Banning Animal Testing: Not as Easy as It Seems
Jim Loran and Paul A. Locke’s article published in the Scientific American, “Beauty and the Beasts: The U.S. Should Ban Testing Cosmetics on Animals,” is a significant piece focused on the enormous lack of utilization of alternatives to animal testing in manufacturing. Loran and Locke argue that such alternatives are much more ethical as well as entirely feasible, due to the fact that they possess the ability to garner the same data that would be collected if animals were utilized in the experiments. Furthermore, the authors emphasize the necessity of passing several acts to ban the usage and distribution of products that have been tested on animals from the market in general. Although Loran and Lock assert
…show more content…
Loran and Locke begin their article by explaining some of the immoral practices present in animal testing. As stated, “The question alluded to the use of the Draize Test, which involves dripping substances such as toluene into rabbits’ eyes, causing pain and sometimes blindness” (2). Through this meticulous description, it is quite evident that the animals’ lives are put in danger through nonstop inhuman practices. After revealing the horror that these animals survive, the authors then transition to how to alleviate the issue specifically. As explained, “Eliminating animal testing of cosmetics is entirely feasible. In the part three decades, scientists have developed many advanced alternatives to animal testing... methods that use human blood, cell lines, artificial skin or computer models... As a result, they cut costs and save
While the pros to animal research are positives on humans, it is negatively affecting the animals themselves. Using animals for medical research is inhumane because they are left in these awful conditions. These animals are being mistreated in captivity because humans need them for their own research. The animals used in these experiments are treated very poorly because, they are subjected to force feeding, forced inhalation, deprived of food and water, excessive physical restraint, and may acquire infections and other wounds while in captivity (“Animal Testing”, 2017). Animals like these are burned, choked by CO2 and even left days without food or water. Sometimes we just test to see what the LD50 is for these animals, over 97,000 animals were killed just testing to find the LD50 from these animals. The LD50 is just a test to find out how much of one substance will kill 50% of the population. These animals are harmed for no reason because, most of the time it does not even help humans.
Utilizing animals as a part of research and to test the safety of items has been a subject of intense arguments for a considerable length of time. Individuals have distinctive affections for animals; numerous look upon animals as partners while others see animals as a methods for propelling medical research or encouraging exploratory research. However people see animals, the reality remains that animals are being misused by research offices and cosmetic organizations across the nation and all around the globe. In spite of the fact that people frequently benefit from effective animal research, the agony, the suffering, and the death of animals are not worth the hypothetical benefits for humans. Thus, animals should not be tested on for product safety or research.
As technology is advancing there is alternatives that are actually more precise in the results and it does not require the use of an animal. Humans and animals do not carry the same genes that result in cancers, heart disease, or Parkinson’s disease ("Against Animal Testing"). An animal researcher stated that,“The new systems the agencies hope to use rely on human cells grown in test tubes and computer-driven testing machines.” “ They allow the scientists to examine potentially toxic compounds in the lab rather than injecting them into animals” (Weise). In other words, an alternative to testing is growing human cells in test tubes and simulating it by computers. Alternative practices that have been proven successful include synthetic membranes, and computer models (McKay).
Millions of animals are being unneedlessly tested on for cosmetics, even though there are plenty of alternatives available and most of the results are unreliable or not applicable to humans. Although the fight against animal testing has made huge progress recently, America has yet to stop this cruel practice and chooses to torture animals while other countries are making a stop to the testing (“Animal Testing 101”).
Throughout history, animal testing has played a monumental role in leading to new discoveries and human benefits. However, what many people tend to forget are the millions of animals that are tortured and killed during these painful, deadly experiments. Imagine being a family pet, but instead of living in a warm home with a caring family, living locked up in a small metal cage, only being let out to swallow harmful chemicals, to be poked and prodded with needles, and to be injected with chemicals. And after the animal’s use for testing is over, they are either killed or die because of their injuries. This is an impractical, unsafe way to find out the safety of everyday products. Animal testing is an impractical, inhumane method of cosmetic testing not worth the resulting multitude of animal deaths when humans could easily be substituted as the test subject.
“Each year, more than 100 million animals—including mice, rats, frogs, dogs, cats, rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs, monkeys, fish, and birds—are killed in U.S. laboratories for biology lessons, medical training, curiosity-driven experimentation, and chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics testing” (PETA 1). For a countless amount of years companies, scientists, biology teachers, and plenty of other people have been using animals for animal experimentation. There are many people are for animal testing when it comes to testing for medical reasons, but when it comes to testing for cosmetics several people oppose animal testing. Tons and tons of animals are killed each year due to animal experimentation, and it is time to put it to an end. When it comes
Animal testing is not a recent occurrence. According to Nohynek et al. (2010) animal testing has been conducted since the 1930’s in order to evaluate the toxicity of consumer products. Animal testing began to attract attention when a woman became blind as a result of applying mascara that had a high level of toxicity, causing her to go blind (Nohynek et al., 2010). As a result of the incident, The Food and Drug Administration passed the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, which gives authority to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to watch over the food, drugs, and cosmetics (Evans, 2012). Considering how cosmetic manufacturers are held responsible for ensuring that their products will not harm their consumers, it is of the utmost importance that products are adequately testing; and for those products that
while there are many controversial thoughts on many different factors that apply to animal testing, I find it to be that many of the pros outweighs the costs that comes animal testing such as the ethical or moral reason. Although when including the ethical or moral consequences that comes with animal testing, the benefits to mankind and improvements to our societies and sciences in many diverse ways. Which leads me to strive towards the many benefits that comes with animal testing even with some of the consequences that comes with the testing. Many people will jump to the conclusion that animal testing is always done in a harsh manner, how the morals and ethics have been the same since way back when, and how the outcomes that occur when testing on animals isn’t worth the chance of them getting hurt. Yet this is not the case.
As you walk into your nearest CVS Pharmacy or Walgreen’s to pick up that bottle of shampoo, your medication, or the makeup brand you may use, have you ever stopped to consider what may have happened to innocent animals in order for you to be able to purchase these products? Many people see animals as companions; however, according to a 2013 Gallup Poll, 56% of the U.S. sees them as a means to further scientific research. (Gallup Poll) Yet, the fact remains: animals are being tested on by a myriad of cosmetics brands and research facilities. Animal testing is unethical and needs to be banned, as thousands of animals suffer serious injuries due to the process of experimentation, as well as the fact that American taxpayers pay millions for research purposes that may not be applicable to humans.
This reluctance to change is especially unforgivable considering the current wide availability of superior non-animal tests. Instead of measuring how long it takes a chemical to burn away the cornea of a rabbit’s eye, manufacturers can now drop that chemical onto donated human corneas. Human skin cultures can be grown and ordered for irritancy testing. These and dozens more tests now in use today are cheaper, faster, and more accurate at predicting human reactions to a product than the old animal tests ever were.” With other alternatives available to test for irritation and chemical exposure, there is no explanation for the United States to still be using live animals for cosmetic testing. With some countries banning the use of cosmetic testing on animals, there is hope that other countries will begin to as well. The countries who still use animal testing as a way of testing products might recognize why the countries have banned such an act. When the cruelty of animal testing is recognized, countries who still testing with
The ethical treatment of animal testing is a controversial topic in the field of zoology. Different aspects on animal testing range from positivity to negativity. Animals such as dogs and rats are used for experimental trials because they have been found to have psychological and genetic correlations that relate to humans. Although the benefits and improvements to modern medicine made it possible to ban animal experimentation completely, animals are still the main subjects in cosmetic industries. Something important to keep in mind when it comes to animal experimentation is that, “Most experimentation has nothing to do
In fact, these methods could replace animal testing and make the incredibly cruel method completely obsolete. Though finances appear to be an issue with this idea, it is also clear the alternatives are a wise investment for cosmetics companies, providing them with even safer testing methods that allow them to sell to markets that have already banned animal testing. These countries that have banned animal testing in cosmetics have realized that scientists can successfully determine safety of products without having to harm millions of innocent animals annually. Not only can the tests take the life of these poor animals, but they also cause extreme suffering in the process. Essentially, animal testing is torture, which is why organizations such as the Humane Society, PETA, and countless others fight for the rights of these animals, the right to live without having to undergo the stress and pain of these tests. Yes, almost everyone agrees that the tests performed on these animals are cruel, but many do not know what to do about it. The first step in banning animal testing in cosmetics is to help cosmetics companies see why abandoning this method is beneficial to them. Americans need to begin boycotting companies that use animal testing and turn towards cruelty-free companies. By supporting these companies, the average citizen can make cosmetics companies want to abandon animal testing as well. Likewise, citizens should show their support for organizations against animal testing such as PETA and the Humane Society. It is important to show the United States government as well as cosmetics companies that citizens and consumers strongly believe that animal testing in cosmetics should be banned in the United States and that they want a change. It is time for cosmetics companies to realize the cruel reality of animal testing and the benefits of the
Animal testing has long played a part in the science of testing, and it still plays a very important role in the medical world. Testing on animals in order to create a cure for AIDS is one thing, but testing on animals for human vanity is another. Animal testing is used to test the safety of a product. It has kept some very unsafe substances out of the cosmetic world. However, in this day in age, animal testing is not the only way to test the safety of a product. Animal testing in cosmetics has decreased over the years. However, it is still used by many companies in America. Animal testing is not only cruel, but it is also unnecessary in today’s advanced scientific world.
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.
Annually, one hundred to two hundred thousand animals suffer and possibly die due to testing for cosmetic reasons. (5) Animal testing was invented in the 1930’s when scientific technology wasn’t as advanced. Since then, cruel and painful tests have been performed on animals to test cosmetics. (1) Technology and science are more advanced now and alternative testing sources have become available. However, cosmetic companies continue to use animal testing for cosmetics even though it is outdated and unreliable. While animal testing is banned in some countries, some believe that it should be illegal for cosmetic companies worldwide to use animal testing. Not only is it is cruel and painful to the animals, reactions on animals may not be the same