iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Hot on the Blog
Chrissie HyndeBonnie TylerDr Brooke MagnantiEsther Rantzen
Jessica-Jane Clement

Model, actress and animal rights activist

GET UPDATES FROM Jessica-Jane Clement
 

No Bunny Should Suffer for Beauty

Posted: 05/09/2012 00:00

Make-up and cosmetics mean a great deal to me, but there is nothing I love more in life than my adorable dogs. I love animals. I grew up with lots of them, and I can't believe that I live in a country where cosmetics companies are still testing products on animals. Next year, we were supposed to be able to walk into any cosmetics shop in the EU and know that no rabbits or other animals had been harmed in the making of a single product. Most consumers agree that force-feeding chemicals to pregnant rabbits in laboratories is wrong - especially when there are 100 per cent humane non-animal testing methods available. Animals shouldn't suffer for shampoo and lip gloss.

As a European citizen who cares about animals, I'm proud that in 2003, the European Parliament voted to ban animal tests for cosmetics and to end the sale of all cosmetics and toiletries containing ingredients tested on animals. The testing is already banned, and 2013 is the final deadline for the full sales ban.

Although no one now tests on animals for cosmetics in the EU, without a ban on the sale of animal-tested products, companies can simply conduct cruel tests elsewhere and still market them here. That's not right.

If the 2013 deadline is delayed or riddled with loopholes, then animals will continue to be confined to small cages - mice, for example, are forced to live in plastic cages the size of a shoebox - and exposed to chemicals that can cause seizures, chronic pain and weakness as well as liver and kidney failure. Pregnant rats and rabbits will be dosed with potential toxins to determine what malformations appear in their babies. The animals are always killed at the end of these tests - if they survive that long.

Testing cosmetics on animals is wrong - and so is profiting from such testing. Hundreds of companies, including Marks & Spencer, Lush, The Body Shop and many others, test their products for safety without hurting animals. That means there's no excuse for the EU not to go ahead with the ban in 2013, exactly as has been planned for the last 10 years. So hands off the buns, hon. Killing animals for eyeliner and deodorant just isn't nice.

Please always buy cruelty-free products. To learn how you can join me and my friends at PETA in urging the European Commission to uphold the 2013 ban, visit PETA.org.uk/2013

 
FOLLOW CANADA STYLE
Make-up and cosmetics mean a great deal to me, but there is nothing I love more in life than my adorable dogs. I love animals. I grew up with lots of them, and I can't believe that I live in a country...
Make-up and cosmetics mean a great deal to me, but there is nothing I love more in life than my adorable dogs. I love animals. I grew up with lots of them, and I can't believe that I live in a country...
Related News On Huffington Post:
 

Read more from Huffington Post bloggers:
Douglas Anthony Cooper

Douglas Anthony Cooper: PETA's "Thank You" for Killing Shelter Pets

When the no-kill shelter in Shelby County, Kentucky recently announced that they had run out of space -- and were hence going to have to start killing healthy dogs and cats -- officials received a nice basket of gourmet cookies, with a note signed from PETA: "Thank you for doing the right thing."
Barney Reed

Barney Reed: Lab Animals Are Left Waiting for Words to be Turned Into Actions

The use and suffering of animals in experiments is a persistent and legitimate public concern. Both the government and the scientific community have recently set up initiatives that attempt to convince a sceptical public that their concerns are understood and taken seriously.
Ronnie Joice

Ronnie Joice: The Struggles of Being A 'Fake' Vegetarian

When I was born in 1987, my mother had already been a vegetarian for quite some time. I can't remember how many years previous she had been, but after seeing a documentary about factory farming, she gave up eating meat, fish and already hated milk anyway.
Ari Solomon

Ari Solomon: PETA's 2012 Sexiest Vegetarian Next Door: An Interview With Hot Gay Man Zachary Koval

When one thinks of a vegetarian or a vegan, I don't think they envision the Adonis that is Brooklyn-based actor/performer Zachary Koval. After reading his insights, it's clear he's not just a pretty face, either.

 
 
  • Comments
  • 17
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Philip J Sparrow
When your work speaks for itself, keep quiet
1479 Fans
 
06:15 PM on 09/09/2012
Leave the animals alone. If you need test subjects, there are plenty of penniless students who'll do anything for money (and we have references).
Permalink  |
vbjsus
10 Fans
08:12 AM on 09/06/2012
The term 'medical research' can be abused by 'scientists' to get a non-medical product, like skin cosmetics, onto the shelf at any cost. Animals suffer unnecessarily. Even genuine scientist/doctors stretch the legitimacy of their often obscure, impractical work which will never benefit anyone, but cause the death of animals, to the point of absurdity. They use the same term as justification. This is often more about getting names onto papers-ego trips-than real medical advances. Killing animals for genuine medical research need happen only very, very rarely and is disturbing.
Permalink  |
1000yardstare
0 Fans
07:59 AM on 09/06/2012
The true colours of some of the large cosmetics companies have been shown recently. L'Occitane, Yves Rocher, Mary Kay and Claudalie have all been forced to remove the Leaping Bunny logo from their products, as they have all returned to testing on animals. The reason for this is that it is mandatory for cosmetics sold in China to be tested on animals. The companies say they want enjoyment of their shampoos, skincare and make-up to be spread among the 700 million women in China, where sales of cosmetics grew by 18 per cent to £10bn last year. Mathilde Thomas, founder of Caudalie said: "We are now selling our products in China and Chinese government reserves the right to conduct tests with cosmetic products but hope this situation will change soon by outside pressure. I took the decision to sell my products in China in order to respond to Chinese women's demand who have been asking to use our products for many years," she said. The tortured animals were unavailable for comment.
Permalink  |
photo
Davewaybe
Life gives us time only love gives us meaning
301 Fans
 
