EnviroLink Forum

Community • Ecology • Connection
It is currently Wed Aug 27, 2014 5:00 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 217 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 15  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 11:56 am 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:07 pm
Posts: 188
Wayne Stollings wrote:

Just to also recap the claim of "testing without animals" after "the ban in Europe" compared to the "delay will not stop the 'real' ban" claim. Still animal toxicity testing on cosmetics sold in Europe, yet pointing this out is a "smoke screen" on my part?


Yes a smoke screen because the ban in the UK has happened, 1997/1998 and in the EU in 2004, although in the EU the three toxicology test can still be done it's not so for the UK because the licences are not available to test cosmetics on animals.

So my stance rings true :mrgreen:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:16 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20492
Location: Southeastern US
tommee wrote:
Quote:
So just to recap, you are of the opinion that the total ban is unlikely to ever be implemented until the toxicology tests are replaced by an alternative and the liability "issue" is covered..?


Quote:
Yes.


The ban at this point in time is still on target although we are aware that the cosmetic industry are hoping for another delay till 2017 when they state they will have alternatives set in place.


It seems there is no ban yet, just a partial ban on some things ... maybe.

Quote:
This has yet to be decided and it's not looking variable for the industry. As it stands the industry have dragged their feet for years and have done nothing much in the way of investing into alternatives.


Assuming there will be an acceptable alternative, which is a critical flaw in the logic.

Quote:
The EU stated that they would implement the final part of the ban with or with out the alternatives for the toxicology tests, meaning the industry would have to either develop an alternative or use other already validated chemicals instead...


Except for those processes that would require the continous testing to ensure safe usage. This would be a boon for the industries moving to other countries and a big economic boost to the EU ... not.

Quote:
The final move in 2013 is mainly for marketing and the three toxicology tests that are already banned in the UK and the EU.


The three TYPES of toxicology tests and yes, they are still being performed for the products in both the UK and EU now.

Quote:
Some companies are testing over seas to defeat this ban others are keeping to the full ban agreement, Lush for instance.


Or their suppliers are doing the testing on the components over seas.

Quote:
So as it stands at the moment testing cosmetics on animals in the UK and EU is banned.


As it stands SOME animal testing related to cosmetics is banned in the UK and EU. The toxicology tests are still performed.

Quote:
Law can and are changed, like I stated. And until otherwise stated the total ban is on track.


On track to see if it will be implimented.

Quote:
Quote:

Or 2020? 2050? 2100? The "counting of one's chickens before they are hatched" aspect is significant. There is no real ban other than it seems the use of Draize test in some cases.


Even IF the delay is on it will not happen again, It's not likely to happen but it could yes. It would be their last delay.


Unless no viable alternatives are discovered and then there may be more delays as the elimination of an industry or the potential health impact on humans would not be a very popular outcome.

Quote:
Quote:

The ones that have already hatched? :mrgreen:


Don't have any cocks so no eggs to hatch :mrgreen:


The hens may not like that as well .... :mrgreen:

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:39 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20492
Location: Southeastern US
tommee wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

Just to also recap the claim of "testing without animals" after "the ban in Europe" compared to the "delay will not stop the 'real' ban" claim. Still animal toxicity testing on cosmetics sold in Europe, yet pointing this out is a "smoke screen" on my part?


Yes a smoke screen because the ban in the UK has happened, 1997/1998 and in the EU in 2004, although in the EU the three toxicology test can still be done it's not so for the UK because the licences are not available to test cosmetics on animals.

So my stance rings true :mrgreen:


There is a ban ... except for certain tests and certain products which are tested elswhere, but if you squint just right you can try to ignore that. The testing of components for cosmetics would not be covered under the licenses surrendered nor is there any prohibition on using products or components which are tested elsewhere. This all makes the initial statement less than accurate does it not?

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:42 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20492
Location: Southeastern US
tommee wrote:
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.


