Cruelty-free confusion leaves millions at risk of buying products linked to animal testing Naturewatch poll finds

Three in four Britons do not understand what “cruelty-free” labels actually guarantee, according to new research raising fears that shoppers are being misled by confusing ethical claims.

A YouGov poll commissioned by animal welfare charity Naturewatch Foundation found that 74 per cent of UK adults were unclear about the legal requirements a product must meet before being described as cruelty-free.

The findings suggest millions of consumers may be buying cosmetics, toiletries and household products they believe have no connection to animal testing, when tests may still have been carried out on ingredients or by a brand’s parent company.

Products may also be sold in international markets where animal testing is required under certain circumstances.

Naturewatch Foundation said the results exposed a troubling gap between what shoppers expect from a cruelty-free claim and what some companies may actually deliver.

The polling of 2,125 UK adults was conducted in March 2026, shortly before undercover footage released by Animals International and Animal Aid brought renewed attention to animal experimentation in Britain.

The organisations said footage filmed inside UK laboratories showed dogs, rabbits, rats, pigs and primates being subjected to procedures including forced intubation, prolonged restraint and chemical exposure.

While 54 per cent of those questioned said a product could be considered cruelty-free if the finished item had not been tested on animals, opinions hardened when participants were asked about ingredients and wider corporate practices.

More than three-quarters, 76 per cent, said a product should not carry a cruelty-free label if products containing ingredients tested on animals may have been tested.

Meanwhile, 69 per cent believed the claim should not be permitted if ingredients had undergone animal testing because of legal requirements.

More than half, 53 per cent, said a product should not be called cruelty-free when its parent company conducts animal testing elsewhere, even if the finished product itself has not been tested.

The results indicate that most consumers expect the term to cover far more than the final item on the shelf. For many, it should mean freedom from animal testing throughout the supply chain and across the company behind the brand.

But shoppers currently face a bewildering mixture of certification schemes, individual company policies and marketing claims.

Some brands promote products as cruelty-free despite being owned by businesses involved in animal testing, using ingredients with historical or ongoing links to testing, or operating in countries where tests may be required.

Naturewatch Foundation warned that this complicated landscape can make it extremely difficult for consumers to establish whether a purchase genuinely reflects their ethical beliefs.

The UK-based charity is now calling for clearer and more transparent information to help shoppers make informed decisions.

Its independently assessed Compassionate Shopping Guide only includes companies that have no ongoing ties to animal testing, apply a fixed cut-off date to historical testing, avoid markets where animal testing is legally required, and ensure that neither their products nor ingredients are tested on animals.

Naturewatch Foundation has campaigned against animal cruelty for more than 30 years, focusing on issues including animal experiments, puppy farming and wildlife crime.

The charity said consumers increasingly want to use their spending power to oppose animal testing, but cannot do so confidently unless cruelty-free claims are clear, consistent and capable of proper scrutiny.

The YouGov survey was conducted online on March 9 and 10, 2026. Its results were weighted to be representative of all UK adults.