Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Animal cruelty cosmetic testing argument
Ethics on animal clinical testing
Cosmetic testing violates animals rights
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Animal cruelty cosmetic testing argument
DATE: April 03, 2014
TO: K. Voltan, Vice President
FROM: Rob Geis, Marketing Executive
SUBJECT: Higher Demand for Non-Animal Tested Cosmetic Products
INTRODUCTION
L’Oréal Canada and Animal Testing
There has been some controversy regarding L’Oréal Canada and their use of animal testing in their cosmetic products. For certifications regarding safety, we currently possess 86% of manufacturing facilities that are either OHSAS 18001 or VPP certified. (L’Oréal Canada, 2014) Safety is a priority for us at L’Oréal Canada to ensure that our products are safe for our consumers so that they can enjoy the beauty of our cosmetic products. Health Canada has stated that science has not advanced to the point where they feel comfortable banning animal testing in the cosmetic industry, but that animal testing is not required for cosmetic products. (Bendall, 2011) However, the European Union has recently passed a Cosmetics Directive in 2009, which bans the use of animal testing in the cosmetic industry. The Cosmetics Directive bans the testing of finished products, ingredients within a product and the marketing of a product that has been tested on animals. (European Commission, 2014) As a result of these changes in Europe, it is important for L’Oréal Canada to consider alternative methods to animal testing for business to continue with countries in Europe, and so that consumers will feel more positive about purchasing our products due to them being cruelty-free.
PROBLEM (BACKGROUND INFORMATION)
Issue Involving Use of Animal Testing
There are many issues involving L’Oréal Canada and its involvement in animal testing. Many consumers feel strongly about animal testing because it is inhumane, therefore they do not wish to purchase products tha...
... middle of paper ...
...teaching. Rev. sci. Off .int.Epiz, 735-745.
Humane Society International/Canada. (2013, March 11). As Europe Bans Animal-Tested Cosmetics, HSI/Canada and Animal Alliance Call on Canada to “Be Cruelty-Free”. Retrieved from Opinion poll shows 8 of 10 Canadians support national cosmetics animal testing ban: http://www.hsi.org/world/canada/news/releases/2013/03/canada_cosmetic_testing_poll_031113.html
Klein, J. (2012). EU Cosmetics Directive and the ban on animal testing: compliance, challenges, and the GATT as a potential barrier to animal welfare. Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems, 253-275.
L’Oréal Canada. (2014). Retrieved from Company Overview Facts & Figures: http://www.en.loreal.ca/_en/_ca/html/our-company/facts-figures/operations.aspx?
P.J. (Bert) Hakkinen, D. K. (2002). Alternatives to animal testing: information resources via the. Toxicology, 3-11
Kanter, James. "E.U. Bans Cosmetics With Animal-Tested Ingredients." New York Times. The New York Times, 10 Mar. 2013. Web. 20 Mar. 2014.
The use of animals to test cosmetics is introduced in their article as well. The authors quote a vast amount of credible sources from prestigious universities such as Princeton and from well known animal rights group such as PETA. I will use this as my main source of information.
and Europe, which include reduction of animal use, refine animal study techniques, and animal testing replacement. According to Dana ,Bidnall, “Animals are also used, and subsequently killed, every year in many other types of laboratory experiments, from military testing to simulated car crashes to deliberately introduced diseases such as AIDS and Alzheimer 's”(49). Bidnal also states that, “These experiments take place in labs at universities, pharmaceutical companies, and testing agencies, and on farms and military bases around the world”(49). The author suggest,”Researchers who conduct experiments on animals argue that it would be unethical to test substances with potentially adverse side effects on humans; animals are good surrogates because their responses are similar to humans”(49).Bidnal contends with ,”However, some animals are chosen for other reasons”(49). According to Bindal, “Animal testing is not the only option in toxicity testing”(50). Bidnal states, “Alternatives are widely available and include human clinical and epidemiological studies; experiments with cadavers, volunteers,and patients; computer simulation and mathematical models; and in vitro (test tube) tissue culture techniques, to name just a
Over the past couple of years many companies of these cosmetic products released that they are against animal testing including LUSH Fresh Handmade Cosmetics, The Body Shop, and many others. There are still companies that still do test with animals; over 250 on PETA’s website. A large percent of these are well-known companies such as Johnson & Johnson, Estee Lauder, Procter & Gamble, L’Oreal, and others that may surprise the consumer. The majority of these companies are producing the same products yet using different animal testing results. This causes the number of test subjects to be substantially larger than what is needed. The number of tests being conducted could be reduced if these companies either become anti animal testing or share results with other companies. This idea might seem like a long-shot since sharing information with their competitors seems ridiculous. If you take a step back from looking at each individual company, you’ll see that they are all conducting similar tests with similar products. Sharing results of these tests with other companies potentially selling similar products, with the same ingredients, will result in a large drop in animal testing (Search for Cruelty-Free
Sadly according to the Humane Society International (HSI) article About Animal Testing “in the United states alone around 26 million animals are tested each year for medical and commercial research” (HSI) even though animal testing is not required to ensure that the cosmetic being sold are safe. From those 26 million animals being tested most are not protected by the federal Animal Welfare Act. The animal welfare act does not include birds, rats and mice bred for research, and it doesn’t include cold-blooded animals. Animals testing should be banned because the animals tested suffer immensely, also animal tested is unethical, and because there are many alternatives.
