Fisher 1

Rylee Fisher

Brett Sipes

24 March 2019

English 1201

Animal Testing and the Cruelty

When purchasing makeup or other cosmetic products it is important to think about how

the products were made. According to the Humane Society of the Humane Society the Federal

Drug Administrative states “"articles intended to be applied to the human body for cleansing,

beautifying, promoting attractiveness or altering the appearance without affecting the body's

structure or functions” (Humane Society). It is very important to understand what you’re

applying to your body, but average customers do not truly understand what goes on behind

closes doors when making cosmetics. Even though some may see the “cruelty-free” or “vegan”

sticker, they might not fully understand what these terms mean. Animals are forced to be

“subjects” in tests for chemicals or products. When buying products, customers should pay

attention to how these products are made. For one to apply safe makeup, an animal had to face

horrible reactions or torture. Animal testing should no longer be permitted because it is not

necessary, animals are harmed in the process and other countries have banned the practice.

Animals, for many years, have been the test subjects for a lot of cosmetic companies. The

AAVS, Animal Anti-vivisection Society,” Twenty-two percent of all regulated animals used in

labs are guinea pigs, by far the most used animal in research and testing, followed by rabbits

(17%) and hamsters (11%). Since 2016, the numbers of dogs in labs increased 12%, rabbits over

16%, and sheep 19%. Additionally, nearly 20% of all animals held in labs fall into either the “all

other covered species” category, like gerbils, bats, ferrets, and chinchillas or the “Other Farm
 Fisher 2

Animals,” like goats and horses,” (AAVS). Consumers of cosmetic products have no idea that

these everyday products are tested on animals that they could have as pets. Animal testing is

when brands apply their products directly to the animal’s body. They are testing to see of there

are any reactions caused by the product. There are several methods of testing used, such as eye

irritancy, acute toxicity, and dermal penetration/ skin absorption. All of these can cause serious

damage to the animal’s sight, nervous system and motor functions. Cosmetic brands will make

certain products like mascara, foundation, lotion or soaps and a scientist of the brands choosing

will then apply the product to the animals. If it were lotion, they would smear an amount on to

the animal’s body and check back in a day to see if there was any irritation or reaction. After

they have assessed the reaction, the animal will then be out to death and a new one will try the

product again after it has been modified. The National Anti-Vivisection Society, NAVS, States

that there are alternative ways of testing that are cheaper, humane, and better predict the

reactions (NAVS). If we can design new way of testing that causes no harm, then why aren’t we

promoting them? Consumers cast a blind eye to what goes on behind closed doors, and many of

them believe that the practice of animal testing had already been banned or was “better” than it

used to be. Animal testing should be a thing of the past because there are thousands of

ingredients that are already proven safe and effective that brands can choose from. There is no

need to find new ingredients or test new ones. The cosmetic brands still choose to do so because

they are competing against other brands.

Animal testing should no longer be allowed because it is unnecessary. Gianni Del Negro

stated, in her article “One Science-driven approach for the regulatory implementation of

alternative methods: a multi-sector perspective”, “With the available tool box, including the

OECD approved test methods, that provide partial information on whether or not a substance is
 Fisher 3

likely to induce skin sensitization, the overall status of non-animal test methods to asses skin

sensitization can be regarded as advanced” (Del Negro). Gianni claims that animal research does

not need to exist. There are plenty of alternative ways that can give information the brands re

looking for when testing a product. The Humane Society of the United States wrote an article,

“HSUS calls on L’Oréal to embrace a Global Ban on Animal Testing for Cosmetics”, writes that

“non-animal testing strategies use human-call-based tests and sophisticated computer programs

to provide human-relevant results” (HSUS). This further proves that animal testing is

unnecessary because it does not pertain to human skin. Animals and human may have

similarities, but they do react differently to other things and have different skin types. Using

animal testing is still not 100% effective. Just because it worked for an animal does not mean it

Weill work for a human with sensitive skin. It would be a smarter, cheaper way to test products

on human cells, rather than on innocent animals. Along with animal testing comes a bigger price

tag. Usually, animal tested makeup brands can be more expensive than vegan or cruelty free

makeup. When it comes to human cells, there are many ways we can achieve them. There are

volunteers, 3D printed cells, or donated bodies. However, we get the human cells, it is important

to know that it would be cheaper, and no animals would be harmed in the process. To further the

point of the unnecessary price tag of animal testing, The Humane Society of the United States,

posted statistics om their blog about the difference between animal testing and vitro (human

cells) tests. “

Eye irritation/corrosion

Draize rabbit eye test animal test $1,800

Bovine corneal opacity and permeability (BCOP) in vitro test $1,400

test
 Fisher 4

Skin corrosion

animal

Draize rabbit skin test test $1,800

EpiDerm™ human skin model in vitro test $850

CORROSITEX® membrane barrier in vitro test $500” (

(HSUS). The statistics show the difference in prices. The consumers have the right to know why

the products is so expensive, and that there are better, humane way to test cosmetics.

