Cosmetics to be banned by Labour

July 17th, 2014 at 4:30 pm by David Farrar

announced:

A Labour Government will help protect animals from harm by prohibiting the sale of cosmetics that have been tested on animals. 

Labour’s Animal Welfare spokesperson Trevor Mallard today launched the initiative at an event organised by Labour’s Ōhariu candidate Ginny Andersen at the Wadestown Veterinary Clinic, which after boundary changes is now in the electorate.

 Trevor Mallard says most New Zealanders find the testing of cosmetics on defenceless animals abhorrent. “No animal testing of cosmetics is carried out in New Zealand because it is barred under the Animal Welfare Act. However, there is no restriction on animal-tested beauty products being imported and sold here.

Labour thinks NZers are unable to make decisions for themselves on what products they find acceptable to buy – so Trevor will decide for everyone.

“Labour will ensure that no make-up sold in this country has been tested on animals by formally prohibiting it in New Zealand. We will also prohibit the sale of imported cosmetics that have been tested on animals. Legislation enacting Labour’s policy will be restricted to cosmetics, toiletries and fragrance. It will not affect medicines. 

“The European.Union last year prohibited the sale and importation of animal-tested products. As in the EU, Labour’s policy will apply both to finished products and ingredients, or combinations of ingredients.

So which companies may be impacted. This overseas site lists companies and brand names that use such testing

  1. American Beauty
  2. Aramis
  3. Avon
  4. Banana Boat
  5. Bausch & Lomb
  6. Bobbi Brown
  7. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.
  8. Bumble and Bumble
  9. Cacherel
  10. Cargill
  11. Carpet Fresh
  12. Carter-Wallace
  13. Charlie
  14. Chesebrough-Ponds
  15. Church & Dwight
  16. Clarion
  17. Clairol
  18. Clear Choice
  19. Clinique
  20. Clorox
  21. Commerce Drug Co.
  22. Consumer Value Stores
  23. Coppertone
  24. Coty
  25. Cover Girl
  26. Crest
  27. Daisy Fuentes
  28. Dana Perfumes
  29. Darphin
  30. Dawn
  31. Del Laboratories
  32. Desitin
  33. Dial Corporation
  34. Diversey
  35. Donna Karan
  36. Dove
  37. Dow Brands
  38. Drackett Products Co.
  39. Drano
  40. EcoLab
  41. Eli Lilly & Co.
  42. El Sanofi Inc.
  43. Elizabeth Arden
  44. Erno Laszlo
  45. Estee Lauder
  46. Faberge
  47. Fantastik
  48. Fendi
  49. Final Net
  50. Finesse
  51. First Response
  52. Flame Glow
  53. Flirt!
  54. Garnier
  55. Giorgio Armani
  56. Givaudan-Roure
  57. Glade
  58. Glass Plus
  59. GlaxoSmithKline
  60. Good Skin
  61. Grassroots skin care
  62. Helena Rubinstein
  63. Helene Curtis Industries
  64. Herbal Essences
  65. Huggies
  66. ISO
  67. Ivory
  68. Jhirmack
  69. Jo Malone
  70. Johnson & Johnson
  71. Johnson Products Co.
  72. Jovan
  73. Kaboom
  74. Keri
  75. Kimberly-Clark Corp
  76. Kiton
  77. Kiwi Brands
  78. Kleenex
  79. La Mer
  80. Lab Series
  81. Lady’s Choice
  82. Lancaster
  83. Lancome
  84. Lava
  85. Lever Brothers
  86. Lipton
  87. Listerine
  88. L’Oreal USA
  89. Lubriderm
  90. Lux
  91. Lysol
  92. MAC Cosmetics
  93. Mars (candy company)
  94. Mary Kay
  95. Matrix Essentials
  96. Max Factor
  97. Maybelline
  98. McNeil Nutritionals
  99. Mead
  100. Michael Kors
  101. Missoni
  102. Mitchum
  103. Mop & Glo
  104. Nair
  105. Naturelle
  106. Neutrogena
  107. Neutron Industries, Inc.
  108. Ojon
  109. Olean
  110. Orange Glo
  111. Origins
  112. Oscar de la Renta
  113. OxiClean
  114. Pantene
  115. Parfums International
  116. Pearl Drops
  117. Pennex
  118. Pfizer, Inc.
  119. Pine-Sol
  120. Plax
  121. Playtex Corporation
  122. Pledge
  123. Polident
  124. Ponds
  125. Post-It
  126. Prescriptives
  127. Prestige Brands
  128. Prince Matchabelli
  129. Proctor & Gamble Co.
  130. Quintessence
  131. Raid
  132. Ralph Lauren Fragrances
  133. Reckitt Benckiser
  134. Redken
  135. Resolve
  136. Revlon
  137. Richardson-Vicks
  138. Sally Beauty Supply
  139. Sally Hansen
  140. Sanofi
  141. SC Johnson & Son
  142. Schering-Plough
  143. Scotch
  144. Scott Paper Co.
  145. Scrub Free
  146. Sean John Fragrances
  147. Sensodyne
  148. Signal
  149. Smashbox Cosmetics
  150. Snobal
  151. SoftSheen
  152. S.O.S.
  153. Splenda
  154. Stanhome Inc.
  155. Sterling Drug
  156. Suave
  157. Sun Star
  158. Sunsilk
  159. TCB Naturals
  160. Tegrin
  161. 3M
  162. Tide
  163. Tilex
  164. Tom Ford Beauty
  165. Tommy Hilfiger
  166. Trojan
  167. Truvia
  168. Ultima II
  169. Unilever
  170. Vaseline
  171. Vichy
  172. Vidal Sassoon
  173. Visine
  174. Vivid
  175. Warner-Lambert
  176. Westwood Pharmaceuticals
  177. White Shoulders
  178. Whitehall Laboratories
  179. Windex
  180. Woolite

