Content Header Mask

Campaigners welcome Swedish Government stand on animal tested cosmetics


The European Coalition to End Animal Experiments (ECEAE), a coalition of key animal protection groups across the EU led by the BUAV, has today warmly welcomed a statement by the Swedish Government opposing a delay to a ban on the marketing of animal tested cosmetics (1). At an ECEAE meeting in London, ECEAE Chief Executive Michelle Thew said, “We are delighted to receive the support of the Swedish Government. Animal testing for cosmetic purposes is an issue of strong public interest across the EU.” 

Cecilia Mille, International Affairs Manager at Animal Rights Sweden said, “We are very happy that the Swedish Government is taking a lead with this ethical stance. Our colleagues from other European countries tell us they expect many other governments will be supporting Sweden’s position.”

There has been a ban on conducting animal tests for cosmetics in the EU since 2009. However, cosmetics tested on animals outside the EU can still be sold. A sales ban that would prevent this is due to come into effect in 2013, but this could now be delayed by up to ten years. If that happens, hundreds of thousands of animals will continue to die in cruel cosmetics tests for beauty products sold in the EU.

The ECEAE has launched the No Cruel Cosmetics campaign to uphold the cosmetics sales ban and is meeting in London this week to prepare for a decision by the European Commission on whether to propose any change to the planned 2013 deadline.


1. Statement from the Swedish Government (in response to an European Commission Health and Consumers Directorate-General document:  Questions for targeted stakeholders consultation 2013 Implementation date Marketing Ban cosmetics directive)

“The ban on cosmetic testing and marketing of products containing animal tested ingredients is based on an ethical choice against testing for cosmetic purposes. The view of the Swedish government is that the ban should be enforced as planned."

"The Swedish government is convinced that the 2013 ban should remain as an incentive to develop alternative methods.”