Tested on animals/Sold in China

By far the most-asked question on the blog recently has been 'Why do you say 'Tested on animals/Sold in China'? in your reviews?.

The simple answer is that China 'reserves the right' to test products imported from overseas on animals. The much more complicated question is 'How far do you go?' when deciding if a brand is cruelty-free. 

Separating some facts from fiction: 

Know this. If you are buying a cosmetic/beauty product in the EU it has not been tested on an animal. It is against the law and has been for over 2 years. As of March 11th 2013, cosmetic products and ingredients tested on animals in production anywhere in the world, may not be sold in the EU. 

If, however, you are buying some paracetamol/medicine in a chemist, especially on prescription, it is a drug and therefore exempt from the EU law on animal testing. 

Same with washing your clothes with Ariel/Fairy or cleaning your toilet with bleach. All tested.

The USA however, still allows testing on animals for cosmetic purposes. Only three states,  California, New Jersey and New York have passed laws stating that available alternatives to animal tests are to be used for cosmetic testing.

It's a minefield, and one that I have written about before here.

My question remains, how far are you willing to exclude brands/retailers that operate in China? Benefit, for example, make a huge song and dance on their website about the lengths they go to to ensure that their ingredients are clear of animal testing at source, yet they are on sale in China. I'm not singling out Benefit for any particular reason, there are a whole heap of brands that do the same thing including Jurlique - which really surprised me. Most brands are shady when it comes to admitting that they are for sale in China. They sometimes will not list the Chinese market on their 'Locations' page because they know it's a tempestuous issue. REN for example, do not test on animals, do not sell in China, but just sold to Unilever, who make household brands that by their very nature are tested on animals, so do you count them? (I don't, but I know some of you do).

After a couple of comments from eagle-eyed readers on my Dr Brandt post last week - since altered to update the 'Sold in China' section to say 'Yes', I did some research (not on those commenters!) across Instagram and bloglovin' and found that quite a few bloggers/commenters who claim to be against animal testing love shopping in Sephora. 

Sephora are HUGE in China. HUGE. So I ask again, where do YOU draw the line? Enough to stop you shopping in Sephora? 

Come on now. Tell the truth. ;)

If you want to absolutely avoid any cosmetics/skincare tested on animals OR sold in China, you can do two things: Ask the brand directly or check one of the many lists available - my preferred one is Paula's Beautypedia list available here: www.paulaschoice.com/animal-testing - Paula counts selling in China as testing on animals and does not preach. She leaves the decision where it belongs, with you.

Animal Testing, China and pussy footing around.

I received an email from PETA this morning stating the following:

London – Is Revlon paying for tests that poison animals in China? The cosmetics giant has refused to answer this question, despite repeated attempts by PETA US to uncover the truth. Now, Revlon has to contend with PETA US as a stockholder.

The animal rights group has purchased stock in the New York–based company, which will allow PETA US to attend annual meetings and submit resolutions calling for transparency in Revlon's animal testing policies. The company's refusal to state whether it is paying for these deadly tests – which the Chinese government currently requires for almost all cosmetics products marketed in China – means it cannot be endorsed as a non-animal testing company by PETA US or PETA UK.

"Since Revlon won't come clean to consumers, maybe it will answer a shareholder", says PETA UK Associate Director Mimi Bekhechi. "If the company is breaking its 1989 ban on poisoning animals, then PETA US will find out in the boardroom, if necessary, and then shout it from the rooftop."

A pretty bold move for PETA and one which I'm sure will be applauded by their supporters. But honestly? What will it change in reality? Revlon are not about to pull out of China. It was announced today that they are cutting 250 jobs. They need the money.

To be clear, I don't support animal testing and support PETA's cause - always have, I am by no means radical, I just know from working with brands over the last 15 years that it is completely unnecessary in 2012 to test any product on an animal. 

Why make animals suffer when all products can safely be tested on real people? - which at the end of the day is your end consumer. A rat has no need for a red lipstick or anti-ageing cream. This message however, is still to be heard loud and clear in Beijing.

Cosmetic companies though, don't answer to me, or you. They answer to shareholders. And even then it is in a trickle down basis. If PETA owned 51% of Revlon stock they could in all reality, call the shots. But to my knowledge, they don't. Mr Perelman is still the dude at the top.

So I wonder: Where do you draw the line? I regularly see on twitter and other blogs the fury that comes with knowing that a brand tests on animals or plans to sell to China. 

Avon, L'Oreal and Estee Lauder all sell in China - and that means the Estee Lauder Group - not just the original house. 

So has it stopped you buying Tom Ford? Will it stop you buying Aerin? MAC?

Has it stopped you buying Mitchum deodorant (same group as Revlon)? Chanel? Caudalie? YSL? Garnier? Christian Dior?

Wal-Mart has been in China for years. Wal-Mart own Asda. Do you shop at Asda?

If Stella McCartney (from one of the possibly most widely known and respected vegan families) clothes are sold in China - are her fragrances sold in her stores? I don't know. I'm just showing how easy it is to take it further and further.

Urban Decay? Gave in to pressure from their fans and PETA? Or made a very quick turnaround in light of the fact that they sold their company within the same month and the controversy would have affected the price? Call me cynical...

Avon is China's no.2 brand (L'Oreal predictably No.1) - they had 6000 stores (they have outlets rather than door-to-door) in China 8 years ago. 8 years ago! Avon own Liz Earle. How long before the inevitable happens?

Proctor & Gamble have been in China for nearly 25 years. Do you use Fairy washing up liquid? Use Pampers on your baby? Gillette on your legs? Head and Shoulders? Aussie? Frederic Fekkai???? 

All I know is this: China is going nowhere and neither are shareholders and corporate money.

• China has 100 million urban (beauty buying) women. 100 MILLION. And that's less than a quarter of the estimated total of women living on the mainland.
• China is the largest internet beauty market in the world with sales of over $8 billion last year. That's the tip of the iceberg. 
• The Chinese online beauty market did nine times more last year than the USA online market.

I am not trying to justify anything or anyone - I have merely been wondering recently how far we genuinely, if we are being really honest, care enough to change our ways? And how often we knowingly turn a blind eye while giving a beautifully-applied-Chanel lip service to the opposite effect in public?

Thoughts?


Some source and  further info if you're interested...