Animal Experiments For Cosmetics And Household Products

In this paper there are three main topics that are going to be covered. They are alternatives to animal testing, animal testing in cosmetics, and the news in the cosmetic industry related to animal testing. For this paper there were four sources that were evaluated. All of them had a few things in common and through that it was easy to link them together through three different subtopics that will be evaluated later in this paper. The first source that I will be using is “The Science of Dermocosmetics and Its Role in Dermatology”. This article was written by Dreno, B., E. Araviiskaia, E. Berardesca, T. Bieber, J. Hawk, M. Sanchez- Viera, and P. Wolkenstein. The second article that will be effective in this essay is “New

Sure the final product may look pretty, but is it really worth it to test these products that could be toxic, on defenceless animals? When people go shopping for cosmetics they can never picture the product being meant for humans, being used on a defenceless creature such as a bunny or a mouse. The test are not as accurate as testing on a human. In most cases the animals are never able to live the life they were meant to. People using animals to test human products on is pointless for many reasons.

Animal testing does not accurately predict possible reactions humans might have to animal tested drugs or cosmetics. ProCon.org says that 94% of drugs successful in animal testing fail during human trials. A drug released in 1999, called Vioxx, was tested and showed a positive effect on the hearts of mice, but ended up causing 27,000 heart attacks and cardiac deaths before being withdrawn from the market. A study by The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, or PNAS, observed inflammatory conditions in ill humans, and experimented with 150 drugs, all of which were successful in animal tests, and found that none of them were successful in humans. A reason why animal testing is so inaccurate is because humans are very different. Despite having similar DNA to several animals, humans and animal test subjects differ in bone structure, organ size, and react in different ways to drugs that have been tested on animals. Paul Furlong, Professor of Clinical Neuroimaging at Aston University, said that "it's very hard to create an animal model that even equates closely to what we're trying to achieve in the human.” With 94% of our drugs failing during human tests, Furlong is, with no doubt, correct. Thomas Hartung, Professor of evidence-based toxicology at Johns Hopkins University also stated that “we are not 70 kg rats.” A final failure in the accuracy of animal tested drugs is that because animal

Picture being locked up in a cage, injured, alone, and in pain. Imagine being a prisoner without committing a crime. This scenario exposes the life of rabbits, mice, dogs, pigs, cats, and many other animals used in cosmetic product testing. The topic of whether animal cosmetic testing is necessary or not has been a topic that many have put-off, but something that should be thought about. The reason that specific animals like, rabbits, chimpanzees, and apes are used for experimenting is because their DNA almost exactly matches a human’s. Since these mammals’ DNA is almost identical, researchers are positive that they are a great tool for testing cleaning and cosmetic products. Though researchers don’t feel any remorse for how they treat

There are many different tests that are performed on animals. According to The Humane Society of The United States (n.d), “it is estimated that 500,000 mice, guinea pigs, rats, and rabbits suffer and die in these tests every year throughout the world.” 500,000 innocent animals are used to improve cosmetic company’s products. One example of a test performed on animals are skin irritation/corrosion. According to the Humane Society of The United States (n.d.), “The test substance is applied to the shaved skin of a rabbit. Their skin may show signs of redness, rash,

Every year, more than 100,000,000  animals, containing mice, rats, frogs, dogs, cats, rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs, monkeys, fish, and birds die in the United States facilities for the use of chemical, food, drug, and cosmetics testing (PETA). Animal experimentation pertains to the experiments and procedures that are performed on living animals for insight into many diseases, the effectiveness of new medications, examining  the health effects on humans because of  products, environmental safety for industry and consumer products including household cleaners, cosmetics, pharmaceuticals, food additives and agricultural and industrial chemicals (Humane Society International). Animal experimentation for medical and cosmetic use is inhumane

With the advanced technology and science in today’s society, we can start testing by means of Vitro testing. Vitro testing is the practice of testing on cells outside of the body rather than on live animals and humans. The Corrositex is an example of a Vitro alternative to skin corrosion and skin sensitization tests. According to the official Corrositex website, Corrositex is “used to determine the dermal corrosive potential of chemicals and chemical mixtures.” This skin-like subject is a substitute for rabbit skin corrosion tests and skin sensitization on guinea pigs and mice. Another alternative to live animal testing is the Bovine Corneal Opacity/Permeability assay, which substitutes for eye Draize tests on rabbits. As stated by The MB Research Lab website, “(BCOP) is an alternative ocular irritation assay designed to replace the rabbit eye test. It is commonly used to test for eye irritation and corrosive potential of test materials that may be used in our around the eye.” As mentioned before, testing on animals can be very expensive. However, when you compare the prices of animal testing to Vitro testing, Vitro testing is less expensive. Eye Draize tests on rabbits are $1,800, but BCOP costs $1,400. Skin corrosion tests on rabbits also cost the same amount as eye Draize tests, while Corrositex only costs $500, which is a huge $1,300

