Wayne Stollings wrote:
Not likely, as there will not be any changes in the near future, unless there is an exemption given for liability for those who would be involved with the first clinical trials. If there is no liability for injury to those in clinical trials, they might bypass the animal tests, but even then I do not see the insurance carriers allowing it.
I remember the cosmetic industry say much the same. It was up in arms saying they couldn't produce cosmetics without animal testing yet years after the ban in Europe they test without the use of animals and companies fall over each other proclaiming animal cruelty free products.
Laws can be change as we can see with the cosmetic industry.
So you believe all ads?? Cosmetics are not drugs, they do not have holistic impacts as can drugs, they are not tested like drugs, and the liability issues are more restrained. The difference in animal cruelty free and non-use of animal products is significant and easily overlooked in the ad campaigns. http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/CosmeticLa ... 005202.htmCruelty Free/Not Tested on Animals
March 14, 1995; Updated February 24, 2000
Some cosmetic companies promote their products with claims such as "CRUELTY-FREE" or "NOT TESTED ON ANIMALS" in their labeling or advertising. The unrestricted use of these phrases by cosmetic companies is possible because there are no legal definitions for these terms.
Some companies may apply such claims solely to their finished cosmetic products. However, these companies may rely on raw material suppliers or contract laboratories to perform any animal testing necessary to substantiate product or ingredient safety. Other cosmetic companies may rely on combinations of scientific literature, non-animal testing, raw material safety testing, or controlled human-use testing to substantiate their product safety.
Many raw materials, used in cosmetics, were tested on animals years ago when they were first introduced. A cosmetic manufacturer might only use those raw materials and base their "cruelty-free" claims on the fact that the materials or products are not "currently" tested on animalsCan you point to which laws were changed for cosmetics? http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/GuidanceCo ... 074162.htm
Does FDA approve cosmetics before they go on the market?
FDA's legal authority over cosmetics is different from other products regulated by the agency, such as drugs, biologics, and medical devices. Cosmetic products and ingredients are not subject to FDA premarket approval authority, with the exception of color additives. However, FDA may pursue enforcement action against violative products, or against firms or individuals who violate the law.
Who is responsible for substantiating the safety of cosmetics?
Cosmetic firms are responsible for substantiating the safety of their products and ingredients before marketing. Failure to adequately substantiate the safety of a cosmetic product or its ingredients prior to marketing causes the product to be misbranded unless the following warning statement appears conspicuously on the principal display panel of the product's label:
"Warning--The safety of this product has not been determined." (21 CFR 740.10)
In addition, regulations prohibit or restrict the use of several ingredients5 in cosmetic products and require warning statements6 on the labels of certain types of cosmetics.
In general, except for color additives and those ingredients which are prohibited or restricted from use in cosmetics by regulation, a manufacturer may use any ingredient in the formulation of a cosmetic provided that the ingredient and the finished cosmetic are safe, the product is properly labeled, and the use of the ingredient does not otherwise cause the cosmetic to be adulterated or misbranded under the laws that FDA enforces.