Since the internet has become so widely popular, there is information for any consumer

to get just by typing a few words. The act of testing products on animals can be searched, by

doing so the consumer will find the methods scientists use, and horrible pictures. In the article

“Cruelty-free Beauty: A Growing Demand”, by Fiona Ward discusses how consumer from

around the world are demanding more humane, and ethical products. “A 2016 Roy Morgan

survey found that 46 percent of Australian women would choose ‘not tested on animals’ as a

feature important to them when purchasing cosmetics – a statistic that had grown by 12 percent

since 2012, and no doubt has grown again since” (Ward). Although this is not U.S based, it

shows that the demand has traveled around the world. Today, people are becoming more and

more aware of what they are putting on their bodies, and what they are eating. People are

discovering what goes into making certain products, and they are not standing for it. If

consumers are demanding more humane options, why aren’t we giving them? Becoming a

cruelty-free consumer is a decision that more people should make. By doing so, you are not

allowing the toxins to enter your body and will be living a much healthier lifestyle.

Animal testing should be banned because it harms animals in the process. Every year,

there is 17-22 million animals are used in a research study. 50% of the animals used in cosmetic
 Fisher 5

testing will die 2-3 weeks after experimentations. Although brands are not required to test, many

are still wanting to develop “new” ingredients and are always looking to outdo their competition.

PETAs website states “They are abused in everything from toxicology tests (in which they are

slowly poisoned to death) to painful burn experiments to psychological experiments that induce

terror, anxiety, depression, and helplessness” (PETA). This quote is discussing what mice and

rats go through in laboratories. Like stated in the beginning of the paper, there are many methods

of testing. One being eye irritancy, this is where mascara, eyeliner, or eyeshadow is applied to

the animal’s eye and observed for reaction. Most animals that will encounter a reaction might

even loose eye sight. Their eyes can be swollen shut and will typically have red irritancy around

it. Below is a graphic photo of the method.

In this picture, you can see a rabbit with a severe reaction to the eye. This could have been from

any eye product such as eyeliner, mascara or eyeshadow. You can see this rabbit is no longer it’s

energized self. Usually rabbits are very scared, and are constantly jumping around, but in the

photo, you can see one that is terrified to move and looks upset and in pain. Along with the eye
 Fisher 6

irritancy, you can see the fur on the rabbit’s back is also heavily irritated. The reaction on the

back could have been from any products such as soap or lotion being tested.

Another heinous method is skin absorption/ dermal penetration. Skin absorption tests are

done to see how long it takes for the chemical to enter the skin. PETA discusses the procedure of

this method on their website, “rats’ backs are shaved, and a chemical is smeared on them for an

exposure period of up to 24 hours, after which the rats’ skin is washed and the animals are

housed individually in “metabolism cages” to permit the collection of their excrement for

analysis. Animals are later killed, and their skin, blood, and excrement are analyzed, after which

the rate of skin absorption is calculated” (PETA). This method is incredibly inhumane because

the animals are exposed to a harmful chemical, only after their fur has been shaved. They have

no way of rejecting the chemical, and it is soaking in and burning them as the time goes by. After

the time period, the animals are then euthanized. The animals had little life and the life they did

have was them being burned. These methods can cause horrible reactions, such as motor function

loss, or nervous system issues, or just burnt skin.

Animal testing is inhumane and causes great harm to the animal involved. The animals

that are involved in these tests could die from these reactions, and most of the time they will be

euthanized if the reaction didn’t already kill them. Some people do not consider “laboratory

animals” real animals. They tend to think that these animals were bred and designed to do these

tests and are used to make medical advancements or make sure products are safe. The Animal

Welfare Act only protects certain animals, and not other like rats, mice and some birds.

According to the government, animals in laboratories are not protected under animal cruelty

laws. They are subdued to any of the harmful treatments they are given. People tend to look at

mice, rats and birds to be non-companion animals. They do not offer the affection that dogs or
 Fisher 7

cats would, but to some people that is not true. There are many people who own these animals as

pets, and they have become part of their family. It is not fair to deem one animal as

“domesticated” and the others not. The animal’s that are given the life of a laboratory animal

should be able to have the same happy life as other animals do. Just because they are not a

popular domesticated pet, doe not mean they can not be.

Jacqueline Traide was a college student that voluntarily subjected herself to the practice

of animal testing. She wore a nude body suit and was subdued to testing for ten hours. She was

forced to shave her head, strapped down, and forced fed. She was connected to wires and she

told the scientists were given the okay. She sat in a window, being tortured in front of hundreds

of horrified shoppers. She did this as an act of protest, to show the horrible acts that go on in

laboratories. There are pictures of her crying and pleading, but they continued. What if animals

had voices? Would they hear them and stop? Humans are resilient and can come back from

broken bones, or horrible injuries. This woman put her health on the line to show that even she

could handle these tests. She brought light to this topic and has caused massive discussions. (The

photos are quite graphic).