Some people think that using animals for cosmetics,and testing cosmetics on animals is good and helps the animals and people, others think it’s wrong….. Women, who are the major consumers of cosmetics, largely oppose animal testing of cosmetics, with 72 percent of those polled opposed. Most women - 70 percent - think animal testing of cosmetics should be illegal. Strong majorities of women think animal testing of cosmetics should be illegal, regardless of age, level of education or ethnicity. 68 percent of voters know that animals are used to test the safety of cosmetics.Three in four voters say that they would feel safer, or as safe, if non-animal methods were used to test the safety of a cosmetic instead of animal testing. The survey of 802 U.S. registered voters, including 206 via cell phone, was conducted by Lake Research Partners from Feb. 5 - 11, 2013, and was commissioned by The HSUS and HSLF. The margin of error is plus or minus 3.47 percent. The questions and results can be viewed here.

In vitro, a cell-based screening system that can determine a chemical or an ingredient’s potential risk to humans (Alternatives). The sequencing of human genome, and the explosive growth of computer power and computational biology “has sparked a quiet revolution in biology” (Humane). Together these innovations have produced new tools that can help uncover exactly how chemicals and drugs disrupt normal processes in the human body on a cellular and molecular level. Scientists can then use computers to interpret and integrate the results with data from past human studies. The results these tests are potentially more relevant to people than those conducted using animal tests (Humane). In conclusion, existing alternative methods and the rise in projected future of computer technology with regards to testing will eliminate any need to resort to animal testing. With the development of new technology, scientists can now use these instead of animal testing in the observation of the effects of certain chemicals and drugs in

A lot of people buy cosmetic products being ignorant to the fact that, that one product has killed a lot of animals. How would you like being sprayed with poisonous liquids, taking poisonous eye drops?, or being fed toxic substances? Cosmetic factories have been doing these inhumane things and more to innocent animals for years.

Imagine hearing the cries and whimpers from a laboratory and wondering what it is. Those sounds are coming from animals being tested and ejected with new substances daily. Everyday, animals are being tested on in laboratories and forced to use their bodies and faces for harmful chemicals in makeup. Millions of animals are killed yearly for testing purposes. Dying every day from this, animals won’t stop being put in danger until there is a cease to animals testing. In order to terminate animal cosmetic testing, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) should ban makeup testing on animals and use more effective and safe solutions such as human skin cells, this would help animals and humans.

A third reason is because Alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals In vitro testing, such as studying cells in a petri dish, can produce more results than animal testing because human cells can be used. Artificial human skin, such as Epiderm and ThinCert, is made from sheets of human skin cells grown in test tubes or plastic wells and can produce more useful results than testing chemicals on animal skin. Microfluidic chips which are lined with human cells and recreate the functions of human organs, are in advanced stages of development. Computer models, such as virtual reconstructions of human molecular structures, can predict the toxicity of substances without invasive experiments on

Cell testing in a petri dish can produce more relevant results than animals because human cells can be used (Kara Rogers). There is also micro dosing, giving doses too small to cause adverse reactions, which can be used for humans, whose blood will then be analyzed. Humans’ experimenting on humans is nothing new to our world as we have been doing it since the dawn of time. We now have artificial human skin, made from reproducing sheets of human skin cells that are grown in test tubes. This skin can be used to provide more accurate results than using animal skin (Kara Rogers). Computer models that create virtual human molecular structures can predict the toxicity of a substance without experiments on animals. Supercomputers are improving every year and may soon have brains of their

Animals have been the guinea pigs for many years for cosmetic brands to test if their products are safe enough to sell to humans, and it is time to put a stop to this. An article from the website faunalytics.org “Research animal fundamentals” states that in the United States alone there are 271,284 hamsters and guinea pigs, 138, 348 rabbits, and over 20 million rats and mice bred just for cosmetic testing alone in the United States. These brands take their product and apply it to an animal to see what the

Using animals in research and to test products has been a topic of heated debate for many years. Animals have contributed to research and we have found many cures to diseases that would have otherwise killed us. Many individuals view animals as companions that exhibit emotion and have a personality, they’re not viewed as lab subjects. The fact remains that animals are utilized by research facilities and cosmetics companies, not just across the country but around the entire world. Although humans do benefit from animal research, the pain, suffering, and annual deaths of over one hundred million animals are not worth the human benefits. Why should animals suffer unnecessarily for the human benefit? Animals are given diseases that they would