These Beauty Brands are Still Tested on Animals

The insatiable nature of man has directed him towards adopting measures that prioritize his wellbeing and requirements at the expense of other living beings. With prime focus on the cosmetic industry, it is troublesome to know that our aesthetic pleasures have toiled upon animal cruelty. Though we have active animal welfare acts on record yet, the history and persisting practice of animal- testing is appalling and upsetting for Beautycareinside.

Animal testing though finds official consent for medical research yet, certain countries (such as China, which happens to be the biggest open market for all top cosmetic brands), have validated the cruelty-production by law for foreign cosmetics. Such green signals have been a hot controversial topic for the cosmetic industry in particular, pitching in conflicting views and opinions. We’ve pretty much learnt that the practice of animal cruelty for satiating human aesthetic needs is not about to go out of fashion. If not coming to a complete halt, at least concerted efforts are being voiced out for minimizing or using possible alternatives to put a wedge into this inhumane act.

Beauty Brands Still Tested on Animals

Ignorance is definitely a bliss and, if you’re not aware that your favorite brand is resorting to animal cruelty to dish out your most favorite and commonly used beauty product, then you might as well continue the encouragement and praise of the trademark. However, after knowing ‘behind-the-back-door’ procedures of the cosmetic productions, you will certainly get an awakening call that questions not only the ironic and double standards of mankind but also your own conscience.

Beautycareinside managed to pen down a few major brands in the industry that are still resorting to the controversial procedures. A list of some major Brands include:


This French based firm is labeled as a luxury beauty trademark that markets multi-purpose cosmetics worldwide. Though it initially followed the cruelty free pact in the past, it no longer adheres to the practice. It officially proclaimed to use animal testing in 2017 due to market requirements and law in China for business propagation in the region.


One of the reigning names in the beauty industry, L’Oreal regretfully and apparently flaunts a deceptive proclamation pertaining to ‘not using’ or ‘testing ingredients on animals’. Being one of the top suppliers of the Chinese market, it is absolutely not possible for its massive sales without complying with the approved law of the marketed country. This clash between the firm’s assertion and action is evident enough raise a brow and defy its brand transparency. Furthermore, the trademarks ownsand endorses multiple other brands too that find massive sales in China under the same mandatory law of animal testing. Hence, a notoriously misleading brand.


It may come as a shock, but Maybelline is a subsidiary firm of the L’Oreal chain of products. It shares the same policy of production and market, hence not cruelty free.


The ultimate goal of any firm is profitability and growth, and MAC seems to be no exception. Once known to be a cruelty-free cosmetic organization, this popular brand conducts tests on animals on an “if required by law” policy as is the prime requisite of the Chinese arcade – a main commercial spot.


Despite satisfactory sales in different expanses, this brand certainly shows no indication of retrieval from the Chinese market on account of its massive sales and demand in the region. Hence, animal testing is inevitable and most certainly a part and parcel of its production procedure.

Procter & Gamble

A name that needs absolutely no introduction. It has been a long contender in the cosmetic industry dishing out an array of skincare products and has been a strong advocate of ‘eliminating animals testing’. However, it fails to win appreciation on account of its policy clause of ‘unless required by law”. The policy article and it’s sales markets are enough to know what that means.


Making way into the mainstream industry as a supplementary chain of L’Oreal , Lancome inherits the same legacy of product manufacturing from its parent firm.

Rimmel London

One of the most liked and hot selling brands worldwide, this label has a huge export record in the Chinese market on account of the peoples’ demand. They assert to encourage the Chinese authorities to adopt to the trend of non-animal testing procedures, which is far from being a reality as yet, hence a pretty lame excuse to say they are not abiding by the Chinese law at present.


A personal favorite of millions, this private cosmetic firm will and does not resort to animal testing unless ‘where law obligations require’.


Covergirl is another nominee in the list of beauty brands that test on animals, and like its parent firm’s (Coty) policy, markets in China and resorts to inhumane practice.


We fail to find any animal testing policy of this brand, but with a strong market in mainland China, we cannot fall for any misleading claims.

Other major beauty brands still tested on animals include:

  • Dior
  • Avon
  • Clinique
  • Almay
  • Amx Factor
  • Dolce & Gabbana
  • Bobby Brown
  • Bourjois
  • Giorgio Armani

And the list simply goes on and on….

What alternatives to animal testing can be used?

One one hand we promote the concept of animal welfare and on the other, we ourselves are the violators.

So, what options do we have at hand? Is it possible to put an end to this sinister practice of beauty brands being tested on animals? Most certainly, yes!

Over the last 30 years, deliberate efforts have been seen to be channelized to craft up advanced means and alternatives that promote not only animal welfare but simultaneously serve the intended results of beauty firms. Beautycareinside suggests a handful of alternative practices that can be used include:

  • Vitro methods
  • Use of human blood
  • Cell lines
  • Artificial skin
  • Computer modeling
  • Human-patient simulators
  • Human volunteers

According to Beautycareinside These alternatives are far more cost effective and comparatively more paced up procedures which further make it feasible to adapt to the transition of cruelty-free testing. Brand transparency should be encouraged while the trend of beauty brands testing on animals should be discouraged. Public response should be assertive enough to bring about a deliberate industry transition for the betterment of animals. Though many multinational companies have made the transition towards the cruelty-free procedures, however, the majority of top branding companies still remain to oblige to the cause.