Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Discuss how to take action in helping wildlife and the environment.

Moderators: paperpaws, Isela

Post Reply
Croix
Former WQ Moderator
Posts: 2330
Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:09 am
Gender: Female

Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by Croix » Tue Apr 10, 2012 9:00 am

Hidden Ingredient: Animal Suffering
Since cosmetic and household products and ingredients are not required to be tested on animals and since non-animal alternatives exist, it is difficult to understand why companies continue to conduct these cruel tests. Institutional inertia seems to be at work, caused in part by technicians, researchers, and industry legal departments who blindly cling to the customary but outdated methods of the past.

It is important to understand that some companies make misleading claims about this complicated issue. A company that tests on animals may claim it no longer uses the Draize test, when in fact a very similar, equally cruel test is being performed under a different name. Also, some companies publicize that they have put large amounts of money into efforts to find alternatives to animal testing. However, viable humane alternatives already exist and are being used by hundreds of companies to make safe and effective cosmetic and household products.

Cosmetics and household product companies kill millions of animals every year in pursuit of profit. Product tests are performed on items from shampoo to laundry detergents. The animals who suffer and die in these laboratories range from rabbits to mice. According to companies that perform such tests, they are done to establish the safety of products and ingredients. However, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC)--which regulates products such as detergents and cleaners--does not require animal testing, nor does the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) require animal testing for cosmetics. In reality, many viable non-animal tests exist.


The Tests
The Draize Eye Irritancy Test is used to evaluate the ability of a test substance to cause damage to the tissues of the eye. Liquid, flake, granule and powdered substances are placed into the eyes of conscious rabbits. In a typical test, six to nine rabbits are held in stocks from which only their heads protrude so that they cannot dislodge the substance with a paw. Rabbits do not have tear ducts to clean the irritants away and they cannot blink their eyes for relief because clips are holding their eyes open. The rabbits often scream when the substance is applied and sometimes break their necks or backs in their efforts to escape the pain. They usually receive no anesthesia during the tests.

Reactions to the substances include swollen eyelids, inflamed irises, ulceration, bleeding, massive deterioration and blindness. When the test is done, the animals are killed or "recycled" into further tests, such as dermal toxicity tests.

Skin irritancy tests, such as the Draize 24-hour Patch Test and Dermal Toxicity tests, are conducted on rabbits, guinea pigs and other animals. The process involves placing chemicals on the animals' raw, shaved skin and covering the skin with adhesive plaster. The animals are immobilized in restraining devices to prevent them from struggling while laboratory workers apply the chemicals, which burn into the animals' skin.

Acute toxicity tests, commonly called Lethal Dose (LD) or poisoning tests, determine the amount of a substance that will kill part of a group of test animals. Animals are forced to ingest substances through stomach tubes, inhale substances as a vapor spray, have substances injected or have substances applied directly to exposed skin. Animals' reactions to toxicity tests include convulsions, vomiting, diarrhea, paralysis and bleeding from the eyes, nose, mouth or rectum. Sub-acute tests can last 28-90 days or longer. In chronic tests, animals are dosed daily for up to two years. To avoid interference with results, no painkillers are used.

Animal tests do not predict antidotes for product toxicity and do not keep toxic substances off the market. The LD tests do not accurately measure human health hazards. They only determine that the product is toxic to the animal it was tested on. In 1986, the industry-funded Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing stated, "The Draize test does not adequately reflect the degree of irritancy in humans." Moreover, LD test results can be affected by the age and gender of animals tested, their housing and nutritional conditions, temperature, and the exact method used to administer the substance. Also, different species react differently to various substances.


Alternatives to Animal Testing Exist
Non-animal tests that are more reliable and less expensive do exist. Alternatives to animals include the following: use of cell cultures, corneal and skin tissue cultures, corneas from eye banks, and sophisticated computer and mathematical models.

Companies can also use ingredients or combinations of ingredients that have already been proven safe by the Cosmetics, Toiletry and Fragrance Association, or use natural ingredients that are already known to be safe.

Since cosmetic and household products and ingredients are not required to be tested on animals and since alternatives exist, it is difficult to understand why companies continue to conduct these cruel tests. Institutional inertia seems to be at work, caused in part by technicians, researchers and industry legal departments that blindly cling to the customary but outdated methods of the past.

It is important to understand that some companies make misleading claims about this complicated issue. A company that tests on animals may claim it no longer uses the Draize test, when in fact a very similar, equally cruel test is being performed under a different name. Also, some companies publicize they have put large amounts of money into efforts to find alternatives to animal testing. However, humane alternatives already exist and are being used by hundreds of companies to make safe and effective cosmetic household products.


What you can do
1. Buy only cruelty-free products. Get in the habit of checking the backs of product labels to find out what company makes the product you are buying and look for statements that the product was not tested on animals. Encourage your friends and family members to support humane companies, as well.

