The usage of cosmetic products between people is increasing rapidly in the modern world. The problem is how do we know the products are not dangerous for humans? Big cosmetic companies around the world such as MAC and Sephora cosmetics are using animals to test their make-up and beauty’s materials. Animal testing is a kind of animal cruelty and abuse because by injecting chemicals into their bodies, their lives are put in danger and most of the animals end up dying. Each year about 100 million animals are used in the United States’ laboratories for biology, medical, and cosmetics testing (U.S Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service). By using animals as testing objects, the cosmetics’ labs are treating these living
…show more content…
As it is said in Lush’s website, “The annual 250,000 prize fund was awarded to scientists, campaigners, lobbyists, training specialists and young researchers working to replace animal testing with methods that are both more humane and more effective.” The campaign believes besides working in groups, the individuals can have effective voice in the public mind. It is a source of encouragement and inspire the young minds to put more work toward developments in non-animal testing process. By the new techniques, it is proven that they have superior compare to old usage of animals. In an article written by Pfuhler, S, Fautz, R, all etc. they argue the fact that “The “3D skin model” project aimed to develop and validate a new assay incorporating the use of human reconstructed skin (RS) models with the genotoxicity endpoints, MN and Comet assays. Since the exposure of many compounds is dermal, especially for cosmetics, these models better reflect their in use conditions” ( ). Applying the products on a live cell of human’s skin is much more effective because that cell represents how exactly humans would react to the products. It is a closer model of a person than animals like rats, mice or even chimpanzees that are known to have the same body structure as
As it is said in Lush’s website, “The annual 250,000 prize fund was awarded to scientists, campaigners, lobbyists, training specialists and young researchers working to replace animal testing with methods that are both more humane and more effective.” The campaign believes besides working in groups, the individuals can have effective voice in the public mind. It is a source of encouragement and inspire the young minds to put more work toward developments in non-animal testing process. By the new techniques, it is proven that they have superior compare to old usage of animals. In an article written by Pfuhler, S, Fautz, R, all etc. they argue the fact that “The “3D skin model” project aimed to develop and validate a new assay incorporating the use of human reconstructed skin (RS) models with the genotoxicity endpoints, MN and Comet assays. Since the exposure of many compounds is dermal, especially for cosmetics, these models better reflect their in use conditions” ( ). Applying the products on a live cell of human’s skin is much more effective because that cell represents how exactly humans would react to the products. It is a closer model of a person than animals like rats, mice or even chimpanzees that are known to have the same body structure as