I don’t know how many cosmetics are tested on animals these days. I think that it upset a lot of people so companies have tried to stop doing it.
The reason they do/did test cosmetics on animals is to check if they will be safe when humans use them. It’s not fair to the animals if they could be hurt by this testing, but the idea is that it is better to test a mascara on a pig and see if the pig goes blind, than to give it straight to humans and have them go blind. Humans are much more likely to sue.
People buy cosmetics – it’s a huge market. We have to know if they are safe. That means testing them before we can buy them.
Some chemicals are known to be bad for you. We already know sulfuric acid shouldn’t go in your eyes, for example. But the stuff in cosmetics is quite complex. There are lots of chemicals. Some of them may be new. So a new red coloured dye might be made and we have to be sure that it’s safe before it goes on lips.
Now what you don’t do is just go up to an animal and start painting its face randomly with lipstick. The tests are done with very small amounts of chemicals first, to check for any effects, and the concentrations are built up. You test skin at very small doses before you start injecting things.
You know what? I’m guessing actually. I know that this is the way we do “Phase I” clinical trials for medicines (not cosmetics) in people – you start dilute, and go more concentrated. Very careful and slow.
But there will be some tests where you have to test at a reasonable level of the chemical. You either use an animal or a person. Or you don’t use any new chemicals and you only use ones that we know are safe already.
There has been a lot of news coverage of this, and the amount of animal testing has gone down a lot, or at least it’s done in a way that minimises any suffering. This is good.
I emotionally understand the need to do animal testing for human medicine. I value the life of a human above the life of an animal (in all cases – I’m trying to think if there are any exceptions) so if testing has to be done, I’d choose an animal rather than a human. It’s important we do as little of this as possible.
For cosmetics, unfortunately there is a huge market for them, and we need to test them. I wish it wasn’t so.
By the way, there are some scientists who work on cosmetics, but the vast majority don’t.
I don’t know how many cosmetics are tested on animals these days. I think that it upset a lot of people so companies have tried to stop doing it.
The reason they do/did test cosmetics on animals is to check if they will be safe when humans use them. It’s not fair to the animals if they could be hurt by this testing, but the idea is that it is better to test a mascara on a pig and see if the pig goes blind, than to give it straight to humans and have them go blind. Humans are much more likely to sue.
0
People buy cosmetics – it’s a huge market. We have to know if they are safe. That means testing them before we can buy them.
Some chemicals are known to be bad for you. We already know sulfuric acid shouldn’t go in your eyes, for example. But the stuff in cosmetics is quite complex. There are lots of chemicals. Some of them may be new. So a new red coloured dye might be made and we have to be sure that it’s safe before it goes on lips.
Now what you don’t do is just go up to an animal and start painting its face randomly with lipstick. The tests are done with very small amounts of chemicals first, to check for any effects, and the concentrations are built up. You test skin at very small doses before you start injecting things.
You know what? I’m guessing actually. I know that this is the way we do “Phase I” clinical trials for medicines (not cosmetics) in people – you start dilute, and go more concentrated. Very careful and slow.
But there will be some tests where you have to test at a reasonable level of the chemical. You either use an animal or a person. Or you don’t use any new chemicals and you only use ones that we know are safe already.
There has been a lot of news coverage of this, and the amount of animal testing has gone down a lot, or at least it’s done in a way that minimises any suffering. This is good.
I emotionally understand the need to do animal testing for human medicine. I value the life of a human above the life of an animal (in all cases – I’m trying to think if there are any exceptions) so if testing has to be done, I’d choose an animal rather than a human. It’s important we do as little of this as possible.
For cosmetics, unfortunately there is a huge market for them, and we need to test them. I wish it wasn’t so.
By the way, there are some scientists who work on cosmetics, but the vast majority don’t.
0