Skip to content

Product Testing

SAMPLE LETTER ONE | General Product Testing

SAMPLE LETTER TWO |  EU Marketing Ban on Animal-Tested Cosmetics, to MP

SAMPLE LETTER THREE | Cruelty-Free International



To Whom It Concerns,

I am shocked to learn that [Name of company] continues to support animal experimentation. Considered archaic and fundamentally flawed, product testing on animals lacks corporate legitimacy and social validation. Indeed, despite using deceptive statements and misleading assertions fabricated by clever marketing and publicity departments, companies that subject animals to product testing are NOT legally mandated to do so, and knowledgeable consumers are demanding discontinuation of such unnecessary and vicious tests. Furthermore, it is imperative to recognize the existence of ingredients that already have an established, proven safety record for human use. These products, such as those found on the FDA GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) list, can be utilized and manufactured in the absence of deliberately cruel and unwarranted animal experimentation. [Name of company]’s blatant disregard for animals and its decision to not use GRAS ingredients exclusively is irresponsible and negligent.

Furthermore, your company’s attempt to foster an idea that consumers continually support animal experimentation due to some inaccurate notion that it will prevent them from being harmed is unprincipled. Product misuse and abuse can lead to harm regardless of how many animals are wrongfully killed during the product testing phase. In fact, corporate manipulation and exploitation of consumer fear by using deceptive advertising is not only unethical but it is also illegal. As such, as long as [Name of company] continues to unnecessarily and selfishly capitalize on the mutilation, torture, and death of animals, I will not financially support you; furthermore, I will share this information with family, friends, colleagues, and members of online communities as well.

Please make both the ethical and financially-responsible decision to discontinue animal experimentation immediately: join an increasing body of corporations who are listening to a concerned and attentive consumer population who refuse to be complicit in the inherently malicious industry of animal experimentation.




SAMPLE LETTER TWO | EU Marketing Ban on Animal-Tested Cosmetics, courtesy Uncaged

Dear [name of MEP]

EU Marketing Ban on Animal-Tested Cosmetics

Back in 2003, the European Union passed the 7th Amendment to the Cosmetics Directive,which requires that cosmetics containing ingredients tested on animals must be banned from sale in the EU in 2013. Importantly, the Commission stated in a report the following year that this ban will be introduced “irrespective of the availability of alternative non-animal tests”.

However, I am extremely concerned that the European Commission appears to be reneging on this stance, which was agreed by all EU institutions, and is instead paving the way for a delay in the ban as a result of pressure from cosmetics companies who continue to conduct animal tests outside the EU. The unconditional nature of the ban is of enormous ethical and democratic significance. It reflects the view of the majority of European citizens who, as I, do not wish to purchase cosmetics containing ingredients tested on animals because we believe that the development of new cosmetics does not justify the suffering caused.

You Gov poll conducted for Uncaged found 60% of the public believe that animal-tested cosmetics should be banned, with only 14% disagreeing. It is crucial to understand that this is not a safety issue because animal testing for cosmetics is driven by the requirement to test new-to-the-world chemicals. Therefore, companies can continue to ensure the safety of their cosmetics products by utilising the thousands of existing ingredients, which have already been tested.

I strongly believe that the ethical principle that it is wrong to inflict pain and suffering onanimals for trivial and unnecessary purposes must underpin the EU approach to the Cosmetics Directive if the EU is to retain moral and democratic legitimacy. Fundamentally, this is a social justice issue rather than a technical one. Furthermore, a delay in the 2013 ban would also remove a key incentive for industry to invest in and develop non-animal alternatives to all toxicity tests, thereby undermining not only animal welfare but human health, given the scientific weaknesses in animal test methods. I am also concerned that the Cosmetics Products Regulation, which has superceded the Directive, fails to stipulate public access to the animal testing aspect of mandatory product information files. I believe that such openness is essential to allow the public to make informed choices about which cosmetics to purchase. I would be very grateful if you could let me know if you can support my stance on this matter and what action you can take to defend the 2013 marketing ban and ensure public access to animal testing product information.

Yours sincerely,

PDF | EU Marketing Ban on Animal-Tested Cosmetics

View this document on Scribd

SAMPLE LETTER THREE | Cruelty-Free International

Dear [BRAND]

I support Cruelty Free International and its campaign to end animal testing for cosmetics globally – see for more details.

I would like to buy your products but will only do so if they are certified under the Humane Cosmetics Standard, the only internationally recognised certification for products which are not tested on animals.

The public don’t want animals to be used in tests for cosmetics, so offering ‘cruelty-free’ products would enable your brand to attract the ever-growing ethical consumer market, and at the same time save the lives of thousands of animals. I urge you to offer your customers peace of mind by obtaining ‘cruelty-free’ certification under the only internationally recognised standard for animal testing.

Over 400 brands have now gone ‘cruelty free’ under the Humane Cosmetics Standard, proving that it is possible to produce safe, effective and highly marketable products without testing on animals. Brands including Badger Balm, Burt’s Bees, Dermalogica, Jason, Marks & Spencer, Montagne Jeunesse, Paul Mitchell, Tom’s of Maine, and The Body Shop have already signed up.

I rely on this third party verification to identify and purchase products which do not involve animal testing. Certification will give credibility to your animal testing policy, so if your products are genuinely not tested on animals, please apply for certification.

You can find more information at

Please respond to let me know how you progress.

Yours sincerely,

3 Comments leave one →
  1. September 7, 2013 3:51 pm

    It is perfect time for making some plans for the future and it truly is time to get satisfied.
    I’ve go through this submit and if I could I wish to counsel you few fascinating issues or advice.
    Maybe it is possible to write subsequent articles referring to this informative article.

    I desire to learn far more issues about it!


  2. November 27, 2013 9:38 pm

    1. Rebuild your site by breaking apart the flash file and going the most important sections to its unique HTML web site. Flash features can then be incorporated as wanted on each independent web site.
    burberry handbags outlet


  3. Smithe102 permalink
    April 9, 2014 6:38 pm

    Fantastic website. A lot of useful information here. I’m sending it to a few pals ans also sharing in delicious. And naturally, thank you in your sweat! bckdbdkdkb


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: