HOME | DD

LeafsStock — April 2012

Published: 2012-04-26 11:38:41 +0000 UTC; Views: 619; Favourites: 8; Downloads: 21
Redirect to original
Description I work for Lush Cosmetics, in the store within Victoria Station. At the moment we have a worldwide campaign, trying to ensure a piece of legislation to ban the testing of cosmetics on animals in the EU, will not be put back another 10 years. This piece of legislation has taken around 30 years to come into affect, & now cosmetic companies are tying to push it back yet another ten years.
ENOUGH IS ENOUGH.
Lush Cosmetics is united in a campaign to ensure this piece of legislation goes through next year, in the hopes of saving a LOT of animal's lives.

My store in London did a demonstration to get people to sign the petition in store, & it really worked! We got a LOT of support from people, & I spent all together around 3 hours inside a cage, dressed as a bunny.

If you're interested in signing the petition, please go here:
[link]
Related content
Comments: 8

ilovemy3cats [2015-01-18 08:02:38 +0000 UTC]

If lush can get in to Furry conventions I'm sure they would get an outstanding amount of support from the furry community

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

Nozdurom [2013-05-23 09:05:04 +0000 UTC]

  • Luckily, animal tested make up is not allowed or soon getting not allowed here in Norway. o v o

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

LeafsStock In reply to Nozdurom [2013-05-28 20:22:08 +0000 UTC]

Yes Europe has banned the selling of ingredients or final products for cosmetics that have been tested on animals. It took a lot of fighting but we finally got there! There are still loop holes companies exploit, but it's definitely a step in the right direction

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Nozdurom In reply to LeafsStock [2013-06-12 13:49:53 +0000 UTC]

  • Ah, then I wasn't completely wrong. c:
    It's good that it have been banned, but how are there loop holes in it? :/

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

LeafsStock In reply to Nozdurom [2013-06-15 18:39:51 +0000 UTC]

There's a few different ones, i.e. if one ingredient inside a cosmetic product isn't tested on animals for cosmetic use but the same ingredient HAS been tested on animals for food allergies or medical research, it is still able to list it as "cruetly free".
Also, there's a time period it takes for companies to be able to say they are cruelty free, which at the moment is 5 years. So, say a company makes a new cosmetic product. They agree on what ingredients they want to use. They then test some or all ingredients on animals. From the moment they do the last test, they have to wait 5 years to say they are cruelty free (like, by exmaple, acquiring a BUAV leaping bunny logo on their product). BUT, if it takes this new product five years (after being tested on animals) to develop, produce, stock, advertise etc, then it could reach the shop floors under the pretence of being 'cruelty free' because it's been five years since they tested the ingredients. Does this make sense?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

Nozdurom In reply to LeafsStock [2013-06-22 23:38:19 +0000 UTC]

  • Yeah, that made sense. :/

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

MawiieCooper [2012-04-29 11:32:44 +0000 UTC]

I signed the petition ^^
I do my best to choose products that are no tested on animals (with the Peta list) but it changes very often, I don't know what to buy anymore

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

LeafsStock In reply to MawiieCooper [2012-05-01 23:02:49 +0000 UTC]

It does get very confusing. I just go by 'if in doubt, go without' So glad t ohear you signed the petition though, well done!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0