85% of Brits against the reintroduction of animal testing for cosmetics in the UK

85% of Brits are against the reintroduction of animal testing for cosmetics in the UK, saying it is unacceptable to test ingredients on animals, found new research conducted by YouGov on behalf of animal protection organisation Cruelty Free International.

With it recently announced that Home Secretary Priti Patel could reintroduce animal testing for cosmetic ingredients in the UK for the first time in 23 years, this data revealed that most Brits are opposed to the decision.

More than half of adults (65%) in Great Britain support a binding plan to phase out animal testing, and a further 66% revealed they would like to see the Government set a date to end the use of animal tests, the data found. 

Just under three quarters (70%) said they would find it unacceptable for testing on animals to still be taking place 90 years from now, 82% find it unacceptable for experiments on animals to continue where alternative, viable non-animal methods exist, and 68% would support an investment strategy to accelerate the availability of alternatives. 

A petition by Cruelty Free International, Animal Free Research UK and OneKind is calling for a phase out plan for animal testing in the UK, and so far, it has reached more than 84,000 signatures. Sign the petition here. 

“Our research with YouGov shows that the public is overwhelmingly supportive of a phased-out end to animal testing in the UK with deadlines applied,” said Kerry Postlewhite, director of public affairs at Cruelty Free International.  

“We are calling on the Government to outline an action plan setting out a proactive strategy for ending reliance on outdated and unreliable animal experiments. Like those deployed in other important policy areas such as climate emissions and pollution, the roadmap should contain agreed milestones, targets, and timetables.

“New non-animal methods, or new approach methodologies (NAMS), promise to deliver safer chemicals and more effective medicines more quickly and at less cost. Yet, while NAMS are regularly shown to demonstrate far higher relevance to human diseases, and widely supported by the public, they continually to be woefully underfunded.

“Not only do animal experiments cause inexcusable suffering to animals in laboratories, [but] they are also not rooted in science. It is time that we adopted a fundamentally different approach and followed both the science and public opinion.”

What do you make of this news? Tell us your thoughts below.