'This isn't a choice between animal protection and consumer safety'

We might consider the 2010s as a decade of ethical consumerism, but in her 20 years of campaigning for an end to animal testing, Michelle Thew says public contempt for the use of animals in developing cosmetics has been constant.

"If you even look back to opinion polls in the 1980s, there was never support for animal testing for beauty," says the Cruelty Free International chief executive. But what she has noticed in her time campaigned is "the willingness of governments to take action and, critically, the willingness of businesses to step up".

Founded in 1898 as the "British Union" – an organisation to oppose experiments on animals in continental Europe – Cruelty Free International is the world's foremost organisation for ending animal testing. They are best known for their Leaping Bunny certification for cosmetics brands, introduced in the 1990s, which are given to companies with no animal testing throughout their supply chain (the companies undergo annual audits). Last year, Covergirl became the largest beauty brand to achieve the certification.

But there can be confusion for consumers who want to buy ethically: a cruelty-free certified product is not necessarily vegan (there are certified products containing lanolin, for example), and the clean beauty trend has resulted in products marketed as "not tested on animals" when they don't meet the certification's standards.

The European Union outlawed cosmetics testing on animals in 2009, and extended this ban to imports in 2013. Over the past 10 years jurisdictions including New Zealand, India, Israel, South Korea and some American states have banned animal testing in cosmetics to varying degrees.

"[The EU] really set the precedent that some markets are closed for business if you want to test on animals," Thew says.

From July 1, Australia will ban the use of data derived from animal tests done after that date to demonstrate the safety of ingredients used solely in cosmetics. The focus on data, not the testing itself, makes sense: according to the RSPCA, no animal testing for cosmetics currently takes place in Australia.

However, some experts have questioned whether the legislation goes far enough; by having a ban which only applies to ingredients used solely in cosmetics, cosmetic products that include multi-purpose ingredients which have been tested on animals can still be made in Australia.

"Phthalates are chemicals that act as binding agents and make products soft and flexible," explains Deakin University law lecturer Dr Jane Kotzmann. "They are used in household cleaners and also fragrances and cosmetics like nail polish and hairspray. Similarly, tricolan is an anti-bacterial agent commonly used in household cleaning products, but also used in cosmetics such as deodorant, soap and toothpaste."

Instead, Kotzmann argues a more comprehensive law would focus on the full cosmetic product or a combination of cosmetic ingredients, as well as include an import ban similar to the EU.

"It's very future-looking," Thew says of the new Australian legislation. "But it is a step and I think it's important to celebrate that step. A lot of the effectiveness will be in the regulation."

Thew's next step is China, where product safety laws requiring cosmetic products to have been tested on animals force beauty brands to choose between going cruelty-free and selling in the Chinese market. There is promise: a pilot program allowing Leaping Bunny certified brands to sell in China without their products being subject to post-market animal testing was introduced last year.

"We need to show that this isn't a choice between animal protection and consumer safety, non-animal methods are better and cheaper," she says, citing cell culture tests and computer modelling as alternatives. "We now have models of human skin to test products rather than shaving the back of a guinea pig. These methods are faster and more human relevant."

With growing support from individual countries, since 2017 Cruelty Free been pushing for a United Nations resolution against animal testing in cosmetics. Last year, the organisation partnered with international skin care company the Body Shop to present a petition with 8.3 million signatures at the UN headquarters in New York.

"There is an animal-shaped hole in the [Sustainability Development Goals] network," Thew says. "What we don't want to see is animal testing moved from one country to another. We want the world to move together."

The developments over the past decade mean Thew believes we are "getting closer to the day where we'll have a cruelty-free world for beauty". However, she feels her work is far from done: it was a conscious decision 20 years ago to focus on the cosmetics industry and, although it has been satisfying to see that landscape change, it isn't the whole of the problem.

"Animals are used for testing for a range of other products – detergents, household products – so, sadly, there's still work for us to do."