The European Commission now officially recognizes our sector’s concerns about the TPO ban. There is a proposal on the table to adapt the regulations, including:
This is a first breakthrough thanks to hard work behind the scenes.
But we continue, of course!
My name is Sofie Devlieger. I am a doctor of chemistry, educator in the beauty industry, and CEO of a wholesale business for professional nail products. Daily, I work with professionals who perform their work with passion, care, and knowledge. People who are trained, who work according to the strictest standards, and who – just like me – believe in safety, innovation, and ethics.
Yet I watch with sadness how regulations that should protect us sometimes have exactly the opposite effect.
Take, for example, the EU’s recent decision to ban the ingredient TPO (Trimethylbenzoyl diphenylphosphine oxide) in cosmetics. The justification? Results from animal testing conducted under the REACH legislation.
And that’s where it hurts – really hurts.
According to the EU Cosmetics Regulation (EC 1223/2009), animal testing for cosmetics is prohibited. Not just conducting them, but also using data from animal tests as a basis for safety assessments. This ban has existed since 2003. We work with alternative testing methods, under strict supervision, within a legal and ethical framework.
But now it turns out that animal testing has still been carried out on TPO under the REACH legislation – including for UV printer ink and paints – and that these results are being used to ban TPO in cosmetics.
Let that sink in.
And as if that weren’t absurd enough: 30 humans were also tested by applying and removing TPO three times a week for a month. The result? No irritation or skin reaction whatsoever.
Yet TPO was banned for cosmetic use.
I have serious questions about this. Not just as a chemist. Not just as a distributor. But also as a citizen, professional, and human being. Because this approach – where a ban based on REACH animal testing is implemented over cosmetics – undermines the ban on animal testing in our sector.
It seems to be a legal backdoor. A clever way to let animal testing count in cosmetics legislation anyway. And it’s not just legally questionable, it’s fundamentally unfair to everyone who actually follows the rules.
That’s why I’ve written an official letter to the European Commission asking for clarification. I have also informed FOD Public Health, the responsible Flemish and federal ministers, and the animal rights organization GAIA. In my letter, I attach the complete report on the animal testing – which is purely hallucinatory.
Because I have no other choice.
Every day I see colleagues and customers building up their lives and careers after COVID. Who invest in quality, education, and ethics. And then comes this measure, based on an ethically incorrect and legally questionable precedent, which once again shakes our sector.
Maybe it won’t change anything.
But maybe it will.
And if nobody speaks up, nothing will definitely happen.
As Within Temptation sings:
“Someone has to take a stand against evil. Why should it not be me?”
I am not an activist.
I am a researcher. An entrepreneur. An educator.
But above all, I am someone who believes in justice, transparency, and responsibility.
But as long as no one takes up the fight, nothing will change.