Emmi Ferguson

Professor Cynthia Richardson

English 1201

15 March 2019

Annotated Bibliography

My essay will try to answer why some makeup companies still test on animals. Do

humans actually benefit from animal testing? Can makeup be made safe to the public without it?

What are some alternatives to animal testing? I want to find out why some companies continue

doing animal testing while others do not, I also plan to find out what the testing entails and how

it affects the animals afterward.

Admin. “Testing.” ​American Anti-Vivisection Society​, Aavs,

aavs.org/animals-science/how-animals-are-used/testing/.

https://aavs.org/animals-science/how-animals-are-used/testing/

AAVS writes “Testing”. This article lists the different types of testing that are done to

animals and explains them. Eye irritancy tests can determine eye irritation from certain

chemicals. Animals are restrained so they cannot react to the irritation and then chemicals are

placed in one eye, to then be monitored every so often for redness, any bleeding, blindness,

and ulcers in the eye. After the experiment, the animals are often killed. Rabbits are often

used for these tests and their cornea, iris, and conjunctiva is observed. This test can be

unreliable, however, because rabbits’ corneas are different from humans, and the tears we

make are also different. Another test that is conducted is acute toxicity, which is exposing rats
or mice to chemicals by their skin, mouth, and even inhaling it. This way you can see the

dangers of the chemicals but in return poison the animals. These animals can end up losing

motor function, experience seizures, and convulsions. At the end of the experiment, the

animals are killed so an autopsy can be performed to observe the internal damage of the

chemicals. This test can be unreliable because different species react to different chemicals in

different ways. Repeated dose toxicity is similar to acute toxicity but is repeated to see

chronic toxicity and its effects. Skin corrosivity and irritation tests are done to determine if a

chemical can do damage to your skin. It is usually performed on rabbits. A chemical is placed

on a shaved patch of their skin and observed for inflammation, swelling, and itching. Since

human and rabbit skin is very different the data collected from these tests are usually

unhelpful. In skin sensitizations tests, chemicals are placed on the ears of mice to see if an

allergic reaction occurs. Multiple does can be used and the animals are killed after the tests.

Toxicokinetic tests measure the rate of absorption, excretion, metabolism, and the distribution

of toxic chemicals. Animals are feed, injected or forced to inhale the chemicals. Their blood

is taken and the amount of the chemicals in their organs is observed. Liver enzymes of

humans and other animals is different making this test unreliable. In dermal penetration tests,

the movement of chemicals through an animal’s skin and blood is observed. Again the

structure of human skin and other species is so different it makes it difficult to believe the

data is reputable. Mutagenicity experiments include exposing animals to large doses of

chemicals and then observing bone marrow for mutations. This experiment has a couple of

problems: since large doses have to be used it is often an unnatural amount of exposure, and

sometimes the chemicals don’t reach the bone marrow. Carcinogenicity tests use rats and
mice and involve exposing the animals to a chemical for a two year period. After this, the

animals are killed and their organs are observed for the presence of cancer. An important

thing to note about this test: rats are more prone to cancer than humans are. Reproductive and

developmental tests are used to determine the effects of a chemical on the reproduction of an

animal and the effects on the offspring as well. One test includes giving pregnant animals

chemicals orally and just before she is about to give birth she is killed and the fetuses are

examined to see if the chemical has toxic effects on the offspring. The other test involves

exposing the male and female, before mating, to the chemical to see if they are able to

reproduce. This test is usually done in two generations to see the effect on reproduction.

Humans and other species have different reproductive and life cycles, producing too many

variables to get reliable data from these tests. Lastly, neurotoxicity tests determine the effect

of a chemical on the nervous system. Weight and behavior changes are monitored and then

the animal is killed to examine for neurotoxicity.

This article came from the AAVS website. AAVS stands for American Anti-Vivisection

Society which is a non-profit organization trying to limit animal procedures done by cosmetic

and medical groups. The article is very factual and does not contain opinions. This article

targets people who want to learn more about the types of animal testing and how the tests

work.

The purpose of this article is to list the types of animal tests and to explain how each test

is conducted. It lists side effects of the tests, what animals are usually used, and what happens

to the animal afterward. It also states problems with each of the tests and why they might not
be the most reliable. I plan to use this article to explain what types of tests are used by

makeup companies and answer the question of what happens to the animals after the test is

over. In all the tests, the animal is typically euthanized. This article also helps explain why

each test doesn’t produce reliable data.

Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition. “Product Testing - Animal Testing &

Cosmetics.” ​U S Food and Drug Administration Home Page,​ Center for Drug Evaluation

and Research, ​www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ScienceResearch/ProductTesting/ucm072268.htm​.

https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/scienceresearch/producttesting/ucm072268.htm

FDA writes “Product Testing - Animal Testing & Cosmetics.”. ​The article states the FDA

policy for cosmetics and the requirements companies have to follow to make sure their

products are safe and properly labeled for the consumers. The FDA does not require

companies to test on animals to prove they are safe. Its the manufactures job to make sure the

products are safe before they go on sale and the FDA only advises that the manufacturers use

whatever testing is needed to make sure the ingredients and the end product is safe.

Sometimes a manufacturer decides that to ensure safety animal testing is absolutely

necessary. When animal testing is conducted, the FDA encourages using as little animals as

possible, while still getting accurate information, and using the most humane methods that are

currently available.
 This article came from the FDA website. The FDA is a federal agency of the U.S. and is

responsible for health and human services It strictly states the policy; no opinions are used.

The article targets people that want to be informed about FDA regulations on animal testing. I

plan to use this article to show that as of now the FDA neither requires or bans the testing on

animals. I will also use it to outline the guidelines that manufacturers of cosmetics have to

follow when creating and selling products.

“Costs of Animal and Non-Animal Testing.” ​Humane Society International,​

www.hsi.org/issues/chemical_product_testing/facts/time_and_cost.html.

“Experiments on Animals: Overview.” ​PETA,​ PETA, 9 Nov. 2018,

www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/animals-used-experimentation-fact

sheets/animal-experiments-overview/​.

https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/animals-used-experimenta

tion-factsheets/animal-experiments-overview/

PETA writes “Experiments on Animals: Overview.”. The article states that animal testing

is often unreliable, not helpful, and a waste of animal lives. Diseases found in animals are not the

same found in humans. The human species and the other species being tested on differ vastly, so

it is unlikely that these experiments will provide data that is helpful at all. Dr. Richard Klausner,

a former director at the National cancer institute states that they have already been able to cure

cancer in mice, but for humans, they could not. It just doesn’t work the same way. At least 85

HIV/AIDS vaccines have worked to protect monkey from the disease, they have all failed on
humans. 99% of the animals used in testing are rats, mice, birds, amphibians, and reptiles. All of

these animals are not included in the Animal Welfare Act of 1966, which regulates animal

treatment in research and experimentation. Some laboratories that use only the species listed

above don’t have to provide the animals with vet care, provide pain relief, search for alternative

means or be regulated by the USDA. This leaves these institutions extremely unregulated.

This article came from the PETA website. PETA is an organization that has over 5

million supporters. PETA encourages ethical treatment of all animals and defends their rights. It

is the largest pro-animal rights organization in the world. In the article, there are 29 sources listed

to back up the information stated in the article.

The purpose of this article is to show why animal testing might not be the most accurate,

and how unregulated it really is. I will use this article to provide specific examples of studies that

prove why animal testing is not always accurate. It will also show what animals in these tests are

not protected and sometimes not given the proper care due to lack of regulations.

Nakamura, Motoki, et al. “Alternative Test Models for Skin Ageing Research.” ​Experimental

Dermatology,​ U.S. National Library of Medicine, May 2018,

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29478289​.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29478289

Nakamura writes “Alternative Test models for Skin Ageing Research”. The article states

that in regards to skin and cosmetics, animal testing not only poses ethical problems but also
economic, scientific, and reliability problems as well. Some alternative methods to animal testing

include: biochemical, two and three-dimensional cell cultures, silico skin models simulations,

and genome research. These alternatives still have limitations though but will only get better in

the future as science continues to develop.

This is an academic article I found on the Sinclair library. It is targetted towards people

that are doing research on alternatives to animal tests or people of higher education that just want

to learn about it. The purpose of this article is to discuss problems with animal testing and show

alternatives that scientists have been working on. I plan to use this article to shows the problems

and limitations of both methods. Science still has limitations on non-animal tests, therefore,

animal testing still takes place.