As always great to see Labour focused on the important issue of telling NZ women which cosmetics they are allowed to buy.

Tags:

70 Responses to “Cosmetics to be banned by Labour”

  1. David Garrett (7,278 comments) says:

    This is fantastic! This will be even more off putting than the proposed ban on incandescent light bulbs was…I remember shane jones banging his head on his desk when that was brought up in the House…fairly safe to assume he didn’t vote for it I think…

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. lilman (959 comments) says:

    Cunliffe must be in a state of dismay fancy banning all those wonderful female products and having now to apologise to all those female chemists for being a man talking on issues about female products.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    There’s absolutely no justification for testing cosmetics on animals, period. Because they’re cosmetics for goodness sake!

    If they can’t be tested without torturing animals, tough luck… there’ll be a few less brands of slap on the shelves for some wrinkled old trollop to plaster herself with. Cry me a river.

    Having said that, I’m not in favour of a ban. Just a dirty great sticker that has to be plastered on the latest Eau du Kardashian, saying “Tested on Animals”, so consumers can make an informed decision, and hopefully send to bankruptcy any firm who thinks a new shade of eyeshadow is worth blinding an animal for.

    Medical testing is a different matter… a necessary evil until such time as some scientist grows a human simulacrum in a giant petrie dish.

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Gulag1917 (917 comments) says:

    New Zealanders find the imposition of Trevor Mallard on defenceless citizens and voters abhorrent.

    Vote: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Unity (584 comments) says:

    I find testing cosmetics (or anything for that matter) on animals disgraceful and they should find some other way to go about their testing, but on the other hand who on earth does Mallard think he is. He needs to get back in his box. I will make my own choices without his input.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. Keeping Stock (10,340 comments) says:

    My Good Lady Wife is a big user of MAC products. I cannot wait to see her reaction when I tell her she will have to change brands if a Labour government is elected in September :D

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. thedavincimode (6,759 comments) says:

    This could be a show stopper for Hosking. Are liebour going to fund grief counselling?

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. thedavincimode (6,759 comments) says:

    Just a dirty great sticker that has to be plastered on the latest Eau du Kardashian, saying “Tested on Animals”

    You mean the Kardashians Rex?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Unity (584 comments) says:

    Keeping Stock, your wife should just tell them to take a running jump. They wouldn’t be able to stand the heat anyway because I’m sure there would be marching in the streets.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. Richard Hurst (859 comments) says:

    Not to worry- just like Kiwibank and Labours planned kiwi insurance we will have state produced: Kiwi scent, Kiwi shampoo, Kiwi night cream, kiwi face scrub, kiwi eye shadow, kiwi soap, kiwi lipstick, kiwi sunscreen etc , etc. And they will be sold from Kiwi supermarkets since those nasty private owned supermarkets are making too much money from selling people stuff. Outrageous they should profit at all!

