Cano 1

Jennifer Cano
Professor Holly Batty
English 113B
25 February 2016
Torturing Animals for luxury; Animal Testing for Cosmetics
Animal testing for cosmetics is something that has been a controversy for so long. It
borders the line of what is right and ethical. Animals are tested for how they react to cosmetic
products. They test the skin irritation, the timing and much more on animals. Animal testing for
cosmetics is something that needs to be banned.
Animals are suffering for our luxury. Why do we need to use these small defenseless
critters to test cosmetics? Cosmetic products arent things that we need, they are what we want.
Animal testing is cruel and needs to be banned in the United States. Some countries have
actually banned the use of any testing on animals for cosmetics. An organization named PETA is
a biased group of people who are completely against any harm towards animals. Having said
this, they make a great point saying In a huge victory for animals, the European Union (EU),
Israel, and India have banned the sale of any cosmetics or cosmetics ingredients that have been
tested on animals (PETA). This is a huge deal for animal rights and the way it effects the rest of
the world. Although these countries have stopped the testing on animals for cosmetics this does
not mean that the whole world has. To make it an even bigger deal, the United States still allows
the use of animal testing for cosmetics. This leaves me to question what the United States has in
mind to make this better. There is indeed an act that limits on what type of animals you can test
on and so forth.
The act is named Animal Welfare Act (AWC), and it is the first federal law in the united

Cano 2
states having to do with animal testing. This act does many things in protecting animals and the
way they must be treated. The act goes way beyond just research it applies to breeders and many
other situations regarding animals. Although this act is a good place to start the act has many
flaws. For example, AWC does not protect every animal. It covers warm-blooded species, with
the exception of birds, rats of the genus Rattus, and mice of the genus Mus -bred for use in
research (Animal Welfare Institute). This means that researchers can test on any cold-blooded
animal and a few warm-blooded ones. What is the difference between any animal? We wouldnt
go out and say testing is fine to do on those of colored skin humans but not those of white skin.
If we wouldnt treat humans like this there is no reason why we should treat any living thing like
this. Another source states the same conflict by saying, 95% of animals used in experiments are
not protected by the federal Animal Welfare Act (AWA), which excludes birds, rats and mice
bred for research, and cold-blooded animals such as reptiles and most fish (pro con). This shows
that the AWC doesnt protect these other wide range of animals. Which means these are the
creatures who are suffering and taking all the blows.
There are many companies that till this day still choose to do animal testing. A lot of
these companies are well known brands. We even have most of these products in our homes.
Some brands that still do animal testing are; Maybelline new your, Almay, Revlon Estee Lauder,
Dove, Secret, MAC, Clean and Clear, Covergirl and many more. All these brands are well known
and someone who has no knowledge of these companies testing on animals can buy several
products and keep supporting the brand. These companies make it really hard to notice what they
actually do. These brands dont advertise that they are testing on animals because if many people
found out they would loose a lot of money.

Cano 3
Now of course many may think that testing all these products on animals before it hits
our own skin is a good thing, but do they really know why they are tested on and the other
recourses companies have? Guniea pigs and rats are tested for allergic reactions on skin, rabbits
are tested for skin irritation, eye irritation and much more. There is a whole list of animals and
tests that go on then just the ones I listed. Although this all seems sensible to do in order to
protect our own health, all these tests can be done with out the use of animals. We are a very fast
evolving nation with high technology. There is a vast majority of other ways we can test things
out using machines and not living creatures. As part of Tox21, the EPA has also completed the
first phase of its ToxCast program, which involved rigorously testing around 300 chemicals
(mostly pesticides) in close to 500 assays in multiple human and animal cell lines to determine
which chemicals activate different metabolic pathways (Environ. Health Perspect. 118, 485-492,
2010). Comparing the results with in vivo data, the researchers found that the more cellular
pathways perturbed by a chemical as observed in a lab dish, the lower the dose at which the
chemical causes toxicity in animals (Dolgin). This quote explains that there is a new type of
technology that can tell you how the product will react to humans and animals. the technology
even gives you the research faster and with use of less product. With this there is no reason why
we should test on animals.
Animal testing for cosmetics needs so come to an end. We are a very technological
country and it is time we use technology over lives. We need to all come together and have our
voices heard in order to make a change. We wouldnt experiment on humans so we shouldnt
experiment on animals. if we keep repressing animals what does that have to say with how the
world works. In order to be in peace and in one with nature we need to stop discriminating on

Cano 4
animals and be a nation that movies in the positive direction. Animal testing needs to be put to an
end.

Cano 5
Work cited page

"Animal Testing - ProCon.org." ProConorg Headlines. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Feb. 2016.

"Animal Welfare Act." Animal Welfare Act. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Feb. 2016.

Dolgin, Elie. "Animal Testing Alternatives Come Alive in US." Nature Medicine, 16.12
(2010): 1348.

"Testing Cosmetics and Household Products on Animals." PETA. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Feb.
2016.