USA’s Lax Approach To Cosmetics Animal Testing

The United States has neither a ban on cosmetics animal testing nor any figures as to how widespread it is. It is a very lax and laissez-faire approach to what the vast majority of citizens in North America consider to be animal cruelty.

Animal testing
Do it on people. Go on!
Until September 7th I will give 10 cents to an animal charity for every comment written by visitors. It is a way visitors can contribute to animal welfare without much effort and no financial cost. Please comment. It helps this website too which at heart is about cat welfare.

There is a desire in some quarters of the country for America to lead the way on issues such as animal testing rather than lag well behind. America has been lumped together with China as two countries who have done nothing about cosmetics animal testing.

I have no expectations that China would have a ban in place but I would have expected more concern from Americans. Neither has Canada a ban in place, incidentally.

The lack of a ban does not mean that all cosmetics companies in the USA animal test. It is up to the individual company as to how they make sure that their products are safe, and I am sure some don’t animal test. I don’t think we know who they are. In fact, we know very little about animal testing for cosmetics in North America. It all seems to be swept under the carpet.

This sloppy approach to animal testing in America has now become an embarrassment for some, because, as reported, there is a Europe-wide ban on sales of cosmetics that have been animal tested and cosmetic testing on animals has been banned in Europe since 2009. Israel also ban the practice, by the way.

Let’s remind ourselves that we are referring to cosmetics not drugs, which may improve the lives of people with life threatening illness. It is clearly immoral to hurt animals so that people – presumably mainly women – can look better. When you think about it, it is absurd.

Actually it is not just women because the word “cosmetics” has a much wider usage than referring to makeup. In Europe it applies to:

  • anti-wrinkle cream
  • sunscreen
  • deodorants
  • shampoos
  • hair sprays
  • colorants
  • shaving creams
  • toothpaste and
  • mouthwash

The word may have a different meaning in North America.

There are no standards for cosmetics animal testing under the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). There appears to be nothing by way of governmental regulation of any type, shape or form. It is all left to be decided by the cosmetics companies. We know what they’ll do. They’ll go on animal testing from here to eternity given the option.

What is galling is that animal testing is less accurate as a test procedure than using artificial skin. And why can’t cosmetics be tested on the skin of people. If people want to use cosmetics let them be the guinea pigs. That seems fair to me and it would be fair more accurate.


It is hard to conclude this short post with anything other than a plea to the American government to ban animal cosmetic testing nationwide, as soon as possible. Does a ban have to be introduced piecemeal, state by state over the next 50 years or something like that? I hope not.

I sense, however, that legislation that concerns the welfare of animals is not high on the agenda. The government desires economic growth and anything that might remotely hinder that is off the menu.

See custom search results for animal testing on PoC.

3 thoughts on “USA’s Lax Approach To Cosmetics Animal Testing”

  1. I dont want to bash other countries anymore – just to say a country that feeds it’s own people food that is unhealthy and illegal in other develpoped countries like genetically modified fruits and vegetables.. AND that food doesn’t have to be labelled as containing GM ingredients clearly isn’t going to worry about the animals. They don’t even give their own people the choice to know what they are eating – I know I harp on this specific point, but I find it a shocking form of capitalist corruption that promotes economic growth at ANY cost. To think the same government that allows that sort of thing to go on would do anything about animal welfare is like thinking I am going to get a ride home on a unicorn after work today. Not going to happen.

  2. To say America is supposed to be so much more advanced than our little island, the way animals are treated there is shocking!
    Do they have many animal welfare campaigners there as we do here?
    We campaign long and hard for ours and although it takes a long long time and improvements are slow, every single one is a step forward.
    It took years to get hunting with dogs banned and years to get our pet welfare law and years to get cosmetic testing banned but it’s the only way to progress. People need to speak out, don’t just think you can do nothing, because if we all thought that then animal welfare would never inprove.
    Take declawing, since it’s been brought out into the open how cruel it is and now more people are being educated about it, more are fighting for a ban.
    We’ve a long way to go in the UK yet until all animals are better cared for and better treated and the only way to ensure that happens is to keep on educating and campaigning.

    • Well, it shocks me too that America appears to have no thoughts or regrets or any ambitions on animal welfare. If they allow animal cosmetics testing you cannot say that the people who run the country care about animal welfare because animal testing for cosmetics is at the bottom rung of the animal abuse ladder.


Leave a Comment

follow it link and logo