The initial statement indicates the industry was wrong in stating they could not produce cosmetics without the use of animal testing, which you claim was banned years ago. The problem is the testing which was not banned years ago and still has not been banned means the claim is false.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:52 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:07 pm
Posts: 188
Wayne Stollings wrote:

It seems there is no ban yet, just a partial ban on some things ... maybe.


No there is a total ban on testing cosmetics on animals in the UK. The EU fell in-line in 2004 BUT they can use the three toxicology tests in the EU but not in the UK because there isn't anyone who has a licence to test cosmetics on animals ;)

Quote:

Assuming there will be an acceptable alternative, which is a critical flaw in the logic.


No alternative is needed.

Quote:

Except for those processes that would require the continous testing to ensure safe usage. This would be a boon for the industries moving to other countries and a big economic boost to the EU ... not.


Alternative or not the ban will go ahead in full.

Quote:
The three TYPES of toxicology tests and yes, they are still being performed for the products in both the UK and EU now.



No not in the UK, no licences.
Quote:

Or their suppliers are doing the testing on the components over seas.


Yes some companies contract out of the UK, Lush follow the full ban as it was 2013, other companies do also.. The final part will sort this out.

Quote:

As it stands SOME animal testing related to cosmetics is banned in the UK and EU. The toxicology tests are still performed.


No that's not correct, testing on animals for cosmetics can't happen in the UK because there are no licence to do so, toxicology or not.

Quote:
On track to see if it will be implimented.

Quote:

No, in the UK regulations have changed, no more testing inside the UK.

Quote:
Unless no viable alternatives are discovered and then there may be more delays as the elimination of an industry or the potential health impact on humans would not be a very popular outcome.



No you are wrong, it matters not if there is an alternative or not. If the industry didn't go for another delay the laws would still change in 2013 alternatives or not. The chemicals that need toxicology would not be able to be used because of it.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 12:55 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:07 pm
Posts: 188
Wayne Stollings wrote:
tommee wrote:
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.


The initial statement indicates the industry was wrong in stating they could not produce cosmetics without the use of animal testing, which you claim was banned years ago. The problem is the testing which was not banned years ago and still has not been banned means the claim is false.


They can and do test cosmetics without the use of animals, some don't. The ban in the UK is current and companies follow the EU directive as if it were 2013, Lush for instance.

Clutching at straws again...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:37 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20492
Location: Southeastern US
tommee wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:

It seems there is no ban yet, just a partial ban on some things ... maybe.


No there is a total ban on testing cosmetics on animals in the UK. The EU fell in-line in 2004 BUT they can use the three toxicology tests in the EU but not in the UK because there isn't anyone who has a licence to test cosmetics on animals ;)


The testing does not have to be on the cosmetics to be tests of cosmetics. The individual components can still be tested prior to being used in the production and are not the cosmetic tests for which there were licenses.

Quote:
Quote:

Assuming there will be an acceptable alternative, which is a critical flaw in the logic.


No alternative is needed.


That may be your opinion, but the consumers, the governments, the providers, and their insurance carrieres will disagree.

Quote:
Quote:

Except for those processes that would require the continous testing to ensure safe usage. This would be a boon for the industries moving to other countries and a big economic boost to the EU ... not.


Alternative or not the ban will go ahead in full.


If that were the case there would be no question as to the possible postponement or a n impact assessment by the Committee.

Quote:
Quote:
The three TYPES of toxicology tests and yes, they are still being performed for the products in both the UK and EU now.



No not in the UK, no licences.



There are test for the products in the UK just no testing for the finished product in the UK ... except for Botox and a few others. Why do the exceptions always screw up the absolute statements?
Quote:
Quote:

Or their suppliers are doing the testing on the components over seas.


Yes some companies contract out of the UK, Lush follow the full ban as it was 2013, other companies do also.. The final part will sort this out.


Poaaibly, but then again possibly not if there are no alternatives and there is a change of heart in risking the health and welfare of the EU population or shutting down an industy and putting people out of work in these economic times.

Quote:
Quote:

As it stands SOME animal testing related to cosmetics is banned in the UK and EU. The toxicology tests are still performed.


