Negative Effects Of Animal Testing

Animal Testing: A Cruel Abuse or Vital Aspect of Research? As technology, medication, and new products are being altered and developed, animal testing labs are growing greatly in size (Casey). The term “animal testing” refers to the experimentation and studies conducted on living animals in the name of science. In fact, it is believed that over 115 million animals each year are being used in laboratory tests (Paterson). The testing, once restricted to only rodents like mice, rats, rabbits, etc., has expanded its research to cats and dogs as well (Paterson). Companies like Proctor and Gamble, for instance, are known for their extensive use of animal testing on their products. Because Proctor and Gamble own many big name makeup brands, household …show more content…
Proctor and Gamble’s mission statement is “working to make every day a little better”, meaning that they strive to make the lives of humans as easy and pleasurable as possible. Proctor and Gamble accomplishes this goal through the distribution and marketing of their popular American household brands. Some examples of these products are: Febreeze, Gillette, Cover Girl, etc.. Proctor and Gamble do, however, admit to using animal testing labs for some of their products such as Cover Girl. According to “uncaged. com” the big name company is known to use “guinea pigs, rabbits, ferrets, rats and mice” in beauty research. They have also reportedly used cats and dogs in dog and cat for animal food related experiments (Sharp). The company argues that the animal testing is used because they place a high standard on their brands, ensuring that only the best and highest quality product is placed on the shelves of their distributors. …show more content…
The most feasible compromise for this situation is to make Proctor and Gamble’s animal testing labs more humane and ethical. PETA could join forces with Proctor and Gamble and educate the company on animal rights and ethical treatment of animals. Perhaps standards and regulations could be put into place that would ensure all animals within Proctor and Gamble’s lab experienced no pain before, during, or after lab testing. In fact, Proctor and Gamble are already making efforts to limit the amount of animal testing that takes place in their company. When asked about the subject of animal testing, Proctor and Gamble stated, “We have achieved a lot, but we still have more work to do” (p&g.com). Since Proctor and Gamble is willing to put forth an effort for change, a compromise with PETA is far from impossible. Though PETA would be compromising their belief that animal testing should be completely eradicated, a positive change would be made in ending animal