HBW Insight is part of Pharma Intelligence UK Limited

This site is operated by Pharma Intelligence UK Limited, a company registered in England and Wales with company number 13787459 whose registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. The Pharma Intelligence group is owned by Caerus Topco S.à r.l. and all copyright resides with the group.

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use. For high-quality copies or electronic reprints for distribution to colleagues or customers, please call +44 (0) 20 3377 3183

Printed By

UsernamePublicRestriction

PCPC Warns California: Animal-Testing Bill Could Be Blow To State’s Economy

This article was originally published in The Rose Sheet

Executive Summary

California Cruelty Free Cosmetics Act does not properly account for the fact that cosmetic animal testing still is required in many instances under foreign and domestic regulations, posing conflicts that could shake out unfavorably for California’s economy, says PCPC head Lezlee Westine.

You may also be interested in...



Stakeholders Converge On California For Animal-Testing Bill Showdown

California lawmakers returning Aug. 6 from summer recess will have cosmetics industry reps and animal welfare groups vying for their ears, with the legislative clock ticking on a highly contentious proposal, SB 1249, to prohibit the sale of cosmetics containing ingredients tested “for any purpose” on animals.

Careful What You Wish For: 80 Companies Stand Behind California’s Proposed Animal-Testing Ban

NGO proponents’ apparent intention is to bar companies from testing new cosmetic ingredients on animals, limiting them to existing ingredients or alternative testing methods. However, draft legislation advancing in California could pose big problems for even the most committed cruelty-free brands.

Animal-Tested Cosmetic Ingredients In The EU: One Big Question Remains

As of July 21, regulatory and legal authorities in the EU have clarified that cosmetic ingredients tested on animals to meet third-country requirements do not necessarily trigger the Cosmetic Regulation's animal-testing ban, and that animal testing on cosmetic ingredients may be needed under REACH for various specified reasons. A final important question may be left to the courts.

Topics

Latest News
UsernamePublicRestriction

Register

RS121703

Ask The Analyst

Ask the Analyst is free for subscribers.  Submit your question and one of our analysts will be in touch.

Your question has been successfully sent to the email address below and we will get back as soon as possible. my@email.address.

All fields are required.

Please make sure all fields are completed.

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please make sure you have filled out all fields

Please enter a valid e-mail address

Please enter a valid Phone Number

Ask your question to our analysts

Cancel