Animal Testing Methods

Each year, thousands of animals are brutally tortured in laboratories, in the name of cosmetic research. A movement to ban animal testing for cosmetic purposes has been gaining popularity, with many companies hopping on the bandwagon against this research. New alternatives have been developed to eliminate the necessity to test on animals. This is only a small beginning of what is necessary to end these immoral acts. Animal testing in cosmetics is useless and cruel, and can be accomplished by other methods of research to end the suffering of animals.

Although beauty products can enhance your appearance, using an excess amount of it can damage your body, rather than help it. According to Source A, "Some of the ingredients in beauty products aren't that pretty." Also, an eighth of the ingredients used in care products are industrial chemicals. These chemicals are carcinogens, pesticides, reproductive toxins, and hormone disruptors. Source A states, "Many products include plasticizers (chemicals that keep concrete soft), degreasers (used to get the grime off auto parts), and surfactants (they reduce surface tension in water, like in paint and inks)." It also states that "We surveyed Canadians to see how many of the Dirty Dozen ingredients below appeared in their cosmetics, and our findings

Although animal testing was a main component for the facilitation of medical research in the past, it is no longer necessary due to the option of alternate testing methods. Animals that fall victim to the mercy of animal research are subject to experimentation for the purpose of manufacturing harmless products (McKnight 2). Cell cultures, the MIMIC system, TraumaMan, in vitro, and human volunteers are substitutes for this inhumane procedure (Sullivan 4; “PCRM Scientists Educate” 10). Animal testing is a cruel, outmoded method that sacrifices the lives of innocent animals, despite the availability of humane alternatives.

Cornelia Dum's website (2013) lists several activists that have put pressure on the industry to change its practices. The David Suzuki Foundation, for example, published an 2010 report providing an overview of toxic chemical products in commonly used cosmetics. Many of these are also proven to be harmful to the environment. The purpose of the report is to stimulate better regulation and more accurate labeling of cosmetics.

The authors gave a descriptive article on the different types of alternative animal testing for cosmetics. In addition, the authors of this article is affiliated with the Miami Valley Laboratories and Kanebo Cosmetics. The publication of this article was in 2010, which is relatively recent. These authors have published many academic journals concerning the safety assessment of cosmetics. This journal article supports my research question by stating the different possible alternatives of animal testing on cosmetics before they are produced onto

Over 1,000,000,000 animals are killed annually throughout the United States (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals). In America alone, over 11,000 research facilities partake in experimenting with cosmetic chemicals on animals (Collins). The number of animals used for cosmetic testing is alarming. Animals and humans differ from one another biologically in many significant ways. Statistics display irrefutably that cosmetic chemical preclinical testing on animals are unreliable. Animal testing is not only wasteful and unreliable; it yields inaccurate results that cannot successfully be interpreted and applied to humans. Cosmetic testing on animals is unacceptable.

Animal testing is used for many products, and one of them is cosmetics. The U.S law requires companies make sure that their product are safe, and safely of these product can be assured by using safe ingredients. The companie’s

Animal models should not be used for cosmetic toxicity testing because it causes pain, loss of basic animal functions, and in some cases death to the animal model. Animal testing has become a recurring problem in today's society. Products that you would not even think of are being tested on animals for toxicity. Many companies are questioning whether animal testing is absolutely necessary and trying to find alternative methods like three dimensional skin models and different cell types to completely stop using animal models. In the article, REACH, animal testing, and the precautionary principle, this fact was given,“In addition, we will demonstrate that much of the methodology that this

Around the world, animal testing has been a controversy for many years. In the cosmetic and medical industry, doctors claim that animal testing is essential for life and solves many issues. Although animal testing may have helped the cosmetics industry and has provided opportunities, this form of experimenting has not been imperative to humanity. Even though animal testing has been helpful, it is no longer necessary due to the development of science, which provides humans with accurate and safer forms of testing that exclude cruelty.

Procon.org stated that an estimated twenty-six million animals per year are used for scientific and commercial tests in the United States of America. Animal testing would not be so widely used if people took into account the alternatives to animal testing, the accuracy and efficiency of animal testing and its alternatives, and the cost difference between animal testing and alternatives to it. Animal testing has been used since five hundred B.C. (procon.org). Out of all of those reasons the most important one would be the alternatives to animal testing which would be able to eliminate the use of animal test subjects altogether.

Who would you want to see live animals or humans? Clearly it must be humans. Animal experiments are the process in which wise researchers develop products by evaluating the effects of those products on animals. Animal testing must progress, because if it does not people could not use what they are using, such as medication and makeup. Before animal testing doctors could not be as confent as they are today, but because of animal testing, doctors can diagnose the patients. As a result, animal research must advance.Animal research must progress since it helps to cure men, women, and children

USDA-United States Department of Agriculture AAALAC-The Association for Assessment and Accreditation of Laboratory Animal Care International AALAS- The American Association for Laboratory Animal Science PHS-Public Health Service OLAW- Office Of Laboratory Animal Welfare

Although animal testing is so wide in its fields of animal use, I will be arguing about the uses of monkeys/chimpanzees.

Over 25 million animals are used in experiments in the US every year, and more than 170,000 of them are rabbits. Using animals in research is a commonly argued subject, and alternative testing methods now exist. Also testing animals is cruel, and drugs that pass animal tests may not always be safe for humans.

Animal testing is the use of animals in research to determine the safety of a product, usually cosmetics or pharmaceutical drugs. This method of testing is an outdated science while alternative, non-animal methods are rapidly becoming more effective. Laws in the United States do not require cosmetics or medicinal drugs to be tested on animals, only that the products must be proven safe (FDA). Some argue that animal testing is necessary to improve human life. However, animals are harmed during the tests, despite the numerous laws put in place to avoid cruelty. Although many believe animal testing is necessary to ensure medicines and cosmetic products are safe, alternative, non-animal methods of testing, such as in vitro tests and EpiDerm, are available, and should be implemented.