If anyone happens to have a box from an Arabian perfume brand such as Rasasi, ASAQ, Al Haramain, Al Khadlaj, Majid Muzzafar Iterji, Al Rehab, Ajmal, or any other, can you take a look if any of them have a statement on the packaging that they do not test on animals (like on the Amouage boxes). None of them have responded by email. Thank you.
Just as an aside, let's PLEASE do not turn this thread into a debate about animal testing.
Last edited by rhiannon_chiana; 31st January 2013 at 07:36 PM. Reason: oud, Arabian perfumes, animal testing
I doubt that you will be able to find out this very specific information on this forum. Beside Amouage, it will be a miracle if anyone here knows anything about any of those companies.
Want to trade - Chanel Platinum Egoiste for Dior Eau Sauvage...
I don't know the answer to your question, however, my guess is that Arabian perfume companies (and probably most western ones) don't test perfumes on animals. They simply mix synthetic ingredients that are produced by aromachemical companies and are known to be safe. However, said aromachemical companies have, in the past, tested their molecules on animals to establish safeness before they started marketing them. And this is true for Amouage as well. probably what the statement means is that the molecules used are not tested on animals now. Of course, they might have been 10 years ago when said molecules were being developed. But this is my interpretation.
As for animal derived ingredients, they are absent from modern perfumery simply because they would be prohibitively expensive. Musks, civet and ambergris have been substituted by synthetics. Perhaps only a handful of really expensive upscale perfumes, such as some of the superexpensive attars of said companies, do contain a touch of true ambergris, but certainly not the regular ones. (Civet is not much used in arabian perfumery, and animal musk doesn't exist anymore, simply because said deers have been nearly driven to extinction decades ago).
Some of the aromachemical companies continue to test on animals in development. Others no longer do it and use the newer alternative methods of safety testing that do not involve animals. So the basic issue that people who wonder about animal testing are looking for is, do companies just work with any supplier, or do they use a fixed cutoff date (as in an actual year, such as 1975 or something, rather than something sneaky like a rolling "five years ago") to designate that they will not use any chemicals tested on animals after that date. It's hard to find out exactly of course, so sometimes the company's word is all you can go on, and a statement like Amouage's that mentions suppliers as well as themselves is pretty thorough.