continue campaigning both for the implementation of the Directive and the issue on animal testing of cosmetics in general.

The 7th amendment to the cosmetics Directive also lacked concrete provisions calling for and imposing immediate and massive investment of scientific and financial resources in the development of non-animal alternative testing methods. The cosmetics industry did very little to develop and validate alternatives in the period between 1992 and 2003 (only managing to tackle two of the simplest animal tests to replace), and unless real pressure is exerted upon them it is doubtful whether they will feel any need to do so now.

Since the adoption of the 7th Amendment, rearguard actions by the cosmetics industry have been deployed to try to prevent the implementation of the testing and marketing bans. Through ferocious lobbying and legal challenges, the cosmetics industry and the French government have attempted to undermine these bans. This is why the European Coalition continues to fight for the directive's correct implementation, as well as for an immediate test and marketing ban.

back to the top