Animal Testing Approximately 100,000 to 200,000 animals suffer and die just for cosmetics every year around the world. This includes rabbits guinea pigs, hamsters, rats and mice. Other animals such as dogs and monkeys are never used to test cosmetics anywhere in the world, they are used to test other types of chemicals. Animal testing is very wrong. This type of testing hurts the animals because it’s unnecessary and it’s unethical. Animal testing is very harmful to the animals involved in this type of testing. This type of testing kill hundreds of thousands of animals every year. These animals do not deserve to be treated in this harmful enviornment. Scientists say this type of testing is not very effective or accurate for humans to be using
…show more content…
Animals have rights, just like all humans have rights in any situation. Chemicals do not have a right to harm such innocent animals. Natacha supports cruelty-free cosmetics, which is animal testing that does not harm animals or use animals at all. He states, “People, not chemicals, have the right to be presumed innocent until guilty. People also have the right not to be experimented on without informed consent; no one has ever been given the opportunity to grant or deny their consent before being exposed to the [toxic] burden that contaminates us all” (Natacha). These suffering animals have no right to be treated like this. Scientists do not know what they are doing to these poor animals. There has to be some type of testing without harming these animals. Scientists should be willing to step up and take control of this situation before it turns into something terrible. Certain animal right groups could actually sue these scientists for what they are …show more content…
Unethical means that it is mortally incorrect. These animals are being treated unethical by the scientists and companies that are supporting this type of testing. Alternative testing is still lacking in certain conditions, most companies may only use animal testing to fulfill certain requirements. EU states, “Companies may only use animal tests to fulfill data requirements as a last resort and must submit proposals for animals tests to ECHA for approval. The proposals are then made available for public comment for 45 days before a decision is reached” (EU). This described how unethical this type of testing is, scientists only use the animal to fulfill certain requirements for that test. EU also stated in an earlier article, “The animal protection organizations recently analyzed the success of the project that 50 animal testing proposals were rejected on account of the comments they made. In other cases, they supported companies objecting against certain testing requirements and were successful in at least 50 cases. The organizations estimate that their intervention activity has prevented experiments on 60,000 animals in the last five years” (EU). This statement described how some companies are actually having intervention on this
Animals have rights, just like all humans have rights in any situation. Chemicals do not have a right to harm such innocent animals. Natacha supports cruelty-free cosmetics, which is animal testing that does not harm animals or use animals at all. He states, “People, not chemicals, have the right to be presumed innocent until guilty. People also have the right not to be experimented on without informed consent; no one has ever been given the opportunity to grant or deny their consent before being exposed to the [toxic] burden that contaminates us all” (Natacha). These suffering animals have no right to be treated like this. Scientists do not know what they are doing to these poor animals. There has to be some type of testing without harming these animals. Scientists should be willing to step up and take control of this situation before it turns into something terrible. Certain animal right groups could actually sue these scientists for what they are …show more content…
Unethical means that it is mortally incorrect. These animals are being treated unethical by the scientists and companies that are supporting this type of testing. Alternative testing is still lacking in certain conditions, most companies may only use animal testing to fulfill certain requirements. EU states, “Companies may only use animal tests to fulfill data requirements as a last resort and must submit proposals for animals tests to ECHA for approval. The proposals are then made available for public comment for 45 days before a decision is reached” (EU). This described how unethical this type of testing is, scientists only use the animal to fulfill certain requirements for that test. EU also stated in an earlier article, “The animal protection organizations recently analyzed the success of the project that 50 animal testing proposals were rejected on account of the comments they made. In other cases, they supported companies objecting against certain testing requirements and were successful in at least 50 cases. The organizations estimate that their intervention activity has prevented experiments on 60,000 animals in the last five years” (EU). This statement described how some companies are actually having intervention on this