No that's not correct, testing on animals for cosmetics can't happen in the UK because there are no licence to do so, toxicology or not.


Sure there are. The licenses were for testing the finished products and not the components. Also there are things like Botox which are still being tested for toxicity and will continue to be tested for as long as it is produced anywhere.

Quote:
Quote:
On track to see if it will be implimented.



No, in the UK regulations have changed, no more testing inside the UK.


For the finished product, which is not the same as the components, especially those components which are not specific to only cosmetics.

Quote:
Quote:
Unless no viable alternatives are discovered and then there may be more delays as the elimination of an industry or the potential health impact on humans would not be a very popular outcome.



No you are wrong, it matters not if there is an alternative or not.


Sure it does as there will be competeing regulations, such as the consumer protection laws. The consumer may be harmed by untested products which require the use of testing and if there is no applicable testing allowed there becomes a big problem for those making the decision.

Quote:
If the industry didn't go for another delay the laws would still change in 2013 alternatives or not.


If there is a delay and no alternative found before the nexrt deadline there will be another delay and another unless and until viable alternatives are found.

Quote:
The chemicals that need toxicology would not be able to be used because of it.


Possibly, or if the chemicals are used for other purposes they may be tested for those purposes and still used in cosmetics. Botox would be a perfect example, the use for medical purposes requires testing and there is no way to know if any or all of a batch would be used for cosmetic purposes. Of course, there is the whole issue of medical treatments which have a cosmetic outcome too.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:42 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20492
Location: Southeastern US
Wayne Stollings wrote:
tommee wrote:
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.


The initial statement indicates the industry was wrong in stating they could not produce cosmetics without the use of animal testing, which you claim was banned years ago. The problem is the testing which was not banned years ago and still has not been banned means the claim is false.


tommee wrote:
They can and do test cosmetics without the use of animals, some don't. The ban in the UK is current and companies follow the EU directive as if it were 2013, Lush for instance.

Clutching at straws again...


You have contradicted yourself. You stated there was testing on components and product outside of the UK for cosmetics sold in the UK, which clearly does not eliminate the testing the industry was referencing. There is still testing beign done for the cosmetic industry for sales in the UK, which means there has been NO ban for years for cosmetics sold in the UK.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 2:48 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20492
Location: Southeastern US
tommee wrote:
I didn't claim otherwise. The fact remains that testing cosmetics on animal within the UK is banned. And in 2013 all cosmetics sold and produced in the UK will be animal cruelty free. Did you read the links I provided?

Quote:
You mean the license to perform the tests within the UK? The tests of ingredients may be performed elsewhere or they may never include new ingredients unless they have been tested in some fashion elsewhere.


Yes we know all this but it doesn't change the fact that testing cosmetics on animals in the UK is banned.

Quote:
But not testing FOR the UK ..... moving the testing off shore is not a "win" since the testing then does not have to meet the strict requirements previously employed


Yes as we have stated contracts can be sent over seas, but that will change in 2013. Can you tell me what company contracts abroad or are you just guessing? Some will but you can't be sure can you?

Quote:
Possibly, there are indications the safety issues may prevent the implimentation of this if there are no alternative test methods. The liability issues would be huge.


As stated by the EU parliament all testing will end in 2013 regardless if a replacement is found or not. I did provede a link stating this.

Quote:
The medical usage will then not be tested or there will be some legislation to separate the usage after testing? That seems to be an unlikely option.


Botox as a cosmetic will not be allowed for sale or use in the UK if it has been tested on animals under the medical testing loophole, it will be closed.




The highlighted portions indicate the actual testing of cosmetic products in and for the UK .....

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 4:54 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:07 pm
Posts: 188
This is becoming tedious.
If you follow the link below you will find your answer to your liability question.
http://www.imb.ie/images/uploaded/docum ... nt_SOM.pdf

If you would have read the EU links on the directive you would have had your answer.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:05 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:07 pm
Posts: 188
Safety testing can be broken down further, based on 2010 figures, as follows:

Environment: 8,422 or 14%
Agriculture: 16,977 or 28%
Industry: 27,104 or 44%
Household: 24 or 0.04%
Foods/food additives: 8,803 or 14%
Cosmetics/toiletries ingredients: none after 1998

TOTAL: 61,130 or 2% of total animal use in research

http://www.understandinganimalresearch. ... l_products


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:08 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:07 pm
Posts: 188
Wayne Stollings wrote:
tommee wrote:
I didn't claim otherwise. The fact remains that testing cosmetics on animal within the UK is banned. And in 2013 all cosmetics sold and produced in the UK will be animal cruelty free. Did you read the links I provided?

Quote:
You mean the license to perform the tests within the UK? The tests of ingredients may be performed elsewhere or they may never include new ingredients unless they have been tested in some fashion elsewhere.


Yes we know all this but it doesn't change the fact that testing cosmetics on animals in the UK is banned.

Quote:
But not testing FOR the UK ..... moving the testing off shore is not a "win" since the testing then does not have to meet the strict requirements previously employed


Yes as we have stated contracts can be sent over seas, but that will change in 2013. Can you tell me what company contracts abroad or are you just guessing? Some will but you can't be sure can you?

Quote:
Possibly, there are indications the safety issues may prevent the implimentation of this if there are no alternative test methods. The liability issues would be huge.


As stated by the EU parliament all testing will end in 2013 regardless if a replacement is found or not. I did provede a link stating this.

Quote:
The medical usage will then not be tested or there will be some legislation to separate the usage after testing? That seems to be an unlikely option.


Botox as a cosmetic will not be allowed for sale or use in the UK if it has been tested on animals under the medical testing loophole, it will be closed.




The highlighted portions indicate the actual testing of cosmetic products in and for the UK .....



Desperate springs to mind...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:13 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:07 pm
Posts: 188
Wayne Stollings wrote:
quote]

You have contradicted yourself. You stated there was testing on components and product outside of the UK for cosmetics sold in the UK, which clearly does not eliminate the testing the industry was referencing. There is still testing beign done for the cosmetic industry for sales in the UK, which means there has been NO ban for years for cosmetics sold in the UK.


Never claimed cosmetics tested on animals were banned in the UK, testing them on animals in the UK is banned.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:18 pm 
Offline
EnviroLink Volunteer
EnviroLink Volunteer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:45 pm
Posts: 20492
Location: Southeastern US
tommee wrote:
This is becoming tedious.
If you follow the link below you will find your answer to your liability question.
http://www.imb.ie/images/uploaded/docum ... nt_SOM.pdf

If you would have read the EU links on the directive you would have had your answer.


Sorry, but there was nothing indicating liability for the use of any product without the proper testing, which would be the case if the ban on products sold using animal testing were to be enacted before there were alternatives.

_________________
With friends like Guido, you will not have enemies for long.

“Intellect is invisible to the man who has none”
Arthur Schopenhauer


"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: We are winning!
PostPosted: Thu Apr 19, 2012 5:27 pm 
Offline
Member with 50 posts!
Member with 50 posts!

Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 1:07 pm
Posts: 188
Wayne Stollings wrote:
tommee wrote:
This is becoming tedious.
If you follow the link below you will find your answer to your liability question.
http://www.imb.ie/images/uploaded/docum ... nt_SOM.pdf

If you would have read the EU links on the directive you would have had your answer.


Sorry, but there was nothing indicating liability for the use of any product without the proper testing, which would be the case if the ban on products sold using animal testing were to be enacted before there were alternatives.


The system is already in use.

"I am committed to manufacturing the finest soap, bath and bodycare products possible. None of my products have been tested on animals. All my products come with full certification from Cosmetic Safety Assessment company and I have full Product and Public Liability insurance."
http://www.passionforsoap.co.uk/Terms-a ... 362%29.htm

It would help if you knew what you were talking about.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 217 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 ... 15  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group