Skip to content

Support to End to Cosmetics Safety Testing on Animals in Your State

Support to End to Cosmetics Safety Testing on Animals in Your State

Name: Ban on Using Animals for Cosmetics Safety Testing

It has been recognized that the use of animals in safety testing for cosmetics does not necessarily create safer products. There are many safety tests that are scientifically superior and more reliable than those that use animals. Moreover, alternative tests have been in use by the cosmetics industry for more than a decade.

California, Illinois, New Jersey, Nevada, New York and Virginia already have state laws in place, and other states are considering the adoption of legislation this session. In addition, New Jersey and New York have proposed bans on the sale of animal-tested cosmetics within their states, a measure that California adopted in 2018.

Please ask your state legislators to consider introducing a bill in your state to finally bring an end to cosmetics safety testing on animals, as well as to end the sale of animal-tested products.


Call to Actions: 

  1. Please contact your State Senator and Representative and urge them to introduce this important legislation.
  2. Spread the word! Share this page with your social network.




  • Your State Senator or Senators
  • Your State Representative or Representatives


*Required fields

If you take action and have not already registered, you will receive periodic updates and communications from National Anti-Vivisection Society.


Please Support the Use of Non-Animal Alternatives for Cosmetics Safety Testing

Dear [Decision Maker],

I am writing to ask you to introduce legislation to end the sale of animal-tested cosmetics in our state. There are numerous alternative toxicity testing methods--including cell cultures and computer simulations--that have proven to be effective and are already widely used by the cosmetics industry. It is unconscionable that animals are still used in this way.

There is no longer justification to continue to cruelly use animals for product safety testing. With current scientific advancements, non-animal tests are more reliable, effective and humane than archaic animal tests that were developed in the last century. In fact, most cosmetics companies already use non-animal safety testing methods.

The adoption of a state law will give the remaining companies a push to stop relying on archaic animal tests and will allow us to join California, Illinois, New Jersey, Nevada, New York and Virginia, as well as many countries around the world that have already taken this step.

For your convenience, I have included a copy of a model law below. Please consider introducing this or a similar bill during the upcoming legislative session, if not this year than in 2021.

Model Law Banning the Use and Sale of Animals for Cosmetics Safety Testing

Sec. 1. Purpose
To prohibit the testing of cosmetics on animals by manufacturers and to require manufacturers to adopt non-animal testing methods in order to end the cruelty to animals and to bring more reliability and consistency to the process of testing cosmetics for safety.

Sec. 2. Regulation
A. Except as specifically required by federal law or regulation, no cosmetic manufacturer shall conduct or have any other person conduct on its behalf, any test which involves the placing of a cosmetic in an animal's eye or on an animal's skin to measure its irritating effects, nor use any other traditional animal test method for which an appropriate industry accepted alternative test method exits.

B. No manufacturer or business shall sell for profit, import for sale or otherwise distribute any cosmetic tested on animals. A 12-month exemption shall apply from the time of passage of this bill to dispose of inventory already in their possession at the time of passage.

C. The appropriate remedy for enforcing this section shall be either a civil action for injunctive relief and a fine of _______ or a criminal penalty of _______.

D. An action for relief may be brought by the Attorney General, the district attorney of the county in which the violation is alleged to occur, a city attorney, an animal advocacy group or a private individual.

Sec. 3. Definitions

For the purposes of this section the following terms shall have the following meanings:

(1) "Animal" means any warm-blooded or cold-blooded vertebrate creature, and any other sentient being.

(2) "Cosmetic" means articles intended to be rubbed, poured, sprinkled, or sprayed on, introduced into, or otherwise applied to the human body or any part thereof for cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance. This includes, but is not limited to, shampoo, soap and beauty aids.

(3) "Traditional animal test method" includes but is not limited to tests which expose the skin or eyes of animals to irritants or tests in which animals are fed lethal doses of toxic chemicals or any test that harms animals in measuring the toxicity of chemical.

(4) "Manufacturer" means any partnership, corporation, association, or other legal relationship that produces chemicals, ingredients, product formulations, or products in this state.

Thank you for your consideration.

[Your Name]
[Your Address]
[City, State ZIP]