 |
Benefit Cosmetics:Benefit Cosmetics conducts animal testing. They might be carried out directly, through their suppliers, or through subcontractors. (PETA,2025) |
 |
Johnson & Johnson:Johnson & Johnson conducts animal testing, either directly, through its suppliers or by hiring third parties. Some of their brands may also be marketed in countries where animal testing is required by law. |
 |
Chanel: Ethical ConsiderationsChanel is not considered an ethical brand that respects the principle of not testing on animals. This implies that it may conduct animal testing directly, through its suppliers, or via third parties. Furthermore, these brands could be selling products in regions where legislation mandates animal testing. This reality suggests that, despite possible claims of ethical commitment, Chanel may be engaging in practices that support animal testing. |
|
Dolce & Gabbana: Ongoing ControversiesAlthough Dolce & Gabbana has stopped using animal fur, it is still not considered completely cruelty-free. The brand conducts animal testing when legally required, especially in markets like China, where these practices are mandatory for certain cosmetic products. While it has made strides towards more ethical fur practices, its stance on animal testing remains controversial. |
 |
Max Factor: Compliance with Local RegulationsMax Factor is not considered a cruelty-free brand. Although its parent company, Coty Inc., claims not to conduct animal testing and aims to eradicate this practice in the beauty industry, Max Factor sells its products in China, where animal testing is mandatory for imported cosmetics. This implies that, although the brand does not conduct the tests directly, it allows them to be performed in its name to comply with local regulations. |