By: Stephanie Blair 
Photo Editor

Many brands claim to be “cruelty-free,” with labels that boast “Not tested on animals!” but in reality, they do. Many cosmetic companies, such as L’Oreal, state on their website that “L’Oréal no longer tests any of its products or any of its ingredients on animals, anywhere in the world nor does L’Oréal delegate this task to others. An exception could only be made if regulatory authorities demanded it for safety or regulatory purposes.” So this raises the question: where is animal testing required by law?

China.

Rather than rip into Chinese consumer law, let me also point out the inherent flaw of saying that a company doesn’t condone animal testing but would do so “if regulatory authorities demanded it.” These companies don’t need to sell in China. Selling in a country that requires animal testing before placing products on the shelves is optional.

I understand that China is a huge market, with its population clocking in at over 1.3 billion. However, by choosing to sell in China while officially stating that they are against animal testing, these companies are stating through actions that profit is more important to the company than ethics.

As a consumer, I feel lied to. If a company is truly against animal testing, why make that choice? The policy becomes a lie to placate the uninformed animal-lover.

A few of the popular brands boasting this tagline are: Avon, Bath and Body Works, Maybelline, L’Oreal, and Axe.

Some other companies boast the same cruelty-free slogan without the Chinese law addendum, and a few specific brands may have started out cruelty-free. However, they are now owned by parent companies who do support animal testing, or do sell in China. So by buying this product that is “cruelty-free” you are giving profit to and helping support the non-cruelty-free parent company.

Some of these brands include: M.A.C. (which is owned by Estee Lauder), Tarte (owned by Kose), Burt’s Bees (owned by Clorox), The Body Shop (owned by L’Oreal), and Urban Decay (also owned by L’Oreal).

While I’ve heard it argued that by only buying from these cruelty-free subsets of this parent company, consumers are showing that the public favors a cruelty-free option. But in reality, as long as these companies are making money, they’re not going to change their testing methods.

Animal testing is quicker and cheaper than the alternatives, such as stem cell usage, but at the cost of torturing innocent lives.

Before I saw the cruelty for myself, I felt that people who said the previous line were exaggerating. After hearing the shrieks of pain from a cosmetic testing bunny, after seeing the aftermath of these experiments, I can definitively say that it is not an overstatement.

To put a bit of perspective on the treatment of these animals, a man in Washington state was sentenced to 80 hours of community service and two years of probation for duct taping shut the mouth of his son. Meanwhile, companies are legally carrying out torturous acts such as “skin and eye irritation tests where chemicals are rubbed onto the shaved skin or dripped into the eyes of restrained rabbits without any pain relief” and “repeated force-feeding studies lasting weeks or months to look for signs of general illness or specific health hazards such as cancer or birth defects” according to humanesociety.org among other horrifying tests.

Animal testing is an ugly thing that many people feel they would rather not know about. The reason, at the heart of it, why people don’t want to talk about it is because they know it’s wrong.

Humans are empathetic creatures, but we’ve evolved into consumers who care more about the prestige of the brand name or the lower cost of the product rather than ethics.

This is not a call for our campus to go vegan; I’ve seen too many “I LOVE BACON” shirts for that. What I am asking is that people stay informed. If you don’t want to support this disgusting system, make sure you don’t.

Ask questions, read up; don’t be satisfied with a vague answer on a company’s webpage.