We are often asked whether Luksha Cosmetics tests its products on animals. The answer is no. But the subject of animal testing in cosmetics is more complex—and more interesting—than a simple “cruelty-free” label may suggest.
Today, animal testing specifically for cosmetics has been prohibited in a number of major markets. In the European Union, testing finished cosmetic products on animals has been banned since 2004, testing cosmetic ingredients since 2009, and the full cosmetics marketing ban came into effect in 2013. Canada introduced its cosmetic animal-testing ban in December 2023.
In the United States, the situation is different: federal law does not require animal testing of cosmetics, but there is also no universal federal prohibition comparable to the EU cosmetics ban. The FDA also notes that terms such as “cruelty-free” and “not tested on animals” do not have a specific legal definition under U.S. federal cosmetic law.
For this reason, we believe consumers should understand what a cruelty-free statement actually communicates. In markets where cosmetic animal testing is already prohibited, simply saying “not tested on animals” does not necessarily distinguish one formula from another or tell you anything about its efficacy, quality, or safety. It can still represent a meaningful company policy, particularly regarding sourcing and suppliers—but it should be understood in context.
There is another important nuance. A cosmetic ingredient may sometimes be subject to animal testing for reasons unrelated to cosmetics, for example under broader chemical-safety legislation. In the EU, the Cosmetics Regulation prohibits animal testing for cosmetic purposes, while REACH legislation (Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals - European Union’s main chemical safety regulation, designed to protect human health and the environment from risks posed by chemicals) may under certain circumstances require toxicological information relating to human or environmental safety.
Historically, animal testing played a much larger role in toxicology. During the mid-20th century, as thousands of new chemicals entered commercial use, regulators and scientists needed ways to evaluate irritation, toxicity, sensitization, and other potential health effects. At the time, animal models were among the principal tools available.
This also means that many familiar ingredients have historical safety data that may include animal studies conducted decades ago. The existence of old animal data does not mean that a modern cosmetic product—or the company formulating it—is currently testing that ingredient on animals.
Fortunately, toxicology has evolved significantly. Today, scientists increasingly use non-animal approaches, including in vitro testing, reconstructed human tissues, cell-based assays, in chemico methods, computational models, and integrated testing strategies. For certain endpoints, validated non-animal methods can completely replace traditional animal tests. For example, the EU Reference Laboratory for Alternatives to Animal Testing has validated full-replacement methods for areas including skin irritation, skin corrosion, skin sensitization, and phototoxicity.
These modern methods can offer important advantages: they may use human-derived cells or reconstructed human skin, provide highly standardized experimental conditions, improve reproducibility, and in some applications offer greater biological relevance to human skin. However, it would not be scientifically accurate to say that every non-animal method is automatically more reliable than every animal test—the appropriate method depends on the biological endpoint being studied.
For Luksha, not testing finished products on animals is simply part of how we formulate and develop skincare today. What matters just as much is how product safety is evaluated: through carefully selected ingredients, existing toxicological evidence, scientifically appropriate non-animal testing methods, formulation expertise, and modern skin science. That, to us, is more meaningful than simply placing a “cruelty-free” phrase on a label.