2. Call and write any companies that currently test products on animals. Let them know you will not purchase their products until they adopt corporate policies against animal testing. Most companies have toll-free 800 numbers that you can call at the company’s expense!

3. Write letters to the editors of your local newspapers and weekly newspapers. Find a listing of all U.S. newspapers at: www.usnpl.com. Make sure to let us know if your letter gets printed. Below is a sample, though using your own words is strongly encouraged. For tips on effective letter-writing, visit: http://www.idausa.org/ir/activist/makenews.html#10.
Source: http://pandgkills.com/facts/cosmetic_testing.html

A comprehensive list of companies that are cruetly-free is available at http://www.leapingbunny.org/.
Curious to see which companies test on animals? Visit http://rabbitrecommended.com/2012/01/06 ... n-animals/.
Just a few large, well-known companies on that list...
  • Aveeno (Johnson & Johnson)
    Banana Boat Suncare (Playtext Products)
    Band-Aid (Johnson & Johnson)
    Covergirl cosmetics (Proctor & Gamble)
    Dove (Unilever)
    Garnier (L’Oreal)
    Gillette Co. (Proctor & Gamble)
    Iams Pet Food (Proctor & Gamble)
    Neutrogena (Johnson & Johnson)
    Pledge (S.C. Johnson)
    TRESemme (Unilever)
    Windex (S.C. Johnson)
Any of those names sound familiar to you? Do you happen to use any of their products?

User avatar
Khia 112
Pup
Pup
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Jan 12, 2012 10:21 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Avatar - Lupinz Signature - Emberflare

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by Khia 112 » Thu Apr 12, 2012 8:10 pm

Band-Aids are tested on animals...?! Oh my gosh. I'll probably never use a band-aid again.
Neutrogena sounds familiar, as does Windex, although I don't think I've used either. AND apparently my deoderant is tested on animals. O:<
However, I'll definitely be more careful when shopping lately.

I have always despised the very thought of animal testing. Simply because animals cannot speak with words does not in any way mean that they don't have emotions, feelings, or thoughts just like we do.
......................'..Rain, rain, go away
.....................Come again another day
...............All the world is waiting for the sun
.......................To lie here under you
.......................Is all I could ever do ♥

Av/Sig: LupinzPack/Emberflare

User avatar
Alpha Female
Former WQ Moderator
Posts: 6112
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 6:00 pm
Name: Kali
Gender: Female
Location: Living the dream
Contact:

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by Alpha Female » Thu Apr 12, 2012 8:22 pm

As a general reminder to anyone interested in posting on this thread, please try to avoid "humans are bad, let's save the animals" type comments, thanks!

Anyways, I try to buy only cruelty-free products, though my mom's more about buying whatever's easiest to get at. xD I adore using products from my local body shop which say they don't test on animals. ^^
SOMETIMES
A KING
HAS TO REMIND
FOOLS WHY HE'S
K I N G

Avatar (c) April
~WolfQuest member since 1969~

User avatar
Edme1
Sub-adult Wolf
Sub-adult Wolf
Posts: 681
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2012 4:47 pm
Gender: Female
Location: SUMMON THY WARHAMMER OF ZILLYHOO
Contact:

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by Edme1 » Tue Jun 19, 2012 9:07 am

I felt my throat ache when I read that first article. :cry: I buy Tom's of Maine toothpaste, which says that they don't use animal cruelty to test their products. I can't believe that some companies would do that just for the money for their products! :evil:
Bustin' makes me feel good~

"Advance or a8scond!"

♋ ♈ ♉ ♊ ♌ ♍ ♎ ♏ ♐ ♑ ♒ ♓

http://blueranyk.deviantart.com/
Av from Homestuck

User avatar
WolvesOfTheSeas
Adult Wolf
Adult Wolf
Posts: 1046
Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 5:08 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Twilight Breaking Dawn. Chapter 21, Page 258.
Contact:

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by WolvesOfTheSeas » Tue Jun 19, 2012 4:26 pm

Interesting thread croix this might be very helpful for animals but not for humans quite interesting thanks for sharing worldwide
Thanks Wolf Thief for the avvie! I love it! Ill be stalking you c:

STAY OUT MY MIRROR, STAY OUT OF MY WAY

User avatar
paperpaws
WolfQuest Moderator
WolfQuest Moderator
Posts: 4420
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by paperpaws » Thu Jun 28, 2012 1:05 pm

Adding on; leapingbunny has a pretty accessible shopping list here as well:

http://www.gocrueltyfree.org/shopper

I tend to avoid products when I know they have been tested on animals, but my parents don't seem to bother much and just buy whatever they deem practical. It would be nice to have a little more clarity in the actual supermarkets and on the actual products whether there has been tested on animals or not.
wyrd bið ful aræd
traveling 03.08 - 18.08 - limited availability.
for questions and concerns, please reach out to another moderator.

