Probably, yes. Eucerin says they do not use animals to test their cosmetic products, but because their parent company, Beiersdorf, reportingly allows their products and their ingredients to be animal tested. It raises the question of just how “cruelty-free” Eucerin is, does it not?
What does “cruelty-free” mean?
The most common definition of “cruelty-free” is that a company’s products and ingredients have not been tested on animals. However, since the United States does not have a cosmetic or skincare (these phrases are used interchangeably) regulatory body, they still allow animal testing, which means some companies misuse the “cruelty-free” label.
This means that:
Some final products could be labeled “cruelty-free,” when it is their ingredients that have been tested on animals. A company could claim “cruelty-free” while contracting another company to test their products, on animals, on their behalf. A company could also use a picture of a bunny on their product, thus implying that their products are “cruelty-free” when they are not.
How is Eucerin “cruelty-free?”
Eucerin has stated that they do not carry out or commission animal testing for cosmetic products and their ingredients. This means that they do not test on animals, nor pay other companies to do it for them. Eucerin’s statement is backed up by two of their alternative tests mentioned below.
In-vitro tests include reconstructed skin models that help researchers predict the reactions the skin could have to the ingredients by imitating the conditions of skin cells. In-vivo tests include patch tests which determine whether a product’s skin tolerability is given by sampling the product on a participant’s forearm and studying the reactions that may, or may not, come with it.
Why is being “cruelty-free” important?
Most times, “cruelty-free,” is synonymous with ethical business, which not only promotes the public image but the bottom line of a skincare company like Eucerin. It has been proven that the ingredients used in animal testing are not predictive of how they will affect people’s skin during human tests, as some of them are still not safe enough for human use.
Another reason why “cruelty-free” is being promoted is because of how it could benefit the customers too. It does this by:
Helping them save more money with the healthier option, thus avoiding the chance of breakouts, allergies, and inflammation caused by bad chemicals. Helping them with mindful beauty practices, which means they will have more space for that product in their skincare routine (or makeup kit). Helping them promote greener living because companies that do animal testing produce large amounts of waste that can be damaging and hazardous to the environment. Helping them boycott against companies that allow animal testing, thus clearing their conscience. Meaning customers will realize that they are not supporting skincare products that brought unnecessary torture and suffering to millions of innocent animals.
How can a cosmetics company be “cruelty-free?”
A company can achieve “cruelty-free” certification from the following two programs.
PETA requires companies to complete a questionnaire and sign a statement of assurance confirming that they do not partake in any form of animal testing and promising they will not do so in the future. Leaping Bunny also has a statement of assurance they ask companies to sign and they use a supplier monitoring system that allows independent audits of their business.
Customers in the United States can be assured of a product being “cruelty-free” if they see a little pink leaping bunny on the products’ labels.
What would happen to Eucerin if it were not “cruelty-free?”
It would probably go out of business. Think about this, if the Humane Cosmetics Act passes, businesses that conduct animal testing will not be able to sell their products unless they change their practices. So, if Eucerin were not “cruelty-free” in the United States, they would go out of business, or bankrupt, from being unable to sell their products that were being tested on animals.
With Eucerin being a dermatologist-recommended skincare brand, you would expect them to be “cruelty-free.” This means that the company does not test its product, or the ingredients of its products, on animals to “ensure human safety.” Even though Eucerin states it does not partake in this behavior, its parent company does, and not only does that hurt the company’s image and profit, but it also tortures millions of innocent animals for no good reason at all. If only the Humane Cosmetics Act was passed, then animal testing would be banned and Eucerin’s customers, the environment, and animals at risk would be better off.
