What's happening
Writing a plain-English summary… Track this bill to get it by email.
Why it matters
Albany, before your first meeting.
Every bill that moved yesterday, summarized in a sentence and ranked by impact. The Albany Scorecard follows on Sundays.
Free. Unsubscribe in one click. Want alerts on specific bills? Create an account.
Who cares
Headline styles
Sponsors
No co-sponsors yet.
History
- Referred to health
- Referred to health
Full text
The text isn't available here yet. Check nysenate.gov.
Sponsor's memo
Title of bill
An act to amend the public health law, in relation to prohibiting animal irritancy tests for cosmetics
Purpose or general idea of bill
To prohibit cosmetic manufacturers and cosmetic ingredient suppliers from conducting any test which involves the placing of a cosmetic, or cosmetic ingredient produced solely for use in cosmetics, in an animal's eye or on an animal's skin to measure its irritancy effects.
Summary of specific provisions
Adds a new section 505-b to the public health law to: (1) Prohibit the testing of cosmetic products in an animal's eye or on its skin to measure its irritating effects;
(2) Prohibit the testing of cosmetic ingredients in an animal's eye or on its skin to measure its irritating effects if such ingredient was produced solely for use as a cosmetic.
(3) Prohibit the sale of cosmetic products tested in an animal's eye or on its skin to measure its irritating effects.
In addition, the bill provides definitions for the following terms: Animal; Cosmetic; Cosmetic manufacturer; Person
Justification
The FDA, which regulates the cosmetic industry, does not require the use of animals for safety testing. Unfortunately some manufacturers continue with this unnecessary practice. One of the most commonly used irritancy tests, the Draize rabbit eye irritancy test, has been criticized as unreliable, highly subjective and cruel. There are significant differences in the anatomy and response to irritation between rabbit eyes and human eyes. A study by Carnegie-Mellon University scientists have found that 24 laboratories that Draize tested the same substances reported highly variable results both between laboratories and within the same laboratories.
Alternatives to the use of animals for eye and skin irritancy tests of cosmetics and their ingredients are widely available and in use by many corporations including Avon, Noxell, Revlon, Redken, Paul Mitchell, Faberge and Mary Kay.
Some of the alternative tests used include the Neutral. Red Bioassay, a test using human cell cultures; the CAM test, which uses the membrane of fertilized chicken eggs; the Eyetex system which uses a compound of proteins that resembles the composition of the human eye; Skintex, similar to Eyetex, using human skin cell cultures; and TOPXAT, a software package that uses computer simulation models.
Further, it must be emphasized that the use of animals to test for eye and skin irritancy of cosmetic products causes excruciating pain and suffering to animals. For example, in the Draize eye test, several rabbits are used in each test which involves keeping the rabbits in stocks, pouring the test substance in their eyes and observing and evaluating over a two week period the redness, swelling, hemorrhaging and corrosion. After the test evaluation, the rabbits are either killed or used in another test.
Given that alternative testing methods are available for cosmetic manufacturers and ingredient suppliers, there is no justification to allow the further use of animals for the purpose of testing the irritancy of cosmetic products and their ingredients.
Effective date
January 1, next succeeding the date on which it shall have become a law.
Summaries, headlines and scores are AI-generated from the official bill text. How we score bills. Source: NYS Open Legislation.