Dear
I am very dismayed to learn that years after the approval of
accurate, non-animal test for corrosive chemicals, [name of company] is
still performing cruel, outdated tests on [animals, what type].
No law requires animal testing for cosmetics and household
products. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires only that each
ingredient in a cosmetics product be "adequately substantiated for
safety" prior to marketing or that the product carry a warning label
indicating that its safety has not been determined. The FDA does not
have the authority to require any particular product test. Likewise,
household products, which are regulated by the Consumer Product Safety
Commission (CPSC), the agency that administers the Federal Hazardous
Substances Act (FHSA), do not have to be tested on animals. A summary of
the CPSC's animal-testing policy, printed in the Federal Register,
states, "[I]t is important to keep in mind that neither the FHSA nor the
Commission's regulations require any firm to perform animal tests. The
statute and its implementing regulations only require that a product be
labeled to reflect the hazards associated with that product."
Testing methods, therefore, are determined by manufacturers. The
very unreliability of animal tests may make them appealing to some
companies, since these tests allow manufacturers to put virtually any
product on the market. Companies can also use the fact that their
products were tested to help defend themselves against consumer
lawsuits.
Such arguments carry little weight with the more than
500 manufacturers of cosmetics and household products that have shunned
animal tests. These companies take advantage of the many alternatives
available today, including cell cultures, tissue cultures, corneas from
eye banks, and sophisticated computer and mathematical models. Companies
can also formulate products using ingredients already determined to be
safe by the FDA. Most cruelty-free companies use a combination of
methods to ensure safety, such as maintaining extensive databases of
ingredient and formula information and employing in vitro tests and
human clinical studies.
Spurred by public outrage, the European
Union (EU) proposed banning cosmetics tests on animals by 1998;
unfortunately, the EU has indefinitely delayed this ban because of
complaints by animal-testing companies. But other organizations in
Europe have stepped in. For example, after conducting surveys showing
that four out of five of its customers are against testing cosmetics and
household products on animals, the Co-op, Britain's largest retailer,
launched its own campaign urging companies to end such tests.
In
the United States, a survey by the American Medical Association found
that 75 percent of Americans are against using animals to test
cosmetics. Hundreds of companies have responded by switching to
animal-friendly test methods. To help consumers identify products that
are truly cruelty-free, a coalition of national animal protection groups
has developed the Corporate Standard of Compassion for Animals, which
clarifies the non-animal- testing terminology and procedures used by
manufacturers and makes available a cruelty-free logo for companies that
are in compliance with the standard.
I refuse to purchase
products from a company that tortures voiceless animals. I will educate
my family and friends about this and encourage them not to purchase any
of your products until you implement a permanent policy against animal
product testing.
Sincerely,
[Name]
[Address] |