The Controversy: The Benefits Of Cosmetics
Many different people use cosmetics every day all over the world for many different reasons. However, many people don’t realize all the different effects that creating cosmetics can have. I choose to look at Benefit Cosmetics. One of the biggest controversies Benefit faces is animal testing. Benefit first opened in 1979 in San Francisco originally names “Face Place.” In 1990 they renames to Benefit Cosmetics, opening in Henri Bendels department store in New York City; jumping over seas seven years later to Harrods. Before this they were a small brand, yet in 1999 Moet Hennessy and Louis Vuitton “LVMH” bought the once modest makeup shop (Cosmetics, 2016). Benefit as well as LVMH earned an over all highest score of 7 on Good Guide on their
different products. Though, many were closer to their products were closer to their lowest score of a 4.3 (G, 2016). The lowest of the scores fell into the health and society categories. This is likely due to the fact they claim to be cruelty-free. According to Benefits Q&A page, “Benefit does not test products on animals” (Cosmetics, 2016). They also claim to be large supports of ending animal testing as a whole following the 2013 official ban set by the European Union. The 2013 ban states that testing on animal is banned if the finished product is cosmetic or contains any cosmetic ingredient. As well was prohibiting marketing finished products that have been testing on animals in the EU (Ban on Animal Testing. 2016). They also support the “Fund for Alternatives to Animal Testing” in the United States as well as creating a framework for the Europeans Cosmetic’s Association (Cosmetics, 2016). The “Fund for Alternatives to Animal Testing” suggests human testing is much more reliable, ethical, cost-effective, practical, accurate and environmentally friendly (Alternatives In Testing, 2016). At the face of things everything sounds great, because it is. However, Benefit is sold in China. This fact alone can offset all of their wonderful cruelty-free claims. This is because as of 2015 China had regulations in place that often end in animal testing. If the products are sold ONLY in Hong Kong the companies are not required to test on animals. Yet, more often then not if a product is sold anywhere outside of Hong Kong post-marketing testing is conducted on animals. Ordinary cosmetics, which include make up, fragrances, skin, hair, and nail care products imported require animal testing (V, 2015). Many companies that wish to sell in china will often have two manufacturing plants (combs, 2012). Benefit states they cruelty free, however they sell in China. Many people as well as myself are strong believers in cruelty free products. Not testing on animals has always been a huge topic of discussion in the cosmetic word. Yet, can a company make these claims if they don’t follow them one hundred percent of the time?
different products. Though, many were closer to their products were closer to their lowest score of a 4.3 (G, 2016). The lowest of the scores fell into the health and society categories. This is likely due to the fact they claim to be cruelty-free. According to Benefits Q&A page, “Benefit does not test products on animals” (Cosmetics, 2016). They also claim to be large supports of ending animal testing as a whole following the 2013 official ban set by the European Union. The 2013 ban states that testing on animal is banned if the finished product is cosmetic or contains any cosmetic ingredient. As well was prohibiting marketing finished products that have been testing on animals in the EU (Ban on Animal Testing. 2016). They also support the “Fund for Alternatives to Animal Testing” in the United States as well as creating a framework for the Europeans Cosmetic’s Association (Cosmetics, 2016). The “Fund for Alternatives to Animal Testing” suggests human testing is much more reliable, ethical, cost-effective, practical, accurate and environmentally friendly (Alternatives In Testing, 2016). At the face of things everything sounds great, because it is. However, Benefit is sold in China. This fact alone can offset all of their wonderful cruelty-free claims. This is because as of 2015 China had regulations in place that often end in animal testing. If the products are sold ONLY in Hong Kong the companies are not required to test on animals. Yet, more often then not if a product is sold anywhere outside of Hong Kong post-marketing testing is conducted on animals. Ordinary cosmetics, which include make up, fragrances, skin, hair, and nail care products imported require animal testing (V, 2015). Many companies that wish to sell in china will often have two manufacturing plants (combs, 2012). Benefit states they cruelty free, however they sell in China. Many people as well as myself are strong believers in cruelty free products. Not testing on animals has always been a huge topic of discussion in the cosmetic word. Yet, can a company make these claims if they don’t follow them one hundred percent of the time?