Sun, Shany. "The Truth Behind Animal Testing." Young Scientists Journal 5.12 (2012): 83-85. Academic Search Complete. Web. 19 Nov. 2013.
Throughout history, beginning as early as 500 BC, animals have been used to test products that will later be utilized by humans (“Animal Testing” 4), what isn’t publicly discussed is the way it will leave the animals after the process is done. Many innocent rabbits, monkeys, mice, and even popular pets such as dogs are harmed during the testing application of cosmetics, medicine, perfumes, and many other consumer products (Donaldson 2). Nevertheless, there are many people whom support the scandal because "it is a legal requirement to carry out animal testing to ensure they are safe and effective” for human benefit (Drayson). The overall question here is should it even be an authorized form of experimentation in the United States, or anywhere else? The fact of the matter is that there are alternatives to remove animals out of the equation for good (“Alternatives” 1). They are cheaper, and less invasive than the maltreatment of the 26 million innocent animals that are subjected to the heartlessness of testing each year (“Animal Testing” 4). All in all, due to the harsh effects of animal testing, it should be treated as animal cruelty in today’s society.
Specific Purpose – To persuade my audience that animal testing is wrong and how other safer alternatives should be taken.
...ts on animals. China is also in the process of decreasing the amount of animal tested products in circulation as well (“Cosmetics and House-Hold Products Animal Testing”). Even though there are alternatives to using animals in this testing, companies in the United States still continue to torture animals for the sake of beauty. There are plenty more ways to experiment with products that do not involve animals in any way, and these tests also produce more reliable information. According to Earth Protect, Tests like this are often cheaper and produce faster results than animal research ever has. For example, there is a model of human cornea tissues that can be subject to eye irritation experiments instead of a rabbit, and there are models of skin cells that can be used for skin irritation tests instead of guinea pigs (“Cosmetic Animal Testing Facts and Alternatives”).
The Cruelty of Cosmetic Testing on Animals Each year, thousands of animals are brutally tortured in laboratories, in the name of cosmetic research. A movement to ban animal testing for cosmetic purposes has been gaining popularity, with many companies hopping on the bandwagon against this research. New alternatives have been developed to eliminate the need to test on animals. This is only a small beginning of what is necessary to end these immoral acts. Animal testing in cosmetics is useless and cruel, and can be accomplished by other methods of research to end the suffering of animals.
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.
Simple household items such as lotions, shampoos and cosmetics aren’t very expensive and are within reach for the public, yet the public is not knowledgeable of the fact that the products that they use everyday are put through a series of tests which involve the use of harmless animals. Several large commercial companies do not make products for animals; they decide that using these harmless creatures for the testing of their products, could be cause to be harmful to animals still go forward with these types of procedures on an everyday basis. Although these animals are unable to defend themselves or signs of any form of consent for the near death procedures, these companies find this as a cheap solution for testing their products before placing them on the market. There are many other alternatives to testing animals such as embryonic stem cell research. Animal experimentation is wrong and it can be avoided but companies which are greedy for money chose not to.
Hundreds of millions of animals die every year from animal testing in the United States. Innocent animals are used everyday in laboratories for biology advancements, medical training, curiosity-driven experimentation, and chemical, drug, food, and cosmetic testing. They are used to provide information to make better products that are safe for human use. Although animal experimentation has some benefits, the negatives outweigh the positives. Animal testing is killing off innocent beings for the possible human benefit, and with modern technology, there are alternative ways to test products that leave animals unharmed.
It still comes as a surprise to me that with all the technology in today’s society, we are still relying on animals for cosmetic research. Some people think that it is acceptable and even justified to test on mere animals rather than risk hurting people. So, for these kinds of people, animal testing makes perfect sense. However, in my opinion, animals are living creatures and have the right to live out their lives as nature intended rather than simply surviving in cages while being poked and prodded with whatever scientists fancy. I think it is depressing and sort of grotesque that I am using products that have been tested on animals that are even commonly bred as our pets. So, I began my research to find out what companies still test on animals, why they do so, and what other alternatives they could use in place of animal testing.
Animal testing has become extremely costly. Animal testing results are not quick, especially for cosmetics. When testing a product it needs to be continually applied to detect if it’s going to irritate the skin or eyes. This can take days or weeks. During this time you have to keep the animals alive long enough to see the result. Therefore also having to supply food and water costing even more $$$. For example the eye irritant test involving rabbits to see how a product or chemical will react on human eyes cost around 1,800$ while the alternative in vitro method only cost 1,400$. Not only is the alternative more accurate but its much more cost effective and over time those 400$ will add up. Another common example is the skin sensation test, which is where a product is placed on a shaved animals skin to see how it reacts. The cost for the animal test is 6,000$ and the alternative is only 3,000$. That is a lot of money that could be used to make the product better or for the company to keep.