    It will be North Korean ‘Juche’ in action. How glorious!

    Popular. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. thedavincimode (6,759 comments) says:

    66. Huggies

    Yikes! That could be a bit of a show stopper for redtweeter.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. dubya (235 comments) says:

    All part of a grand left wing conspiracy to make all our ladies as beautiful and captivating as the lovely Nanaia Mahuta, the ageless Sue Moroney, and that naturally flawless earth-mother every red-blooded man goes weak at the knees for, Metiria Turei.

    Vote: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. gravedodger (1,566 comments) says:

    That’l work Thuggard ever heard of the internet you know the thingy you use to market the tickets you are gifted.

    Of course nobody will buy on line sheesh.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (890 comments) says:

    This policy is a sure winner folks!! (for National I mean….)

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Sir Cullen's Sidekick (890 comments) says:

    dubya (214 comments) says:
    July 17th, 2014 at 4:49 pm

    Well Dubya, you forgot Labour’s poster girl Jacinda and Internet Party’s Mother who sold her soul Laila Mother Harre!!

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Judith (8,534 comments) says:

    Actually MAC cosmetics prefer not to test on animals and only test within the strict guidelines of the law – and where possible avoid the practice altogether. They are also currently working of going back to completely avoiding animal testing like they did a couple of years back.

    They will have no problem should the policy be enforced here in NZ.

    Also Avon, can and do avoid testing on animals.
    http://www.avoncompany.com/corporatecitizenship/corporateresponsibility/resourcecenter/policies_and_procedures/animal_welfare.html

    Bobbi Brown
    http://www.bobbibrown.co.uk/cms/customer_service/faqs.tmpl#animals

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Ross12 (1,428 comments) says:

    The other thing for Labour to would to be change the regulations so animal testing was not required in the development of new cosmetics. That would fix it !! I’m sure they would be happy to pay medical bills for any person who had a negative reaction to the new cosmetic.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Rex Widerstrom (5,354 comments) says:

    Dear me, so may blokes worried their wives may have to find a different brand of Polyfilla powder…

    Here’s an idea for some foreign exchange earnings, then. We offer the women of NZ as cosmetics testers. We could televise the whole thing, a la The Hunger Games.

    The handful whose names are drawn out of the ballot step forward and get a bucket of Britney Spears’ Talentless or Kim Kardashian’s Ginormarse (or whatever their latest creations are entitled) chucked in their face. The effects would be duly noted and anyone who could still read the cover of Wimmins Daze from a supermarket trolley’s width away would be considered to have a product which met with the regulator’s approval.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. metcalph (1,430 comments) says:

    Even if you avoid testing the finished product on animals, you still have the major problem that individual ingredients have all been tested on animals.

    For example: environmental toxicity. How are you going to determine whether something kills animals in the wild in low concentrations? Animal Testing.

    Another example: carcinogens. Want to be sure that the skin cream or hand sanitizer you are using doesn’t give you skin cancer several years later? The only solution is animal testing in small cute furry animals.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Auberon (873 comments) says:

    What we’re seeing is the list may already be out of date, because major companies like Avon and Bobbi Brown, and others, are moving away from the practice.

    That’s the market talking to you Labour, no bans required.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. davidp (3,581 comments) says:

    On one hand, Mallard wants to ban cosmetics testing on animals.

    On the other hand, Labour want the government to establish a multi-billion dollar moa cloning project. Which surely will involve extensive testing on prototype moas, the use of filler DNA extracted from other birds, surrogacy, and a host of other testing and research run out of a serious laboratory. It isn’t as if the first moa v2 is going to hatch out of an egg laid by another moa, then run off in to the forest to frolic with the other bird life.

    Is it too much to expect Labour to at least pay lip service to consistency?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. Don the Kiwi (1,757 comments) says:

    Won’t worry my missus – she buys most of her cosmetics on line from the states.

    As for me, I gave up wearing makeup when i stopped acting 50 years ago :-) And besides, I’m nobody’s bitch !!!

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. holysheet (389 comments) says:

    I see Phizer on that list. One thing you can be sure all the rainbow party will not ban is Viagra. It has been animal tested, on all the lowlife ones in the rainbow party.
    How would trev perform without it?

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. NK (1,244 comments) says:

    I wondered how Labour were going to police the Internet and sites such as strawberrynet.com?