The final reason cosmetic animal testing should be banned is because there are countries

that already have. The Humane Society of the United States, states that “At this time, 37

countries or political regions, including the European Union, Guatemala, India, Israel, New

Zealand, Norway, South Korea, Switzerland, Taiwan, and Turkey, have banned or limited the

use of animals for cosmetics testing” (HSUS). Because of the ban that these countries have

made, that means that the countries that they trade with will lose their trade. This will affect the

makeup companies because it will cause them to lose money from not trading or importing. The

animals in these countries are no longer being harmed. This should be a lesson to the countries
 Fisher 8

that have yet to ban the practice, because the makeup industry has not lost money, or changed

since they have applied the ban. The United States should pass the law against animal testing

because, as a culture, we are very animal friendly. Yes, there are animals that are raised to be

made for food, but that is what is needed. Animals that are raised in cages just to have chemicals

put in their eye or rubbed on them should be able to live their life in bliss and be in a cruelty free

environment.

Addition to the cruelty surrounded with makeup, I think people fail to notice that the

makeup brushes are also made from animal’s hairs. CV Skinlabs team wrote an article “Do

Animal-hair Makeup Brushes Contribute to Animal Cruelty”, “Are the animals harmed when

they give up this hair? According to caringconsumer.com, mink and sable brushes often use hair

obtained from the fur industry, which is known for trapping and killing animals for their pelts,

often by gassing or electrocuting to avoid damaging the hair. Horse hair commonly comes from

horses slaughtered for meat, goats are shorn like sheep (and may suffer cuts and other injuries),

and squirrels are hunted or trapped. Some manufacturers obtain their hair supplies from other

countries, where animal welfare regulations are either lax or nonexistent” (CV Skinlabs). People

are very blind to things they do not want to see, such as the cruelty. Everyday animals are killed

for their hair, or pelts to make clothing and makeup brushes. These animals are dying for

something that isn’t a necessity. From the same article ““Companies that claim that they are

cruelty free,” says Peggy Hannaman-Jones, founder of the Branded J Collection, “claiming they

are shaving the animals and using shed hair from animals are deceiving themselves and others. It

is simply not true! All hair is bought through fur farmers all over the world” (CV Skinlab). This

is important because so many people choose to buy brands that claim they are 100% cruelty free,

when it is not true. They may think they are getting fur from animals that are not being harmed,
 Fisher 9

but they are getting it from farmers. Animals are mistreated every single day just for our benefit,

and it needs to stop sometime.

Animals are forced to be test subjects, and then later are killed because of their reactions

or because the need for their pelts. The animals that are not protected from the Animal Welfare

Act are, typically, given loving and affectionate homes. While the ones that are not protected

from the Act are tortured every single day. They have little to no life, and all of it is spent inside

a small cage. They are terrified to move or react because they know the consequences. The next

time you go buy cosmetics think about the process. When you apply eyeshadow, think about

how a rat was tortured and had lost vison because of the chemicals. Stores and brands should

encourage customers to be more aware and show them what happens behind closed doors.

Animal testing for cosmetics should be banned because it is unnecessary, animals are harmed

and/or killed in the process, and many other countries have already made the decision to ban the

practice.
 Fisher 10

Works Cited

“HSUS Calls on L'Oréal to Embrace a Global Ban on Animal Testing for Cosmetics · A Humane

Nation.” A Humane Nation, The Human Society of the United States, 20 Sept. 2017,

https://blog.humanesociety.org/wayne/2017/09/hsus-calls-loreal-embrace-global-ban-animal-

testing-cosmetics.html

“Animals Used in Cosmetics Testing.” National Anti-Vivisection Society, NAVS Advancing Science

Without Harming Animals , www.navs.org/the-issues/animals-used-in-cosmetics-

testing/?gclid=EAIaIQobChMInd6qxOnm1gIVEKlpCh38oQ9TEAAYASAAEgKfivD_BwE#.

Wd0kG7pFyzk

Dal Negro, Gianni, et al. “One Science-Driven Approach for the Regulatory Implementation of

Alternative Methods: A Multi-Sector Perspective.” Regulatory Toxicology & Pharmacology:

RTP, vol. 99, Nov. 2018, pp. 33–49. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1016/j.yrtph.2018.08.002

Admin. “Which Animals Are Used.” American Anti-Vivisection Society, aavs.org/animals-

science/animals-used/.

Fiona Ward. “Cruelty-Free Beauty: a Growing Demand.” Naturally Good, 21 Mar. 2018,

naturallygood.com.au/beauty-home-living/cruelty-free-beauty-growing-demand/.

“Mice and Rats in Laboratories.” PETA, 23 Jan. 2019, www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-

experimentation/animals-laboratories/mice-rats-laboratories/.

Team, CV Skinlabs. “Do Animal-Hair Makeup Brushes Contribute to Animal Cruelty?” CV Skinlabs,

CV Skinlabs, 13 Sept. 2018, cvskinlabs.com/do-animal-hair-makeup-brushes-contribute-to-

animal-cruelty/.