Code of Conduct
Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1

    Default Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    (Apologies if this is a repeat topic, I couldn't find any)

    Today, I was wondering about animal testing in relation to our hobby. I generally do take animal testing into account when buying cosmetics and toiletries, but so far have given it no thought in perfume. Is it even known which companies do and don't test their products on animals? How about niche? Independent perfumers? Perfumes presented as organic? I'm assuming the large corporations do test across the board, and independents do not - they wouldn't have the resources. Niche I've no clue about - it might depend on the philosophy and the size of the company.

    Is it a subject you've given any thought in general or specifically in relation to perfume? Would you take it into consideration if the information were readily available? How about finding out your favourite, irreplaceable perfume is not cruelty-free?

    I honestly don't know how far I would take it for myself. I suppose I could decide to boycott the offending company and simply not sample any of their fragrances, thereby avoiding the love vs. principles conundrum. But if I found out after I fell in love? I'm not sure. I would like information to be available in cases like these; that way, those who chose to can make an informed decision either way.

    Anyway, just curious about your thoughts.
    It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely products of a deranged imagination.

    Douglas Adams

  2. #2

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    Thank you for starting this discussion. I did a little research on the subject, and whereas it looks like many brands do conduct animal testing, I wasn't able to find anything that would differentiate between perfumes and cosmetics. I don't purchase cosmetics (lotions, mascara, etc.) from YSL and Dior, but I do purchase their perfumes. Do they conduct animal testing on both?

  3. #3

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    I wouldn't test animalics until I learned the real castoreum/musk/civet/ambergris had been banned. This means vintage Jicky is out of the question.

    I just did a little research. This list http://www.kittyradio.com/soapbox/ma...d-animals.html seems pretty definitive for American companies.

    PETA lists some that are okay. http://www.peta.org/Forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4132

    This was the best I could find on Dior. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...6072139AAkh82f
    Unfortunately, the freebunnybeauty link is gone.
    Last edited by Sunnyfunny; 18th March 2009 at 04:35 PM.

  4. #4

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    Even if a perfume company doesn't test on animals directly, their ingredients must have been tested on animals at some point by another lab or a past result. Does this make them ethical?

    As a parallel, a lot of what we know about hypothermia comes from horrible Nazi Germany research. But just because the results were obtained in a highly unethical manner, does it invalidate it or make it unethical if the research results are useful? I would argue the results of a research is morally neutral- although the method of conducting a research can be moral or immoral.

  5. #5

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    Animal testing for medical purposes- necessary. Animal testing for cosmetic purposes- not necessary. Animal testing for fragrance- completely unnecessary. There seems to me to be no valid reason why animals should enter the equation regarding something made strictly for fragrancing one's (human) epidermis.
    Last edited by Sunnyfunny; 19th March 2009 at 12:37 AM. Reason: aminals??

  6. #6

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    Quote Originally Posted by Sunnyfunny View Post
    Animal testing for medical purposes- necessary. Animal testing for cosmetic purposes- not necessary. Animal testing for fragrance- completely unnecessary.
    this is the sensible perspective. well said.

  7. #7

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Texas (formerly Boston)
    Posts
    3,089

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    I'm against animal testing entirely, but with regard to say... a vintage bottle... the testing/ingredient manufacture was done when such was commonplace and not an ethical issue. It wasn't as though companies knew alternatives existed and chose to forgo them. Today modern companies that engage in animal testing do so without necessity and knowing it is unethical. Thus I don't feel bad about buying or wearing vintage (and let's face, they smell great). But hey that's just me. To each their own.

    And GourmandHomme - FYI there is a plenty of ill-gotten Nazi medical research and date that are shunned and not used because of how it was obtained.

  8. #8

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    Quote Originally Posted by bbBD View Post
    I'm against animal testing entirely, but with regard to say... a vintage bottle... the testing/ingredient manufacture was done when such was commonplace and not an ethical issue. It wasn't as though companies knew alternatives existed and chose to forgo them. Today modern companies that engage in animal testing do so without necessity and knowing it is unethical. Thus I don't feel bad about buying or wearing vintage (and let's face, they smell great). But hey that's just me. To each their own.

    And GourmandHomme - FYI there is a plenty of ill-gotten Nazi medical research and date that are shunned and not used because of how it was obtained.
    I'm not against animal testings. But before you think I hate animals - my life was graced wth the presence of an adorable beagle - and I know how labs like using beagles in cosmetic testings. However, having said that, I would like the development of "synthetic skins" and "synthetic eyes" for the purposes of replacing animal testing.

  9. #9

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    As I get older, I become more uncomfortable with animal testing, even in medicine, though I know that sometimes an 'in vivo' system, like a sheep or dog, is the only way to see if a new medication really works or not. There are many virtual systems being developed, for testing purposes, thank goodness.

    I don't think that real civet has been banned. There are civet farms in Africa where the civet is 'harvested' from the animals on a regular basis. I suspect that this is quite horrible for the animals. On the other hand, the people that keep these animals are able to make a living from them, and would otherwise be unable to sustain themselves and their families. It's a very difficult dilemma, I think, but personally I avoid modern fragrances with civet..Just me.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sunnyfunny View Post
    I wouldn't test animalics until I learned the real castoreum/musk/civet/ambergris had been banned. This means vintage Jicky is out of the question.