    Then I saw this: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/politics/news/article.cfm?c_id=280&objectid=11294658

    Money quote: Labour is reassuring consumers that a proposed ban on cosmetics tested on animals will not strip popular makeup and beauty brands from New Zealand shelves.

    This is a ban when you’re not having a ban!

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. OneTrack (3,104 comments) says:

    “Labour thinks NZers are unable to make decisions for themselves on what products they find acceptable to buy – so Trevor will decide for everyone.”

    It’s just the left’s totalitarian nature bubbling to the surface again. And, yes, they do think NZers are unable to make decisions for themselves. They know best.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. kiwi in america (2,452 comments) says:

    This is a ban that would make the ban happy Greens blush. Great election narrative for National – “what else do Labour/Greens want to ban?” Cosmetics are a mysterious woman’s world that I learned men ought not interfere with or even comment on so good on ya Trev for breaking that unwritten rule. Do I sense a new hashtag to join #manban #chanban #sorryforbeingaman – maybe #makeupban?

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. Huevon (222 comments) says:

    How does one “test” cosmetics on an animal, exactly?

    What are we talking about here? Putting a little rouge on a mouse is one thing. Electrocuting it through the testicles is another.

    I’m just looking for some clarity….

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. Fisiani (1,039 comments) says:

    Never forget that no matter if Labour want to ban cosmetics or bring back the moa or leave timber to rot or any other ludicrous idea there are about 20% of people who are oblivious to reason and will tick Labour like one of Pavlov’s dogs. All they have to do is promise a juicy bribe and the rest of the pack will salivate at the polling booth. This election is neck and neck and if you want a strong stable government then you simply have to PARTY VOTE NATIONAL.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Steve (North Shore) (4,562 comments) says:

    ‘I’m sorry for using makeup’ – The Labour Party.
    Fuck they are going to be one very ugly bunch if they win, uglier than they are now

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. Manolo (13,774 comments) says:

    Mallard is doing his worst best to embarrass Silent T.
    It is now bordering on the ridiculous.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. David Garrett (7,278 comments) says:

    Huevon: I believe the testing which is seen as abhorrent (and I don’t like the thought of it much either) is called the LD50 test…animals are force fed more and more of the tested product until 50% of the die…

    I suspect like most people, I don’t much like the thought of it, and if it has to be done I’d rather it was on rats than beagles…but I guess they have to have some way of working out if their products are safe…Others will know a lot more about this than me..

    Where’s Judith? She knows a lot about nearly everything…

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. queenstfarmer (782 comments) says:

    To lighten the mood momentarily, here’s a topical bit from the late, great Rik Mayall:

    http://youtu.be/Y-vZDNnjM2E?t=45s

    :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. adze (2,126 comments) says:
    66. Huggies

    Yikes! That could be a bit of a show stopper for redtweeter.

    Glad I read that before taking a mouthful of coffee.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. Captain Pugwash (98 comments) says:

    Well it looks like SWMBO’s “Natural Glo” is not on the list,

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. metcalph (1,430 comments) says:

    I believe the testing which is seen as abhorrent (and I don’t like the thought of it much either) is called the LD50 test…animals are force fed more and more of the tested product until 50% of the die…

    There is no one LD50 test. Substances have different Lethal Dosages depending on how they are applied: Orally, Inhaled or Via Skin. I even seen an LD50 dosage (interperonital) which in layman’s terms is sticking it up the animal’s bum and seeing how much it takes to kill them.

    Then there are the LDlow tests which denote the dosage at which death is a possibility.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. artemisia (242 comments) says:

    Drano cosmetics? Don’t suppose that has a big NZ following.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. DisgruntledOne (20 comments) says:

    Testing substances on animals to see if they are harmful is barbaric. Unfortunately, it is also a necessary evil for the advancement of medicine, where the end justifies the means. It is also used for the production of new cosmetics. However, it the later case, the end does not justify the means.

    To everybody suggesting that, while this is the case, it should still be up to the individual consumer to decide whether to exercise their conscience, would you say the same if the torture concerned was of people? Of course you wouldn’t. Whether or not you think animal torture is an acceptable price to pay for new cosmetics, I don’t understand why you think this should be the consumers choice.

