Controversial ways of thinking run rampant through our media. One of the many topics that fall under this category is the justification for animal testing — as if it could ever be justified.
Profitable companies including Mr. Clean, Johnson & Johnson, L’Oreal, Aquaphor, Arm & Hammer, Axe, Balenciaga and many others either conduct animal testing or allow their suppliers or third parties to do such testing before they put their products on the shelves.
Why would the makers of cleaning products, makeup, body fragrances and other products need to conduct such inhumane acts on animals that can’t even defend themselves? Animal testing shouldn’t be relied on when products are being readied for use by humans.
The Animal Welfare Act signed by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1966 is enforced by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. It ensures the safekeeping, transportation, selling and handling of “cats, dogs, rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs, and nonhuman primates.”
While the safety of these animals is being enforced, they are still being used within inhumane and sometimes unsanitary laboratories. They are being kept in small wire cages as they wait for their next life-changing experiment.
While amendments to the Animal Welfare Act have improved conditions for these animals, it’s not enough. For example, some animals, like mice and rats, aren’t even protected by this law and are used frequently for animal testing. Animals used for testing are either bred to be experimented on, or they are taken from their natural habitat.
Where does the ideology of animals not feeling pain come from? This is completely outrageous! Just because they aren’t human doesn’t mean they can’t feel pain. The pain receptors in humans and animals subjected to testing work in very similar ways.
There are some situations in which animal testing can be justified. Research on animal biology and illness is different, and that kind of testing does have a place within society.
However, animal testing should not be used for clothing, beauty products, household items or fragrances.
Yes, there are some tests that are required by the Food and Drug Administration. For example, the Draize eye test — commonly done with albino rabbits as the subject — is used to determine whether a product or chemical would cause injury to the human eye.
However, some of these required tests were devised decades ago and should be adapted or modernized in order to cause less harm to the animal test subjects.
While some might argue that animals can be used for medical research, not all of these experiments are accurate. Some studies using monkeys as test subjects to find a way to cure or suppress the AIDS virus have had successes with monkey subjects that were not transferable to human subjects.
According to Faunalytics, a nonprofit that advocates on behalf of animals, the federal government spends almost $15 billion per year on animal testing, with only 10% of the research benefiting humans. Some of this money is coming from tax dollars, and this money could be better spent protecting the citizens of the United States.
Rabbits, hamsters, cats, dogs, chimpanzees and other animals endure the exploitation of animal testing daily, with little benefit to the public. Must we really force such defenseless creatures to endure such suffering? Only in rare instances are there valid reasons for such cruelty. This harm to animals must stop.
Kiey Heist is in the 10th grade at Warwick High School.
