The Truth in Pictures

The pictures above depict real animal testing done in labs. The variety of animals in the pictures are only a few of the types of animals used in testing. Others include guinea pigs, mice, cats, reptiles, and many more. After viewing these pictures is there any real reason a person could support animal testing for cosmetics?

Animal Welfare Act (FAIL)

The Animal Welfare Act was enacted by Congress and authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to set the standards and requirements for the humane handling, care, treatment, and housing of animals used for testing. This act prohibits the FDA to say what type of research should be done, all species used that are under the AWA are to be regulated by the AWA. The flaw with this Act is that while it sets standards, they are so broad that almost always it is not followed correctly. Another issue with this act is that it does not consider birds and mice which is a vast majority of animals used for testing. In this manner, there is NOT effective regulation for animal testing. If acts like this are going to exist, they should be more strict and specific so that animals are getting covered properly.

The Three R'S

In order to make animal experimentation and testing more ethical, scientists have come up with a method called the three R's. This is an idea that was created for more ethical testing standards when using animals. The three R's stand for: replacement, reduction, and refinement. Replacement means that alternatives to research should be used instead of animals. Types of alternatives include human models, computer simulations, and tissue cultures. Included in this idea is replacing vertebraes with invertebraes such as bacteria, worms, or small bugs. Reduction means to minimize the number of animals being used for experiments, so that LESS animals are harmed. The method for reduction can be by using positive and strict control over the experiment's design and having a proper environment for animals to live in. Finally, refinement means that something in the experiment gets changed in order for there to be a reduction of pain or stress that an animal may feel. While this method may not entirely get rid of animal testing, it is a step in the right direction towards animals having better rights.

Living Conditions

"The lack of ethical self-examination is common and generally involves the denial or avoidance of animal suffering, resulting in the dehumanization of researchers and the ethical degradation of their research subjects."
John P. Gluck; Ethics and Behavior, Vol. 1, 1991

For the purpose of animal testing, animals are kept in labarotories where scientists can moniter their reactions and changes to products. The animals who are tested are put in wire cages with other animals like them, sometimes many small animals are put together in one small cage. These type of living conditions are not healthy for animals and can cause distress to the animals being tested on, resulting in false results. Larger animals are kept in similiar wire cages with newspaper and a container of water to drink from. While scientists usually offer proper lighting and temperature settings in the rooms animals are kept in, the lack of a structured environment within cages can alter the behavior of the animals enclosed. While the cages offer the bare minimum that an animal needs to survive, it does not offer exercise wheels, shelves, or toys which animals use to interact with and maintain healthy. The lack of this type of environment which ranges from animal to animal, can cause increased levels of stress. When animals become stressed their levels of stress hormones increase, their sex hormones decrease, and their immune system begins to fail, compromising accuracy of test results. Many scientists say that the living conditions of animals "cancel out" and have nothing to do with test results, yet experiments have proven that results vary when compared to healthy animals. Another key factor of living conditions animals are kept under is noise level that occurs within the labs due to human activity. Sounds of constant closing and opening doors, carts, jingling keys, and machinery can affect the behavior of animals, especially rodents. Rodents are extremely sensitive to noise and are very affected, this causes them to change their behavior patterns and become more withdrawn. While scientists believe that the living conditions animals are placed in are a good method, they do not realize the effects this has on animals

Test Inaccuracy

The purpose for testing cosmetics on animals is to measure the levels of skin irritancy, eye tissue damage, and toxicity which can be caused by various cosmetic products. Through a variety of testing methods, animals are made to endure pain in order for manufacturers to understand what products are safe for public sale. The truth about this type of testing in animals is that although the testing is meant to find safe means for cosmetic products, many of these tests are innacurate. Some of the tests performed on animals such as the LD tests which are meant to measure toxicity in a certain product, do not find any valid evidence of the safety of a product, rather it finds how toxic the product was to that specified animal being used. Test results from rats and mice can not be mixed together or used as the same, although they are both rodents, so how is that supposed to be matched to resemble a human? The different types of animals used throughout various test methods have been proven and recorded to have varying side effects that change from animal to animal. Not only that, but other factors that affect the test results for such tests as the LD can be determined by the sex of the animal, the living conditions the animal is in, and the way in which the drugs or test are administered. These varying factors can play a major role in the outcome for a test, and are not necessarily easy to relate to how a human would react to that product. It could be that a person could have no reaction to the product used, or they could have an adverse reaction. In the same way that people vary, animals do too and can cause false information for cosmetic testing.

Animal Testing History (Cosmetic)

Documentation and references related to animal testing can date back as far as the 1850's where Charles Darwin said that animals could be used as a human model for biological information and scientific research. Other instances of animals being used for other types of research are with Ivan Pavlov who did psychological research on dogs. His psychological research was to come up with the idea of classical conditioning. The cloning of Dolly the sheep is also an instance of animals being used for research or testing, this occured in 1996.

The above information is all instances of animal testing for scientific, psychological and biological research. However, I am going to review the history of COSMETIC testing on animals.

The initiation for cosmetic testing on animals began in 1933 after a woman used the brand Lash Lure Mascara. The mascara she was using had not been previously tested for public safety and in turn the make-up caused her eyes to become irritated and burn, and in the end she went blind. The incident caused a serious concern for products to become inspected and become more safe for the public. The outcome of this incident prompted the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to be passed in 1938. This act gives the federal government the responsibility to oversee the safety of products that are meant for the public, this includes food, drugs and cosmetics. The section for cosmetics under the act defines these products as any product intended for "cleansing, beautifying, promoting attractiveness, or altering the appearance". While cosmetics are under this act, it only gives the federal government the ability to classify the products without having to regulate them. The regulation of cosmetic products is the manufacturer's responsibility, that is to say that a cosmetic company is in charge of how they want to ensure the safety of their products. This can include testing on animals or testing with alternative methods.

The Other Side: Pros of Testing

To every argument there are two sides, just as in the argument over whether cosmetic testing on animals should be done. The side that I am on, supports the ideas that cosmetic testing on animals is unethical and unecessary on many levels. The other side of cosmetic testing for animals believes that testing is essential for safety of the public. Other people believe that testing on animals reduces the exposure to dangerous substances people are exposed to on a daily basis. These people believe that without animal testing, people's health would be on the line. While this can be a valid and understandable argument, people need to realize that there are alternative methods to testing that do not include endangering the lives of countless animals. Scientists also argue that animals are used for research because they are closely matched to humans and the outcomes are very similiar.