    But the ‘animal torture or cosmetics’ dilemma is irrelevant, because the EU has not allowed animal testing for cosmetics for ten years, and last year prohibited the sale of any cosmetics, including imports, that have been tested on animals. Therefore, all cosmetics produced for that market are fine.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. jaba (2,142 comments) says:

    I hate the thought the animals are tortured in this way as well.
    I would suggest that the Gweens will be happy with this policy introduced by Trev .. except for Turei of course

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. masterman (19 comments) says:

    Your list just shows how despicable the cosmetic industry is – about time something was done to shake it

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. cha (4,017 comments) says:

    Scientific us.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. eszett (2,408 comments) says:

    Labour thinks NZers are unable to make decisions for themselves on what products they find acceptable to buy

    What a stupid hyperbole. We ban and regulate a number of things, mostly for very good reasons. You could equally argue
    “National thinks NZers are unable to make decisions for themselves on how fast it is safe to drive” so abolish all speed limits.

    It’s just lazy thinking, not wanting to address the issue whether animal testing of cosmetics is necessary and justified.

    All you want to do is take a cheap political pot shot.

    BTW, you may want to ask John Banks what his stance on this issue is.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. Brian Smaller (4,023 comments) says:

    Next on the list – Gillette Lady Shavers.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. BR (81 comments) says:

    Which ones will be allowed?

    Bill.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. Johnboy (16,554 comments) says:

    Won’t worry me. I just rub a bit of natural lanolin round my more chafed regions and all my ladies seem happy! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. adze (2,126 comments) says:

    Johnboy
    I thought you might put a little rouge and eye shadow on the nicer ewes? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. Johnboy (16,554 comments) says:

    Raddle me riddle adze! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. kowtow (8,475 comments) says:

    Still OK to kill babies though.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. greenjacket (465 comments) says:

    And yet again, Labour release a “policy” with absolutely no research at all.
    A quick email to the Parliamentary Library asking “What common products are tested on animals?” would have made someone in Labour realise that this was a really bad idea. But no – they are so f@cking inept and lazy that they can’t even send a quick email to the Parliamentary Library – instead they just make sh*t up on the spot.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Adolf Fiinkensein (2,903 comments) says:

    It’s Labour’s new game changer.

    The TALCUBAN

    Wimmin in public will not need makeup. They’ll just wear burquas.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Tauhei Notts (1,713 comments) says:

    No. 171 interested me. Vaseline.
    At our golf club when a bloke puts out an expertly placed tee shot on a dogleg par four it is called a “vaseline shot”.
    It opens up the hole.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. wreck1080 (3,917 comments) says:

    what about importing them from amazon?

    Are customs going to boot down your door searching for lancome lipsticks?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. Bob (497 comments) says:

    I don’t think much of testing cosmetics on animals. However I believe in educating the public not forcing them whether it is smoking, food sold in schools or cosmetics. Labour don’t seem to have learnt from their defeat in 2008 how much voters resented nanny state.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. goldnkiwi (1,304 comments) says:

    Surely there have been enough ingredients tested by now. Apparently the creams etc are more myth than magic, why do we need to keep experimenting? Money of course so I am all for a ban. Testing things on rabbits eyes because they do not blink often is barbaric. How many types of eye makeup do we need? None if we were honest, vanity projects by women to entice men for gods sake, as if men need any encouragement ;) lol.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. James Stephenson (2,180 comments) says:

    Time to bring back that great scent “Self Righteous” by Anita Roddick

    (H/T Half Man Half Biscuit)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. adc (595 comments) says:

    Mallard is just pissed he’s not eligible for list so he’s going out to sabotage Labour’s chances.

    Surely that’s the only feasible explanation…

    Surely he doesn’t think no ingredient of any cosmetic should have ever been proved safe by testing on an animal at some stage?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. marcw (247 comments) says:

    I’ve figured out why Trevor and Fenton have never been photographed together – Trev is Darrian WITH makeup. With this new policy, no wonder she has to stand down. Her secret has been exposed.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. meh (165 comments) says:

    Mitchum – awesome take away one of the few decent anti perspirants so we can all smell like the watermelons. Focus on some real issues ffs…

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Duxton (651 comments) says:

    So, Labour want women to look ugly and stink. I guess that will appeal to their Caucus…..and general voter base
    :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. Duxton (651 comments) says:

    Seriously, they have just nailed my gorgeous wife’s vote…….for National

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. pejhay (29 comments) says:

    All the problems solved ! Bring back the Moa, and test shit on that, what’s the worst that can happen?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. dave53 (91 comments) says:

    Thank God. Chanel No 5 is not on their list. My wife always says I am always hers as long as I keep her in Chanel No 5.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    Is Duck Man Mallard just following the EC on this?

    http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/cosmetic-household-products-animal-testing/

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Jack5 (5,137 comments) says:

    But the West has gone fucking crazy. We humans are carnivores and wouldn’t have survived for millennia without eating animals. New Zealand would be as poor as Tonga if it weren’t for its animal-based food exports.

