The Commander

  • Welcome back Centurions! Come back soon for updates on everything UC High!

  • Do you have anything to complain about? Submit a "Letter to the Editor"

Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

Emma Truchan, Editor-in-Chief

Hang on for a minute...we're trying to find some more stories you might like.


Email This Story






   In a market that’s selling point is beauty, it is ironic that such ugly practices hide behind closed doors of makeup companies. Well-known brands like Maybelline, MAC, L’Oreal, and Benefit Cosmetics all use animal testing to determine the safety of their products. This practice has been proven to be less efficient than other testing methods, and causes unnecessary harm to innocent animals.

   On June 27, 2017, NARS Cosmetics announced that they would begin retailing their products in China, where national laws require cosmetics companies to test their products on animals. They claimed that “the global elimination of animal testing needs to happen… but we must comply with the local laws of the markets in which we operate… We have decided to make NARS available in China because we feel it is important to bring our vision of beauty and artistry to fans in the region” (narscosmetics.com). But these actions do not come from a place of beauty and artistry, they comes from a place of greed. This hypocritical statement exposes the true nature of make-up companies. NARS supposedly wants to eliminate animal testing, but for some extra cash will do whatever it takes. Companies like NARS are sacrificing their ethics and morals for the sake of profit, at the price of animal’s lives and wellbeing, disgracing the name of makeup with it.

   The practice of animal testing is happening so consistently because there are very few restrictions placed on the method from governmental powers. According to the Food and Drug Administration’s website, “The FDC [Food, Drug, and Cosmetics] Act does not specifically require the use of animals in testing cosmetics for safety… [however,] animal testing by manufacturers seeking to market new products may be used to establish product safety… FDA supports the development and use of alternatives to whole-animal testing as well as adherence to the most humane methods” (fda.gov). Although animal testing is not enforced in the United States, the cruel and inhumane practice is being allowed to slide, despite there being other options such as testing on donated human tissue and cell culture testing — all of which are within FDA regulations.

   Some argue that animal testing is an efficient way to test the safety of cosmetics, since it is allowed by the FDA and in multiple other countries. According to the Institute of In Vitro Sciences, the process is generally used to guarantee the safety of makeup products for human eyes, and the overall toxicity of the product (iivs.org). Testing on animals has been a method that has been used for years, and has been considered to be something that is instrumental in the security of our cosmetics. But the practice has proven to be unnecessary, with more efficient processes being developed.

   According to Science Magazine, National Institute of Health Director Francis Collins said, “The use of animal models for therapeutic development and target validation… may not accurately predict efficacy in humans. With more rigorous target validation in human tissues, it may be justifiable to skip the animal model assessment of efficacy altogether” (sciencemag.org). The process of testing on animals to guarantee the safety of a product is proving to be inefficient as new methods come up. Companies continuing to use this method are harming animals for no reason.

   Senior Rachel Kwon said, “I always try to buy from companies that are animal cruelty-free because there is no point in testing on animals when they weren’t created and put on this planet just for us to exploit them.” She continued, “I understand the struggle of wanting a certain product from a brand that encourages animal cruelty, but people should definitely try to support the livelihood of animals on our Earth.” With other methods available for companies to use, that are within FDA regulations, it is up to the consumers to only buy products who use these alternative ways.

   The testing of animals for the safety of beauty commodities is a process that has been the cause of suffering and death of millions of animals worldwide. It has been proven to be less effective compared to other methods and overall unnecessary. Companies compromise their morals by testing on animals for the purpose of financial gain. But as consumers, we can help this cause by supporting brands that refuse to fall into the trap of profit and greed.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Leave a Comment

If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a gravatar.




Navigate Right
Navigate Left
  • Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

    Opinions

    Unsigned Editorial: Colleges Should be More Upfront About Campus Crimes

  • Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

    Opinions

    People Under the Influence Can’t Give Consent, Period

  • Opinions

    Letter to the Editor

  • Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

    Opinions

    UC High as Two Schools: Beneficial for Students or Not? -Counterpoint

  • Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

    Opinions

    Device Users not Evil Cheaters?

  • Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

    Opinions

    UC High as Two Schools: Beneficial for Students or Not? -Point

  • Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

    Opinions

    People Should not Have to Adjust Their Holiday Greetings

  • Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

    Opinions

    Antonia’s “Fake” News…a column

  • Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

    Opinions

    Support Your Class With Fundraisers

  • Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary

    Opinions

    Antonia’s “Fake” News…a column

The news site of University City High School
Animal Testing Cruel and Unnecessary