Against Testing Cosmetics on Animals
Cosmetics shouldn’t be tested on animals.
* Our furry little friends get to try out the newest cosmetic finds before they reach the counters of stores. Poor innocent creatures suffer for our vanity. Beauty shouldn’t be linked to pain.
Change slide * Companies instead of using non-animal tests, choose to use animal tests because their results can be manipulated. * Since the 1960s, animal testing has been a routine step in getting shampoos, lipsticks, mascaras, hand lotions and many other personal products onto store shelves. * Each year in the United States, about 70 million animals are maimed, blinded, scalded, force-fed chemicals, genetically manipulated, and hurt and killed in the name of science, by private institutions, household product and cosmetics companies, government agencies, educational institutions, and scientific centers. Substances we use everyday may be tested on rats, rabbits, guinea pigs, dogs, cats, and other animals.
Change slide * These tests are not required by the law or by the FDA, and they are only done to protect companies from consumer lawsuits. And scientific testing using animals has been the accepted method of proving a cosmetic isn’t a hazard to our health. This testing on animals is inhumane and the results are often inaccurate when applied towards humans. * Approximately 17-22 million animals are used in research each year. * (PETA) has been negotiating with the U.S. government since the late 1990s to reduce toxicity testing on animals, which it says “could easily be replaced with more sophisticated, more accurate and less expensive non-animal alternatives.” * Virto studies and population health studies, human skin patches, computer and mathematical models, cloned human skin cells are some of the alternatives that can help cosmetics scientists predict individual reactions or toxicity. * Gordon Baxter, cofounder of Pharmagene Laboratories, which uses only computers and human tissues to
* Our furry little friends get to try out the newest cosmetic finds before they reach the counters of stores. Poor innocent creatures suffer for our vanity. Beauty shouldn’t be linked to pain.
Change slide * Companies instead of using non-animal tests, choose to use animal tests because their results can be manipulated. * Since the 1960s, animal testing has been a routine step in getting shampoos, lipsticks, mascaras, hand lotions and many other personal products onto store shelves. * Each year in the United States, about 70 million animals are maimed, blinded, scalded, force-fed chemicals, genetically manipulated, and hurt and killed in the name of science, by private institutions, household product and cosmetics companies, government agencies, educational institutions, and scientific centers. Substances we use everyday may be tested on rats, rabbits, guinea pigs, dogs, cats, and other animals.
Change slide * These tests are not required by the law or by the FDA, and they are only done to protect companies from consumer lawsuits. And scientific testing using animals has been the accepted method of proving a cosmetic isn’t a hazard to our health. This testing on animals is inhumane and the results are often inaccurate when applied towards humans. * Approximately 17-22 million animals are used in research each year. * (PETA) has been negotiating with the U.S. government since the late 1990s to reduce toxicity testing on animals, which it says “could easily be replaced with more sophisticated, more accurate and less expensive non-animal alternatives.” * Virto studies and population health studies, human skin patches, computer and mathematical models, cloned human skin cells are some of the alternatives that can help cosmetics scientists predict individual reactions or toxicity. * Gordon Baxter, cofounder of Pharmagene Laboratories, which uses only computers and human tissues to
Bibliography: "AFC - 04/24/07 Croatian Consumers Demand Ethical Products." AFC - 04/24/07 Croatian Consumers Demand Ethical Products. Animal Friends Croatia, 24 Apr. 2007. Web. 07 Oct. 2012. . "Wikileaks Releases Disturbing Photos Of Beauty Products Being Tested On Animals (NSFW)." Wikileaks Releases Disturbing Photos Of Beauty Products Being Tested On Animals (NSFW). The Falafel, 21 Feb. 2012. Web. 07 Oct. 2012. . "Charlie 's Makeup Kit." Erucult. N.p., 19 Jan. 2011. Web. 7 Oct. 2012. . "EcoMerge Project at Portland State University: Testing of Cosmetic Products." EcoMerge Project at Portland State University: Testing of Cosmetic Products. Portland State University, 3 Aug. 2012. Web. 07 Oct. 2012. .