    I just did a little research. This list http://www.kittyradio.com/soapbox/ma...d-animals.html seems pretty definitive for American companies.

    PETA lists some that are okay. http://www.peta.org/Forums/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4132

    This was the best I could find on Dior. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...6072139AAkh82f
    Unfortunately, the freebunnybeauty link is gone.

  10. #10

    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Texas (formerly Boston)
    Posts
    3,089

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    On a side note, 'real ambergris' is found, not harvested... it's rare but there's no ethical concern using it (as far as I know). Isn't it just whale barf? I believe lizzie is right about both civet and castoreum. I wish I could say I didn't like civet frags, but I do.

  11. #11

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    The European cosmetic legislation (directive 76/768/CEE amended the 1th March 2003) requires manufacturers to use methods alternative to animal testing to test new raw cosmetic material and finished products.

    I am assuming, if its made in europe then it hasn't been tested on animals; however, there is a possibility that some ingredients have been testing on animals in the past. Or, less likely but still possible, some of their ingredients may come from north america where the chemical could have been tested on animals.

    BUT! and a big but, what confuses me is that PETA lists proctor and gamble as a company that tests on animals.. They also list all of PG prestige's fragrances as tested on animals.. however, their fragrances are made in the UK, so I am confused by that. The only possible explanation to that is that they do all of their animal testing in the US and then send all of the research over to the UK to manufacture the fragrances... shady shady PG!

    Here is a resource to find out if your fragrances are tested on animals or not: http://www.peta.org/living/beauty-an...s/default.aspx

  12. #12

    Question Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    Quote Originally Posted by cformosa4 View Post
    The European cosmetic legislation (directive 76/768/CEE amended the 1th March 2003) requires manufacturers to use methods alternative to animal testing to test new raw cosmetic material and finished products.

    I am assuming, if its made in europe then it hasn't been tested on animals; however, there is a possibility that some ingredients have been testing on animals in the past. Or, less likely but still possible, some of their ingredients may come from north america where the chemical could have been tested on animals.

    BUT! and a big but, what confuses me is that PETA lists proctor and gamble as a company that tests on animals.. They also list all of PG prestige's fragrances as tested on animals.. however, their fragrances are made in the UK, so I am confused by that. The only possible explanation to that is that they do all of their animal testing in the US and then send all of the research over to the UK to manufacture the fragrances... shady shady PG!

    Here is a resource to find out if your fragrances are tested on animals or not: http://www.peta.org/living/beauty-an...s/default.aspx
    Thanks for the link. It's a very confusing area. Perfume companies owned by larger international corps - can they still abide by their own ethics (if they have them regarding animal testing)? Or must they follow the owners' rules - e.g. L'Oreal, P&G, etc.?

    The question recently came up in our home because I wanted to buy a new frag for my daughter who's an environmentalist and a vegetarian. The only scents she uses now are Stella and its flankers. Thank to BN, I was given a list of natural and organic perfumers which I'm still checking out, but it is a real concern for us.

    I'm also a veggie, and my take on vintage scents is similar to what I think about used fur coats etc. from charity shops and garage sales - I personally wouldn't want to wear them as I'm sending out a message that killing animals for personal adornment is OK, which in my book it certainly isn't. But if someone else wears them, I feel they have a right to their own choice. The furs and the vintage perfumes were made and tested long before I was born so I'm not in any way responsible for the problem. And neither is anyone who wears them now, IMO.

    But I wouldn't wear anything, fabric or scent, which tests on animals today - if I can only find out which ones they are!

  13. #13

    Default Re: Ethics: Perfume & Animal Testing

    Story about the King's Speech and PETA. Woman in charge of wardrobe contacted PETA about using real fur in the movie. They tried fake and it did not look right. PETA said as long as it was vintage it was okay to use real fur. So does the same apply to vintage perfume which more likely to have real musk,civet etc?

    There was one farm left which supplied civet to the perfume houses, but most now use synthetic. The farmer said once his animals all died he would retire and the farm would be finished. This was back in 2004. It did not pay to farm civet because so many used synthetic.

    Many cosmetic companies do testing through a third party and will say no we do not test but was they don't say is someone else is testing an ingredient on their behalf. Unless its a new ingredient never used before in a perfume I doubt they will spend the money testing. PETA will have a different list to BUFA which is strange, one will say this company tests the other no and vice versa. There is the 5 year ruling where cosmetics company are suppose to stop testing within a five year period. Estee Lauder are said to not test but others say oh yes they do.
    DONNA

Similar Threads

  1. Primer on How to Make Perfume (Version 1.0)
    By ItalianStallion in forum Fragrance DIY
    Replies: 148
    Last Post: 2nd September 2014, 06:33 PM
  2. The Perfume House, Portland, Oregon
    By adamgottschalk in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 23rd January 2014, 06:37 AM
  3. Replies: 18
    Last Post: 3rd March 2013, 10:18 AM
  4. Fragrance History
    By Yvan in forum Male Fragrance Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 22nd February 2005, 12:20 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •