VN October 2021

Vetnews | October 2021 13 The Animal Ethics andWelfare Committee of the SAVA is mandated to watch a brief on welfare legislation developments in South Africa and abroad. In addition to its formal relationshipwith animal welfare societies and its contacts with animal rights advocates and activists, it informs the Association's Federal Council on these matters. Notice was recently given in the Government Gazette of the intention of Mr S Swart, with the support of the caucus of the ACDP, to re-introduce the abovementioned Bill as a private member's Bill. The aim is to amend the Animal Protection Act (APA) and Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act (FDCA) to prohibit animal testing of cosmetics and the importation and sale of cosmetics that contain ingredients that have undergone safety testing in animals. Parliament has called for written submissions to the Speaker in opposition to the proposed amendment Bill to be delivered by the 14th October 2020.The endeavour to stop animal testing of compounded cosmetics and their ingredients has been an effective animal rights campaign for 40 years. It led to such testing being banned within the EU countries, the UK, India, Taiwan, New Zealand, Australia and some 40 other countries worldwide. The rationale behind the legislative banning of such testing is based on reasoned argument against it as it being unjustified, inhumane, and unscientific. Over the last three decades, more than 50 safety tests have been developed and scientifically validated for replacing animal testing. These tests assess acute and chronic oral toxicity, dermal irritation, dermally absorbed toxicity, photosensitisation, mutagenicity, teratogenicity, carcinogenicity and immunological sensitisation of cosmetic products. The proposed amendments to the FDCA will not in any conceivable way hinder the obligation of suppliers to ensure that the consumer products which they are marketing are safe. The newly developed alternatives to animal testing in this arena should continue to confirm this. As there is no evidence of animal testing being performed in the RSA at present, this aspect of its content is likely to be unopposed. The considerable commercial interest in the importation and the sale of some high-end cosmetic products may well be affected by the proposed amendments to the two Acts. It will only be because they may be out of step with the national and international policies which have evolved to protect the interests of sentient animals against irrational and humane exploitation. Based on the evidence of the declining necessity for using sentient animals for toxicological safety testing, the SAVA should find no objection with the proposed amendment Bill to ban cosmetic testing becoming law. The debating of this Amendment Bill in our Parliament and hopefully its adoption is part of democracy in action being led by rational and humane motives. v A Bill to ban the safety-testing of cosmetics on laboratory animals and the import of animal-tested cosmetic substances or their ingredients in the RSA is scrutinised. The Foodstuffs, Disinfectants and Cosmetics Act of 1972(FDCA) and the Animals Protection Act of 1962(APA) has reference.