01:08 AM on 09/06/2012
Strange a woman should complain of the tests..... when women are the prime market....
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rob Ferris
32 Fans
04:16 AM on 09/07/2012
...you're kidding, right? I honestly can't tell.
Permalink  |
Elisajasmin
0 Fans
09:10 PM on 09/05/2012
Lets hope the EU Commissioner listens to the general public who are vehemently opposed to cosmetics tests on animals and upholds the 2013 ban.
Permalink  |
photo
junenorris
98 Fans
08:18 PM on 09/05/2012
Please leave the poor innocent rabbits (all animals) alone, why can't the murders and child molesters be put to good use. instead of them being in luxury in prisons at the tax payers expense.
Permalink  |
HappyBen85
8 Fans
05:46 PM on 09/05/2012
Excllent comment Jessica-Jane thank you. Everyone now knows that cosmetics testing on animals is wrong, and Europe's precedent-setting policy against it should be a point of pride for all of us. But in 2012, companies are still profiting from the blood of animals used in cosmetics tests, and it shouldn't have to take a model, actress and animal rights activist to tell our politicians that the European Union's 2013 deadline to end testing on animals must not be compromised or postponed by a single day.

I also think you are right about The Body Shop. Buying personal-care products from The Body Shop supports the company’s strong anti-testing stance which has remained unwavering since L'Oreal bought them and sends a strong message to L'Oreal and all other animal testing companies that compassion and profit go hand in hand. Often when conglomerates purchase compassionate companies, the result is that humane products become more widely promoted and sold than ever before and that's been the case here. Large corporations recognise the expanding market of compassionate consumers who want cruelty-free food, cosmetics and clothing and the relationship between L'Oreal and The Body Shop will only bring closer the welcome day when L'Oreal abandons animal testing and embraces kinder, better, more scientifically-accurate methods.
Permalink  |
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Richie2012
Your micro bio is empty.
227 Fans
05:39 PM on 09/05/2012
Should beauty suffer for a bunny?
Permalink  |
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
sabelmouse
i love to tumble , ask me why .
834 Fans
 
03:08 PM on 09/05/2012
the body shop ?
Permalink  |
photo
linsnoir
19 Fans
 
01:41 PM on 09/05/2012
The Body Shop is owned by L'Oreal, who have acknowledged they continue to test ingredients on animals.
Permalink  |
photo
TruthSeeker666
62 Fans
12:12 PM on 09/05/2012
Britain is a nation of animal lovers, however they say nothing to the barbaric slaughter to obtain Halal meat, the animal has its throat slit, can take up to 5 minuets to die, a traditional British bolt gun kills the animal instantly... but because campaigning against the barbaric slaught might offend Muslims the British say nothing !!!!!
Permalink  |
1000yardstare
0 Fans
07:32 AM on 09/06/2012
Excellent comment. Torture and cruelty to animals is allowed if its conducted in the name of tradition, religion and culture it seems.It was widely reported last year that a lot of schools and hospitals now serve only halal meat as its cheaper than having to buy both kinds. I'm not sure about the validity of the reports but if they're true then it's a disgrace in a 'civilised' society.
Permalink  |
Sam1985
137 Fans
 
12:08 PM on 09/05/2012
I wholeheartedly agree with your position on cosmetics testing. I think it's a totally barbaric and unnecessary practice.

However, I take slight issue with The Body Shop being on your list when they are owned by Loreal who are one of the worst companies for cosmetics testing.
Permalink  |
BezzUK
0 Fans
09:07 AM on 09/05/2012
"I'm proud that in 2003, the European Parliament voted to ban animal tests for cosmetics and to end the sale of all cosmetics and toiletries containing ingredients tested on animals. The testing is already banned, and 2013 is the final deadline for the full sales ban."

Then again, with the EU's chemical REACH legislation which all chemicals sold/bought within Europe must be registered to, a “set of data” must be submitted to ensure compliance. From what I understand there is no other “approved” way of obtaining some of the required testing data that is wanted for the “next stage” of the REACH programme.
Permalink  |
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realitytrumpsbull
Two 'alves of coconut!
2058 Fans
12:34 AM on 09/05/2012
One way to approach the situation is to go get the solvent bottle, and take all the war paint OFF. Or, buy natural cosmetics that have never been anywhere near a lab animal, but are still skin-safe and tested. What are you looking for, here? Some skin tone, lip color, that kind of thing. Can you do it without starting up a chemistry plant? Yep. Want all-natural color, like it says on the bottle? Go wash with cold water, and take a quick walk around the block. Also, get 8 hours sleep a night, and eat well. Nothing more attractive, than robust natural beauty. Paint can only hide so much, if you're a wreck underneath, that'll show through, no matter how many layers of clear-kote are applied.
Permalink  |
Tihamer
0 Fans
03:15 AM on 10/23/2012
Finally! RealityTrumpsBull brings some sanity in the wilderness of cosmetics! On the other hand, women have been using cosmetics for thousands of years--because it works. It even worked when it was much more dangerous than it is today (much lipstick *still* contains lead). Think of it as evolution in action. If it attracts guys, then women will do it. Crazy, but then again, look at all the crazy things men do to impress women. In the long run, the people who don't do the otherwise crazy things don't propagate the species.
If you don't test on animals, then do you test on students? Or convicts? Are they both less than human? I suppose you can make the case that convicts should pay their debt to society, but wouldn't it make more sense to volunteer them for medical tests that actually save human lives?
Finally, if rabbit lives are worth the same as human ones, then why prefer one over the other? Or are the rabbit lovers volunteering to be experimented on?
Permalink  |