Sintact
Guest
Guest

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by Sintact » Fri Aug 03, 2012 10:47 am

Curiously, most vaccines (if not all) that have saved mankind have been tested first in animals and then applied in humans. For the simple fact that many of the diseases we are affected by, at some point are mutated genetics from animals. Most of us vaccinate at least once a year; it's curious the debate that starts from "A life that scarifies for the many that are saved". I'm sure most of people will think like that, not worrying about the couple lives that perished, in a time of need.

Now, cosmetics are not necessary for mankind and a lot of suffering could be avoided. This issue is just wrong.

User avatar
paperpaws
WolfQuest Moderator
WolfQuest Moderator
Posts: 4420
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by paperpaws » Fri Apr 06, 2018 7:47 am

For those of you interested in cruelty-free make-up, this has been my go-to frequently updated overview of which brands do not test on animals. Whoever has compiled this has gone through the lengths of indicating whether the companies are owned by a non-cruelty-free parent company for those who want to avoid spending money on those altogether. There are also a few brands on here that are 100% vegan, which is neat.

https://www.crueltyfreekitty.com/list-o ... ee-brands/

Some of my personal favourites are Catrice and Kiko Milano (for cheaper brands) and Kat von D (for slightly more pricey stuff). I've dabbled in Barry M but mainly like their mascaras and foundations due to them being pretty light-coverage and "natural"-looking; something I can't seem to get from other brands. E.L.F. is pretty neat price/quality wise, but no longer available in The Netherlands, so I did not get the chance to try out a lot of their products. I can vouch for their primers, though.

I have yet to find a satisfactory cruelty-free shampoo. If any of you happen to have any recommendations (most preferably reasonably priced ones), I'm all ears.

The same website has a list of companies that do test on animals here: https://www.crueltyfreekitty.com/compan ... n-animals/
wyrd bið ful aræd
traveling 03.08 - 18.08 - limited availability.
for questions and concerns, please reach out to another moderator.

User avatar
Dj SheepWolf
Hunter-in-training
Hunter-in-training
Posts: 212
Joined: Sat Jun 28, 2014 3:13 pm
Name: Massa
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by Dj SheepWolf » Wed May 16, 2018 8:11 am

  • I've read an article about that. They were also doing an petition to send the UN. It would be interesting if everyone could sign.
http://www.foreveragainstanimaltesting.com/
The campaign consists of a global petition with the aim of banning animal testing for cosmetic purposes by 2020.
-
When 8 million signatures are obtained in the petition, The Body Shop and Cruelty Free International will submit the petition to the UN, claiming an international convention.
Avatar by LupinzPack

My Artworks Shop
My DeviantART

•°•°•°•∞|•·×±×·•|∞•°•°•°•
Maybe it was all in my mind,
But why should that mean
It is not real?
•°•°•°•∞|•·×±×·•|∞•°•°•°•
Sig × Black Burn
──────────────────
FIRE VALLEY PACK
ʜᴇʀᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ɴᴏᴡ - ᴛʜᴇʀᴇ ᴀɴᴅ ᴛʜᴇɴ
ᴀ ꜱᴛʀᴏɴɢ ᴘᴀᴄᴋ ᴡᴇ'ᴠᴇ ᴀʟᴡᴀʏꜱ ʙᴇᴇɴ
──────────────────
,---------------,
| Coca-Cola |,,|"""\,__,
| _________ |,,||_|_ ||)
/(@)(@)**/(@)***/(@)

User avatar
Writers Block
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:00 pm
Name: Mika, Lynx
Gender: Female

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by Writers Block » Wed May 16, 2018 9:46 am

paperpaws wrote:I have yet to find a satisfactory cruelty-free shampoo. If any of you happen to have any recommendations (most preferably reasonably priced ones), I'm all ears.
I use Mane N Tail shampoo/conditioner, which doesn't test on animals according to its site FAQ? Considering that the brand is originally for use on animals I'm sure they did at one point, but it sounds like the company (Straight Arrow) doesn't do that anymore. I'm not sure how it compares in terms of price since I've been using it for so long that I don't really look at the other shampoos when I go to buy it, but I think I remember doing the math once and decided that it may be more expensive, but since there's more shampoo per bottle it ends up equaling out. Don't quote me on that though xP EDIT-- I had to run some errands so I decided to check while I was out. At my local CVS, one bottle (32 ounces) was around 8$, and at the grocery store it was about 5.50$ (that seems unusually to me low though, I think there was a sale of some kind going on) while 8$ IS more expensive than almost every other brand they were selling, there's more volume per bottle, and after checking against some other brands I used to use (head and shoulders, fructis, etc) Mane N Tail consistently had more shampoo per dollar than the other brands. So while it is more expensive up front, it's actually a better deal overall! I don't use it all that often (I condition about once a week and I don't shampoo unless I'm really sweaty or rolled around in dirt or something) but one bottle easily lasts me around 6 months if not more.