    If they want to be vegetarians or vegans, fine, but leave other people alone.

    I blame it on the decline of religion. Once these fuckers would have been on street corners with signs saying in big type: Repent, the end is nigh. Now they want to save the animals we eat.

    Any time now animal rights extremists will call for a ban on ice cream, because some brands contain gelatin, and I think all brands used to contain it. And we know gelatin is made from:

    …a mixture of peptides and proteins produced by partial hydrolysis of collagen extracted from the skin, bones, and connective tissues of animals such as domesticated cattle, chicken, pigs, and fish…

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. Dale 08 (32 comments) says:

    Please don’t take away my Hugo Boss that stuff drives my girlfriend into a frenzy.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Pharmachick (235 comments) says:

    @Metcalph 6:18 pm … No, that’s utter tosh.

    Intra-peritoneal (IP) administration is when a substance is administered through the abdominal wall and into the abdominal cavity. It is occasionally used on rodents (primarily rats and mice) because you can tip them upside down and avoid hitting any of the major organs with the needle. But its not commonly used in serious drug development because its not a route of administration of drugs in humans, therefore the distribution of the drug after injection when IP is used is not reflective of the human distribution, hence you get a skewed idea of the drug.

    FWIW “up the bum” is called a suppository and its usually only used for pain medication and/or anti-vomiting meds when the person can’t take it orally for various reasons.

    Also LD50 is seldom used at all any more, except in the most exigent circumstances (think anti-cancer drug development, where the drug itself is super toxic). It is very hard, almost impossible; to get LD50 tests approved by Animal Ethics Committees, and has been since the late 90s.

    Most companies that test on animals use skin patch testing for allergies/adverse reactions. They have good data for most individual ingredients because of the years of testing that has gone before, however they cannot account for the specific effects of combinations of chemicals (which may differ from the individual chemical effects alone). There are still a few companies that use nasty tests like the Draize test etc (***WARNING*** if you google Draize test you will get horrible descriptions and images, it is not nice) for testing e.g. mascara (which IMHO is horrific) but also for ophthalmic preparations, but even within the industry its frowned upon because there are newer tests in petri dishes with isolated corneal epithelial cells that can be used.

    I have no problem with people that want to ban animal testing for cosmetics, but I do see the necessity for testing new drugs, particularly where it is a completely novel class that has not been discovered before.

    And for what it is worth, this stunt by Labour/Mallard truly shows how ridiculous they have become this year.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Psycho Milt (2,412 comments) says:

    If this constitutes ‘banning cosmetics,’ the current government already ‘bans cosmetics’ via the Animal Welfare Act. Of course, the current government only ‘bans’ locally-made cosmetics while leaving overseas competitors ‘unbanned.’ Labour’s great crime against New Zealand women will be to appy National’s existing ‘ban’ less inequitably.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. Bogusnews (474 comments) says:

    It sounds to me like the National candidate is really scaring Trevor. He is going to extreme lengths to get publicity.

    Pleasing also that National’s popularity is not being dented at this stage. It almost looks as though they are just working away on the important stuff (sorting out the economy, getting us back into jobs etc) and are a bit bemused as Labour flails away at irrelevancies.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. Nigel Kearney (1,013 comments) says:

    When a new product is developed, some creature has to use it first. If the guinea pig is not an actual guinea pig or other animal, then it is a human. t’s just common sense to try it on an animal first to make sure no adverse reaction occurs..

    These stories of animals being tortured are horrible, but can be addressed by banning the actual torture, not by banning any product that has ever been put on an animal before a human.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. david (2,557 comments) says:

    Hand it over to dotcom and you will get a scenario that goes something like: “If we ban a large chunk of available cosmetics it will make women less attractive and this make a glorious first step towards getting rid of New Zealand’s “rape culture”

    C’mon guys, get with the conspiracy and join the dots.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Of course Labour are against cosmetics. The ugly old dragons in their line-up need broomsticks, not beauty therapy.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote