EnviroLink Forum

Do you know there are ingredients used in food and cosmetics? The testing for food additives would not be used for cosmetics would they? That would be like using a medication as a component of cosmetics, which would never happen ... right?


http://ec.europa.eu/consumers/sectors/c ... dex_en.htm

Important notice

Please note that ingredients assigned with an INCI name which appear in CosIng (Inventory Section) are not necessarily actually used in cosmetic products nor are they approved for such use. However, for ingredients used in cosmetic products as colorants, preservatives and UV filters, only those authorized in Annexes IV, VI, respectively VII to Directive 76/768/EEC are listed in CosIng.

CosIng may contain ingredients known to be used in medicinal products.

If thanks to such ingredients a product restores, corrects, or modifies physiological functions by exerting a pharmacological, immunological or metabolic action, the product shall be qualified as a medicinal product. However, products that, while having an effect on the human body, do not significantly affect the metabolism and thus do not strictly modify the way in which it functions, may be qualified as cosmetic products.

_________________
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

Then why did you reference this?



They do not follow the directive as if it were 2013 or they would not include any products tested on anumal anywhere. You clearly have no idea of what is going on.

_________________
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

I think I've covered all this in my last posts. Just remember that ingredients came into play for UK in 1998 and the EU in 2004.

Botox is classified as a pharmaceuticals because it's injected directly into the body. Cosmetics are classed as skin application and oral care etc....

What system? There are still toxicity tests required and being undertaken for cosmetic products. What system has repleces them?



SOAP?!?! What does soap have to do with the previous link requiring the specific safety data for public products? A limited active ingredient and FOOD grade coloring, which can be tested on animals, would be the extent of this product if one wanted. Unless all cosmetics are soap this is not an indication of anything.

_________________
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

I'm not surprised this place is dead.

No, you have not. the testing which is still allowed is clearly being ignored. The components which are food grade or medicinal can be tested as their food or medicine components and used in cosmetics. The toxicolgical testing is still allowed for those components.



And what of the other components which are classified and tested as food or medicinal products? How are they eliminated from the cosmetic ingredients if they are tested?

How does the safety requirement become fulfilled if there are no available alternative tests for animal models? That is not addressed.

_________________
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

CosIng also includes the latest data after the adoption of the "Cosmetics Regulation" in 2009


"Council Directive 76/768/EEC of 27 July 1976 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to cosmetic products(3)
OJ L 262, 27.9.1976, p. 169. (3) has been significantly amended on several occasions. Since further amendments are to be made, in this particular case it should be recast as one single text in the interests of clarity."


"List of time-limits for transposition into national law and application"

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/Lex ... 209:en:PDF


Yes I'm well aware that there are ingredients used in foods and medicines. Do you realise there is a compiled list of ingredients already tested safe (oh you must do because you linked the database) and ingredients that are banned? You do know there was a cut off point for the UK 1998 and EU 2004 for such ingredients? anything after the date can't be tested on animal for cosmetic purposes..

You're out of date and things have moved on.

Would help if you knew what you were talking about, would be even better if you kept upto date.

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]

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.



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



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




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?


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.



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.



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



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.



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.







No, you have not. the testing which is still allowed is clearly being ignored. The components which are food grade or medicinal can be tested as their food or medicine components and used in cosmetics. The toxicolgical testing is still allowed for those components.



Refer to above post.

can you provide something to support this claim? I quoted Lush as a company who comply with the directive, M&S are another so do the Co-op.

Things may not be tested for pure cosmetic purposes but they may be tested for other purposes and later used in cosmetics. That is a very important distinction you seem to overlook. Also the "cutoff point" for the UK in 1998 was for tests within the UK not testing elsewhere and not testing for other applications. That is another sleight of hand jumping back and forth between the two different situations.

_________________
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

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.



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



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




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?


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.



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.



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



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.



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.







No, you have not. the testing which is still allowed is clearly being ignored. The components which are food grade or medicinal can be tested as their food or medicine components and used in cosmetics. The toxicolgical testing is still allowed for those components.



Refer to above post.[/quote]

Which has nothing at all to cover the points referenced.

_________________
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

You seem to think that I'm saying that everything sold as a cosmetic in the UK has not been tested on animals. Although this will end with the final implementation of the EU directives.

You can purchase products tested on animals, purchase products with ingredients that have been tested on animals. You can't test on animals within the UK for cosmetic purposes. Again this will change with the final implementation of the EU directives.

Companies such as Lush follow the directives from the 2013 date. These companies don't use products testing on animals or use ingredients tested on animals and have liability insurance to cover them....

So as I have already stated, law can change and things are getting better.

Which has nothing at all to cover the points referenced.[/quote]

It has, you have much to read and it would be an advantage if you did so. I'm going to jump off this round about until such a time you take time to read up.

it would be an advantage if you knew what you were talking about.

I thought your own statements would be sufficient evidence for you. If you were misleading us then there is no way to know when you are doing so again is there?

Did you claim the sale of cosmetics for which animal testing was banned in the UK or not? This would include component testing.

_________________
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

It's clear what I have said, I can't see why you have a problem understanding. The marketing and sales doesn't come into play until 2013. "Companies such as Lush" doesn't mean every company in the UK....