For recovering MAC-aholics

[cno64]

Due to Estee Lauder's abandonment of their ban on animal testing, I am in the process of distancing myself from MAC.

I thought it might be nice to have a "support group" for those of us who are trying to kick our MAC "habit," for various reasons - be they ethical, financial, or otherwise.
I still love a good many things about MAC, and I'll use what I've got. I just won't be buying from them anymore.
The price increases and limited edition things were starting to grate on me, anyhow.

 

[Selenite]

I'm absolutely saddened to hear that Estee Lauder is going to stoop to L'Oreal's level. This probably means even Aveda might animal tested products in the future. I haven't tried Inglot but have heard nothing but good things. There's also obvious ones like MUFE. Inmykit.com started out as a resource for pro-friendly MAC alternatives so you could go there. If you like bolder colors, Obsessive Compulsive, Sugarpill, and Kryolan have incredible pressed and loose shadows as well as the famous Lip Tars. And frankly, I've found a number of NYX products too good to shun in favor of MAC.

 

[commandolando]

How did you find out that Estee Lauder was going to be testing on animals? this is directly from their web site:

The Estée Lauder Companies Inc. is committed to the elimination of animal testing. We are equally committed to consumer health and safety, and bringing to market products that comply with applicable regulations in every country in which our products are sold. We do not conduct animal testing on our products or ingredients, nor ask others to test on our behalf, except when required by law. We evaluate our finished products in clinical tests on volunteer panels. Estée Lauder fully supports the development and global acceptance of non-animal testing alternatives. To this end, the Company works extensively with the industry at large and the global scientific community to research and fund these alternatives.

 

[cno64]

How did you find out that Estee Lauder was going to be testing on animals? this is directly from their web site:

I heard about it on Specktra, then I contacted PETA, and they replied: "Estée Lauder was included on PETA’s cruelty-free list for more than two decades, so we were stunned to learn that it is paying for tests on animals in China. This means that Estée Lauder no longer qualifies to be listed as cruelty-free, and we have removed it from our list of companies that have permanently banned all tests on animals and added it to our list of companies that do test on animals."
I saw the statement on Estee Lauder's site about animal-testing, too, but it was dated 2010, so apparently there have been some changes since then. I e-mailed Estee Lauder, but they haven't replied yet.
Bummer.
I was already getting a little disenchanted with MAC, anyhow, so I'm fine with exploring other options.
Is Inglot cruelty-free?

 

[Mac-Guy]

Is Inglot cruelty-free?

You might want to check out Urban Decay's Vegan collection.

 

[Thia Winter]

Yep I'm in the process of distancing myself too. Which is a bummer but it is what it is. I've got some Urban Decay I love, so I'll be getting more of it, as well as Stila, Tarte, and Too Faced instead.

 

[cno64]

I'll be getting more of it, as well as Stila, Tarte, and Too Faced instead.

Urban Decay is my cruelty-free cosmetics "rock."
I only wish they offered a wider selection of lipsticks, and non-shiny eyeshadows.
I'm glad Stila is apparently no longer owned by Estee Lauder; Stila makes some wonderful, albeit too large, matte eyeshadows.
Fortunately for me, my HG foundation is a mineral-based powder, made by a small company that has nothing to do with Estee Lauder.
Since Estee Lauder and Mary Kay have gone down the toilet, are there any large cosmetics companies that are cruelty-free?
Lancome and Shisheido (sp.?) are known animal-testers, and even Avon is highly questionable.
What's going on here?
Why are so many companies going backward?
As for my MAC recovery, it's exceeding my expectations. I went to Temptalia yesterday, noticed some photos of upcoming MAC collections, and was honestly surprised at how little I was interested, even though I caught glimpses of some bright lipsticks, which are a major weakness of mine.
I can be incredibly hard-headed when I'm motivated, and this quality is working to my advantage.

 

[commandolando]

I found this article:http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2012/02/avon-mary-kay-estee-lauder-resume-animal-testing/

I can't believe this is actually true. THIS IS HORRIBLE! I, like most people on this board - live/breathe MAC. I've been a pretty good customer for the past 9 years and hadn't planned on boycotting the company. One of the things I respected/admired most about MAC is their stand on testing on animals...it's completely pointless & extremely cruel. If enough of us get together & write emails as well as letters to MAC (or even boycott) they will get the msg.

Didn't people have to do this in the 1970's for cosmetic companies to open their eyes at the CRUELTY. How barbaric.

I for one am not that vein where I will contribute to this. I'm not renewing my Pro card and MAC is loosing a good customer.

http://www.veganpeace.com/animal_cruelty/animal_testing.htm

 

[shellygrrl]

Honestly? Virtually every ingredient in cosmetics has been tested on animals at some point. IMO, if you want to go truly "cruelty-free", you may as well stop wearing makeup full stop.

 

[cno64]

I found this article:http://www.lifewithdogs.tv/2012/02/avon-mary-kay-estee-lauder-resume-animal-testing/

I can't believe this is actually true. THIS IS HORRIBLE! I, like most people on this board - live/breathe MAC. I've been a pretty good customer for the past 9 years and hadn't planned on boycotting the company. One of the things I respected/admired most about MAC is their stand on testing on animals
http://www.veganpeace.com/animal_cruelty/animal_testing.htm

Good for you!
I feel exactly the same way about MAC. I also liked (note the past tense) Bobbi Brown, Clinique, and Prescriptives. Those companies' products essentially no longer exist for me now, as well.
I'll be honest, though: MAC's been the hardest to get out of my "system." I love animals more than I love makeup, though, and until and unless Estee Lauder re-joins the 21st century, they have permanently disappeared from my "radar."

