Cosmetics are used daily by millions of people, and include a vast range of products such as shampoo, makeup, moisturizer, perfume, etc. Approximately 38,000 animals are used every year across the EU to test new ingredients and products. And in the world, cosmetics companies kill millions of animals every year to test their products. These companies claim they test on animals to establish the safety of their products and ingredients for consumers. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require animal testing for cosmetics, and alternative testing methods are widely available and lead to more reliable results. Hundreds of companies – including Avon, The Body Shop and Mary Kay – already use humane non-animal testing methods to ensure the safety of their cosmetics.
When most people go to the store to purchase cosmetics and household cleaners they usually don't put too much thought into it. Most people do not realize that 14 million animals die and suffer each year for these products that are almost meaningless to humans.
Cosmetic animal testing is a very big problem that gets greatly overlooked. It is a problem that has lasted for centuries. As a matter of fact, according to the All for Animals Newsletter, animal testing on cosmetics goes way back to the seventeenth century when animals were believed to feel no pain.
[...] All of these tests are done on live, feeling animals without benefit of anesthesia or supportive medical care. Other tests, such as the LD-50, would administer a Lethal Dose of some substance to 50% of the animals in the test. The remaining 50% were observed and evaluated and ultimately killed and autopsied. Although the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) does not require animal testing to determine product safety, standards have been developed based on historical data. Some companies find it difficult to trust these surrogate methods. [...]
[...] Statistics also points out the fact that 75% of the Americans are against cosmetic testing on animals and many companies have adopted more human ways of cosmetic testing due to the popular public demand. The finished cosmetic products are no longer being tested on animals as they are tested on the human volunteers. The advantages of the cosmetic animal testing The cosmetic companies point out the following benefits for cosmetic testing on animals: Protecting the human health and safety: The companies claim that protecting human health is the main reason for carrying out the cosmetic testing on animals. [...]
[...] The cosmetic testing on animals is very expensive. The cosmetic testing on animals is said to be less reliable. The animals are made to endure a lot of tests in the labs making the end-result meaningless. The critics point out that the alternatives to the animal testing could also be used to test the safety of the cosmetics. The alternatives are cell cultures, tissue cultures, corneas from the eye banks and sophisticated computer models. The Big Debate When the topic of cosmetic animal testing is discussed, the justification of the harm to animals being worth the benefit to humans is different than the debate regarding testing animals for medical research. [...]
[...] This will cause them to keep up the good work If you really want to become involved, join an animal support group. These groups donate a lot of their time fighting for the well being of animals. I don't know if testing on animals will ever be stopped. There will probably always be those stubborn companies out there that just will not give in. However, we can try to abolish it. I have found out that in the last ten years animal research has dropped by 50 percent. [...]
[...] Cosmetics manufacturers who genuinely do not test on animals generally use the following for safety testing of their products: Reliance on existing natural or synthetic ingredients, compounds and substances, which have already been extensively tested on animals; Avoiding novel ingredients or combinations of ingredients that have not been fully tested and may not be safe; Testing on human volunteers/clinical trials. A HET-CAM test for eye-irritancy could be done. These tests have been successfully carried out in Germany and Belgium. The vitro methods could be used to test the skin irritation. [...]
APA Style reference
For your bibliographyOnline reading
with our online readerContent validated
by our reading committee
