will be halted. The European Federation for Cosmetic Ingredients, which represents seventy cosmetic
companies from all over Europe, opposes the ban. In the United States, animal testing is still in use.
As consumers, we are partly responsible, too. Each of us can choose not to buy cosmetic products
from companies that either practice animal testing or pay other companies to conduct such tests. By
voting with your dollar, you can send a strong message to cosmetic manufacturers that testing on
animals is cruel, useless, and unacceptable.
The fact that a product is called “herbal” or “natural” doesn’t mean it is cruelty-free.
The fact that a product is called “herbal” or “natural” doesn’t mean it is cruelty-free. Many
cosmetic companies claim they do not test their products on animals but buy ingredients from
suppliers that either own research labs that perform tests on animals or order such tests from
independent labs. Still, a logo of a leaping bunny on a box or a tube of a cosmetic product is a good
sign that this particular company does not carry out cruel animal testing or at least does not directly
support it. In future chapters, I will never recommend using a beauty product made by a company that
encourages animal testing in any form.
Non-GMO
Variation: no genetically modified organisms used
A genetically modified organism (GMO) is a natural substance whose DNA has been altered using
genetic engineering techniques. A plant’s DNA can be twisted up a notch to make it more resistant to
pests or a harsh climate, improve its shelf life, or increase nutritional value. Genetically modified
plants most commonly used in cosmetics include soya and corn. Soybean oil, corn flour, and potato
starch are common ingredients in moisturizers, masks, and makeup. According to Greenpeace, more
than 50 percent of the world’s soy contains genetically modified organisms. However, no GM labels
are required on cosmetics.
The risks of genetic engineering are still unknown. Opponents of GMOs, or genetically modified
organisms, warn that any product used on the skin enters the bloodstream more quickly, which
increases any potential risk that GMOs may have. “I believe that people should always have the
ability to know what they are supporting with their dollars as well as what they are putting on and in
their bodies,” says Joshua Scott Onysko, the creator of Pangea Organics. “GMOs are man playing
god. Companies like Monsanto claim that extensive testing has been done on these new GMO crops,
but what does ‘testing’mean? How do you ‘test’ the effects of [genetically modified] organisms on a
planet with millions of different species? I believe their stewardship of this planet and its people is
as myopic as their business plans.”
The practice of genetic modification is not restricted in the United States, although some states and
counties, such as Mendocino County, California, banned the production of GMOs in 2004. In general,
United States law does not impose mandatory identification of the presence of GMOs in consumer
products, whether food or cosmetics, because the FDA does not consider genetically modified food
to present any greater safety concerns than other foods do.
Most countries in Europe, Japan, and Mexico declared that genetic modification has not been
proven safe. Austria, France, Germany, Luxembourg, and Greece banned the use of engineered corn
and rapeseed, but many European countries lifted the GMO ban in 2004. The controversy over
genetically modified food in Europe is still going on, even though surveys consistently find that 97
percent of European consumers want clear labeling of all genetically engineered foods and 80 percent