 

[commandolando]

If every ingredient has been tested, then why continue the torture? it's extremely unessecary. The part that really angers me is the fact that Estee Lauder just did this (knowing it was wrong) and I'm presuming didn't make this public because they knew they would get a ton of negative backlash.

Honestly? Virtually every ingredient in cosmetics has been tested on animals at some point. IMO, if you want to go truly "cruelty-free", you may as well stop wearing makeup full stop.

 

[cno64]

I've heard that some cosmetics companies will not market their products in China, because to do so would mean having to conduct or contract for animal testing.
I hope that business lost in the U.S. and other countries will more than offset any gains from marketing in China.

 

[commandolando]

Peta sent me an email stating that they are working with the Institute for In Vitro Sciences which apparently educates scientist in China on non-animal testing methods.

Everything helps, right?!

Here's what Peta sent me:

Thank you for writing to us about MAC. Estée Lauder, MAC’s parent company, was included on PETA’s cruelty-free list for more than two decades, so we were stunned to learn that it is paying for tests on animals in China. This means that Estée Lauder no longer qualifies to be listed as cruelty-free, and we have removed it from our list of companies that have permanently banned all tests on animals and added it to our list of companies that do test on animals.

Estée Lauder has also changed the language in the animal testing policies of its subsidiary brands, which are listed at http://www.elcompanies.com/Pages/Our-Brands.aspx. We are currently trying to clarify whether these brands are still cruelty-free or whether they are also marketing in China, and they have been removed from our “don’t test” list until we receive clarification.

Because tests on animals are required by the Chinese government before many cosmetics products can be marketed in China, some companies choose not to sell their products there. We urge you to support these companies and continue to purchase products from the more than 1,000 companies on our cruelty-free list, which can be found athttp://www.PETA.org/living/beauty-and-personal-care/companies/default.aspx.

Through a generous grant given to PETA, we are now supporting the efforts of the Institute for In Vitro Sciences (http://www.iivs.org), which is providing training for scientists in China in the use of non-animal test methods and working with officials to accept the non-animal methods that are used in the U.S., the European Union, and much of the world. We are urging Estée Lauder to contribute significantly to this effort to hasten the process.

To learn more about non-animal methods and how PETA has been instrumental in the acceptance of these tests by governments around the world, please visit http://www.PETA.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/peta-scientific-papers-and-presentations.aspx.

We hope that you will continue to purchase products from the more than 1,000 companies on our cruelty-free list, which can be found athttp://www.PETA.org/living/beauty-and-personal-care/companies/default.aspx.

To learn more about how animals suffer in laboratories, please go to [FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]http://www.PETA.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/default.aspx[/FONT][/FONT]. To get involved in PETA’s other campaigns, please see [FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]http://www.PETA.org/action/default.aspx[/FONT][/FONT]. To make a donation in support of PETA’s campaigns to stop cruelty to animals, please visit [FONT=&quot][FONT=&quot]http://www.PETA.org/donate[/FONT][/FONT].

Thanks again for writing and for everything that you do to help animals.

Sincerely,

The PETA Staff

I hope that business lost in the U.S. and other countries will more than offset any gains from marketing in China.

 

[katred]

I'm very disappointed that Lauder has reneged on their non-testing policy, especially since that was a rule that they seemed to have established over all the brands that they owned. I'm not sure how they run their various brands, but I want to find out. As much as it would sadden me to drop EL brands, There are enough quality products being made by companies that don't engage in these practices that I don't feel it's necessary to support those who do.

As far as ingredients being tested in the past, yes, that has been the case, but since we can't undo the past, it's better to look at companies who have abandoned the practice and who don't ask others to conduct tests on their behalf. On top of everything else, newer testing methods are actually better, in that they yield more accurate results (switching is more a matter of short-term costs and the work needed to implement changes).

One little caveat about PETA- while their cruelty-free list is still the standard for finding which companies do and don't test on animals, it's important to note that companies can only be included if they sign an agreement with PETA. There are companies that don't do animal testing, but who, for various reasons, choose not to sign on with PETA. (This isn't something that PETA keeps a secret- they mention it on their site.) I found that it's good to cross-check the PETA list with that maintained by the National Anti-Vivisection Society in the UK. Also, it's worth writing to companies individually for clarification if you have the time. The more messages of concern they get, the more seriously they take the issue. I've found that most companies are pretty happy to share the information.

 

[cno64]

. As much as it would sadden me to drop EL brands, There are enough quality products being made by companies that don't engage in these practices that I don't feel it's necessary to support those who do.

I agree completely!
Even if Estee Lauder never sees the light, and I have to go the rest of my life without ever buying another MAC, Bobbi Brown, Clinique, or Prescriptives product, I don't expect my look to suffer at all.
That said, I'll use up the Lauder brand products I already own, but I will not be buying more, whether for my own use, or as gifts.
Just ask J.C. Penney how much business they've gotten from me the past several years, after the dog-fur coat debacle.
I'm stubborn when I'm angry.

 

[cno64]

It is quite true that there's really no way to reliably guarantee that no ingredient in a cosmetic or skincare product has EVER been tested on animals, at some point.
But I'm choosing not to support companies that are currently testing on animals, in favor of those who have demonstrated a commitment to using alternative methods, thereby sparing some living creatures unnecessary pain.
I don't know what is so objectionable about that.
I don't think for a moment that I can single-handedly "save the world," but I think it's my right to act according to my own conscience.

 

[shellygrrl]

IMO every ingredient may have been tested on animals at some point; where do you draw the line? 

I agree with this, but did you seriously have to belittle those who have opted to stay away from certain brands? IMO, the one with the shoddy attitude is you.