It's very gentle, and it always makes my hair feel very soft and smell really nice. I've used it when washing horses as well, and it always makes their coast so soft and shiny! I definitely recommend it!

(I'm not sure if there's a difference between "cruelty-free" and "no animal testing", so sorry if I've misinterpreted your question!!)
we are not history yet.
we are happening now.
how miraculous is that?
avvie©mute
quote©wtnv

User avatar
paperpaws
WolfQuest Moderator
WolfQuest Moderator
Posts: 4420
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:44 pm
Contact:

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by paperpaws » Wed May 16, 2018 12:04 pm

Oh, hey! Thanks for the in-depth response! I actually finally found a good cruelty-free/non-tested (I do use them interchangeably ;D) shampoo finally - a brand called Petal Fresh - but to my surprise Mane N Tail is available over here too and that looks pretty good. It's definitely pricier over here though; over twice from what you pay at some retailers.

Honestly so glad my struggle for a good untested shampoo is finally over, and having options to choose from would be even better. So far I'm in love with the Petal Fresh shampoo as the lavender one fits right in with all of my preferences in terms of scent and purpose, but I think I'll definitely give the Mane N Tail one a shot sometime as I'm reading good things about it.
Dj SheepWolf wrote:
  • I've read an article about that. They were also doing an petition to send the UN. It would be interesting if everyone could sign.
http://www.foreveragainstanimaltesting.com/
The campaign consists of a global petition with the aim of banning animal testing for cosmetic purposes by 2020.
-
When 8 million signatures are obtained in the petition, The Body Shop and Cruelty Free International will submit the petition to the UN, claiming an international convention.
The only issue with "banning cosmetic animal testing" is the loopholes companies can still find. The fact that The Body Shop is involved in the petition is a bit of a red flag for me as well, as they are owned by L'Oréal who have been super shady about their animal testing policies since forever.
wyrd bið ful aræd
traveling 03.08 - 18.08 - limited availability.
for questions and concerns, please reach out to another moderator.

User avatar
DaniBeez
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 432
Joined: Fri Jul 28, 2017 8:15 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by DaniBeez » Wed May 16, 2018 1:31 pm

I support research and development testing on animals, so I guess I support cosmetic applications too, since those fields overlap. Right now I don't actively look at product labels for animal testing statements.

In general though, I think backlash from the public has influenced the trend where some companies (as this topic shows) move away from non-human animal testing, which I don't have much issue with. It's similar to the current hysteria around GMOs and organic products (the latter I think is a marketing scam based on lack of genetic literacy and disagreement on what actually constitutes a GMO).
_
__
Avatar by LupinzPack

User avatar
Writers Block
Senior Member
Senior Member
Posts: 2327
Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 9:00 pm
Name: Mika, Lynx
Gender: Female

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by Writers Block » Wed May 16, 2018 5:05 pm

paperpaws wrote:Oh, hey! Thanks for the in-depth response! I actually finally found a good cruelty-free/non-tested (I do use them interchangeably ;D) shampoo finally - a brand called Petal Fresh - but to my surprise Mane N Tail is available over here too and that looks pretty good. It's definitely pricier over here though; over twice from what you pay at some retailers.

Honestly so glad my struggle for a good untested shampoo is finally over, and having options to choose from would be even better. So far I'm in love with the Petal Fresh shampoo as the lavender one fits right in with all of my preferences in terms of scent and purpose, but I think I'll definitely give the Mane N Tail one a shot sometime as I'm reading good things about it.
Oh no, I never considered that it would be so much pricier in other countries!! I'm glad you found a brand that works though! It sounds very delicious and like it would smell wonderful; I've never heard of it before so it doesn't seem like it's sold near me (at least in the stores I normally go to when I want to buy shampoo) but maybe I'll try to get some sometime and see how I like it!
we are not history yet.
we are happening now.
how miraculous is that?
avvie©mute
quote©wtnv

User avatar
alebrije
Yearling
Yearling
Posts: 476
Joined: Sat Jan 09, 2010 12:17 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Missouri
Contact:

Re: Cosmetic Testing on Animals

Post by alebrije » Sun Feb 03, 2019 4:07 pm

When I was younger, I had little idea product testing was done on animals. As I’ve come to grow older from the first moment I learned the fact, I was sickened with how much of those products I had in my home. Luckily now I know to do my research on all the brands and off-brand products that will not only benefit myself, but save an animal from the cruelty it may suffer from testing.

Post Reply

Return to “Take Action”