Alternatives to animal testing Imagine you are walking down the cosmetics isle at your grocery store. While picking up some deodorant or toothpaste, have you ever stopped to think if your favorite product has been tested on animals? You probably haven’t, but the chances are very high that it has been. Two of the main reasons why companies continue to use animals to test their products are to determine possible dangers to human health and to avoid product liability suits, but now there are many reliable tests that can be conducted to determine the safety of products without the use of animals. To better understand this important issue I will discuss how animal testing began, what companies do and do not test products on animals, some alternatives to animal testing, and the awareness and prevention that demands our help. Experimentation on live animals began as early as the 17 th Century.
Philosopher Jeremy Bentham rejected Philosopher Rene Descartes’ theory that animals are not able to reason and therefore do not feel pain. Bentham’s philosophy on animals was: ” The question is not can they reason? Nor, can they talk? but, can they suffer? .” The practice of testing cosmetics on animals began in 1933 after a woman used mascara for her eyelashes and became blind. According to the Food and Drug Administration at FDA. gov, this led to the development of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act in 1938, which protects the public from unsafe products.
The Essay on Animal Lab Testing Animals Research Test
People all over the world have different opinions on whether animal lab testing is a sufficient way to test products. Well, the fact is animal lab testing does not harm animals nor does it humans. This happens because animals in laboratories are not in pain. The animals' rights are not harmed during the testing. Lastly, the numbers are decreasing for animal research. All of these reasons are ...
This led to many tests on animals. Two of most common animal tests, according to the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, are Draize Test (named after FDA scientist John Draize) and the LD 50 (which stands for Lethal Dose 50).
The Draize test involves dropping a substance directly into an animal’s eyes and watching the results. The other test, the LD 50 involves force-feeding a substance to a group of animals until 50% of the group dies. So you are probably asking yourself, where are all of these animals coming from? Well, to this day, one of the largest suppliers of laboratory animals is the Charles River Laboratories. Tests are being performed on these animals daily at their laboratories.
The most disturbing part is that thousands of companies test their products on animals. According to the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, also known as PETA. Lists some of those companies on the PETA. com website, they include: Arm & Hammer, Bausch & Lomb, Clairol, Clorox, Cover Girl, Dial, Johnson & Johnson, Schick, S. C. Johnson Wax, Playtex and Max Factor, just to mention a few.
The companies that do not however test their products on animals have found other alternatives to test their products. These are a few of the companies: Abercrombie & Fitch, Almay, Avon, Bath & Body Works, Bobbie Brown, Colgate, L’Oreal, Maybelline, Gillette and Neutrogena Corporation. Some of the alternatives that are available for companies to use that don’t involve cruelty towards animals. These methods not only prevent cruelty towards animals but they are also more cost effective, better predictors of human injury, and they produce quicker results. Two main reasons why a lot of companies do not use these alternatives are because the fear for human safety and the fear of product liability suits. Some of the most common types of alternative methods are: in-vito test (in-vito means in glass, as opposed to in-viv o, which is used today, means “whole animal”), computer software, and databases of tests.
Ey tex, which is produced by the National Testing Corporation, uses in-vito test tube procedure that measures eye via a protein alteration system. Epi Pack is another animal-free test, which uses cloned human tissue to test potentially harmful substances. According to John Frazier and Alan Goldberg, of the center for the Alternatives to Animal Testing (CART), they stated that the main disadvantages to animal tests are “Animal discomfort and death, species-extrapolation problems, and excessive time and expense.” Why aren’t companies being forced to stop using animals for their tests? According to the Human Society of the United States with Pet Ownership Statistics, in February of 2002, stated that approximately 63. 4 million households have pets.
The Term Paper on Animal Rights Animals Test Tests
... differences in these products that the use of animals is totally outdated. Alternatives to animal tests are available on todays market. Many companies are working in ... consumer complaints, etc. ) requires firms to conduct animal testing of any cosmetic product. Cosmetic companies use animal tests to insure themselves against possible consumer lawsuits. If ...
This shows that most Americans have a tremendous love for animals. In conclusion animal testing is wrong and can be stopped. So as you go home tonight to your fury loved ones, you are now aware of how animal testing began, some of the companies that do and do not test their products on animals, and some alternative methods that are available. So in regards to philosopher Jeremy Bentham, the question is not can they suffer, but how can we help them stop suffering? Our job is simple, be aware of the companies that are committing these crimes and write a letter to them letting them know how you feel. Your pets will be proud of you. Work Cited Food and Drug Administration Physicians Committee for responsible Medicine People for the Ethical Treatment of Animal (PETA) Center for the Alternatives to Animal Testing The University of Science and Technology.
