UK Government Defends Animal Testing Loophole for Cosmetic Ingredients

The UK government is under fire after the High Court ruled it acted legally in allowing limited animal testing for cosmetic ingredients. The move, which aligns with EU chemical regulations, follows a 2020 ruling by the European Chemicals Agency that certain ingredients must be tested on animals to ensure worker safety during manufacturing.

Animal Testing Ban Loosened – But Only for Ingredient Safety

Animal testing for makeup has been banned in the UK since 1998 — except when benefits outweigh harm, such as for medicines. However, since 2019, despite Brexit, the government has been granting licenses to test cosmetic ingredients on animals, following EU chemical safety rules.

These tests are strictly for ingredient safety during production, not for checking the makeup’s safety on consumers. Companies still cannot test finished products on animals.

Beauty Giants and Campaigners Outraged

The policy shift has sparked fierce backlash from top beauty brands like Unilever, Body Shop, and Boots, alongside animal rights groups including Cruelty Free International (CFI). Over 80 brands have condemned the government’s “step backward.”

“Outrageous,” said Michelle Thew, CEO of Cruelty Free International. “The government is prioritising contract-testing firms over the wishes of millions of Britons who oppose animal testing for cosmetics.”

CFI promised to challenge the ruling and demand a full reinstatement of the ban.

Industry Experts Slam ‘Unnecessary’ Animal Tests

Dr Julia Fentem from Unilever’s Safety and Environmental Assurance Centre slammed the new testing requirements as “unnecessary.” She stated that modern alternatives can guarantee product safety without hurting animals.

A new UK chemicals strategy expected later this year may provide clearer guidance on cosmetic chemical testing – potentially stirring the pot even further.

We are your go-to destination for breaking UK news, real-life stories from communities across the country, striking images, and must-see video from the heart of the action.

Follow us on Facebook at for the latest updates and developing stories, and stay connected on X (Twitter) the for live coverage as news breaks across the UK.

SIGN UP NOW FOR YOUR FREE DAILY BREAKING NEWS AND PICTURES NEWSLETTER

Your information will be used in accordance with our Privacy Policy

YOU MIGHT LIKE

TWO TIER JUSTICE # Danny Tommo refused bail and remanded in custody after denying Channel boat charges Anti-migration activist Daniel Thomas, known as Danny Tommo, has been **refused bail and remanded in custody** after pleading not guilty to charges arising from an incident involving a boat in the English Channel. The 37-year-old appeared at Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court on Friday and denied one count of criminal damage and a separate offence under Section 53 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 relating to an alleged failure to disclose the PIN to his mobile phone. Thomas had applied for bail, but the court refused the application and ordered that he remain in custody. He is now due to appear at **Portsmouth Crown Court on Tuesday, September 29**. The criminal damage allegation relates to an incident in the Channel on Tuesday, September 22. Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary said the charge followed an allegation that a boat was damaged while an emergency responder was on board. During Friday’s hearing, prosecutors alleged Thomas used a knife to damage the vessel. Thomas has pleaded not guilty and the allegation has not been proved. He also denies the RIPA offence concerning his phone PIN. Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, known as Tommy Robinson, attended court in support of Thomas, following a demonstration involving several hundred people outside Hampshire Constabulary’s Police Investigation Centre in Basingstoke on Thursday evening. Claims circulating on social media say Thomas’s legal team proposed a package of bail conditions including electronic monitoring, restrictions preventing him from approaching the coast and restrictions on social-media use. **Those specific proposed conditions have not yet been confirmed in the published court reports reviewed by UKNIP.** Thomas remains in custody pending his next appearance. Proceedings are active and Thomas is entitled to a fair trial. He has pleaded not guilty and the allegat