“Testing Cosmetics and Household Products on Animals.” ​PETA,​ PETA, 21 Feb. 2019,

www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/cosmetic-household-products-ani

mal-testing/​.

https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/cosmetic-household-produ

cts-animal-testing/

PETA writes “Testing Cosmetics and Household Products on Animals.”. The

article states that ​there are many alternatives to animal testing and even though other

countries are starting to use these alternative methods, the United States still has demands

by U.S. environmental groups for these animal tests. Alternative tests include growing

human skin cultures and 3D cornea tissue to test the chemicals on. Some of these
 non-animal tests are quicker, less expensive and very reliable. These environmental

organizations seem to dismiss this science and still call for testing the products on living

things.

This article came from the PETA website. PETA is an organization that has over

5 million supporters. PETA encourages ethical treatment of all animals and defends their

rights. It is the largest pro-animal rights organization in the world. This article is for

people who want to learn about alternatives to animal testing and why it is still prelavent

in the U.S. I plan to use this article to show some alternatives to animals testing and why

the demand for these tests in the U.S.

Thomason, H, and D J S Montagnes. “Developing a Quick and Inexpensive in Vitro

(Non-Animal) Bioassay for Mascara Irritation.” ​International Journal of Cosmetic

Science,​ U.S. National Library of Medicine, Apr. 2014,

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24251684​.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24251684

Thomason writes “Developing a Quick and Inexpensive in Vitro (Non-Animal) Bioassay

for Mascara Irritation.”. The article states that mascara often irritates peoples’ eyes and because

of that has to be tested on animals to predict the irritation. The unreliability that animal testing

has, calls for in vitro testing. Six random mascaras were observed against a certain treatment for

the changes in ciliated protozoan growth rates. This study helped establish the groundwork for
these studies to be done. It also proved there is a quick and cheaper way to assess mascara

without using animals.

This is an academic article I found on the Sinclair library. It is targetted towards people

that are doing research on non-animal tests for cosmetics or people with higher education that

want to learn about it. The purpose of the article is to show that non-animal tests are developing

and can be done quickly and inexpensively. I plan to use this article as an example of a

non-animal test for cosmetics that can be performed quickly and still stay in budget.

Wischhover, Cheryl. “Why the U.S. Won't Ban Cosmetics Animal Testing Anytime Soon.”

Fashionista​, Fashionista, 30 Jan. 2015,

fashionista.com/2015/01/us-cosmetics-animal-testing-ban.

https://fashionista.com/2015/01/us-cosmetics-animal-testing-ban

Wischover writes “Why the U.S. Won't Ban Cosmetics Animal Testing Anytime Soon.”.

The article states that ​there are many cons to animals testing. It is expensive, can be

imprecise, and lastly makes consumers mad. As far as non-animal testing goes they can

replicate skin and eye irritation, phototoxicity, and skin erosion as alternatives. The main

reason however that animal testing still takes place is that there are no tests that can determine

whether a chemical causes cancer or is harmful when inhaled. Harvard, however, is working

on artificial lungs that could solve this problem in the future. Another problem with

non-animal testing is that new innovative products could be delayed. Other countries are

moving away from animal testing. How are they able to do this? In Europe, there are over

11,000 chemicals that are safe to use in products. They know they are safe because they were
tested on animals in the past and are now verified safe. A brand can use the ingredients on this

list and call themselves cruelty-free even though they were tested on animals at some point in

the past. Animal testing is banned from cosmetics in Europe but can still be used in chemical

industries, pharmaceuticals, and manufacturing. Ingredients tested in pharmaceuticals can be

taken and used in cosmetics to easily get around this ban.

The author of this article is a writer and editor who has written for a plethora of beauty

websites. She was also a nurse practitioner at a clinic for pediatric oncology and bone marrow

transplant. She provided links in the article to back up her claims. This article is targetted

towards people that want to know why the U.S. hasn’t banned animal testing in cosmetics.

The purpose of this article is to tell why the U.S. won’t ban cosmetic animal testing. It

also shows that while other countries are starting the ban it in cosmetics, it’s still taking place

in other areas and might not be as good as it seems. I plan to use this article to show the

reasons why animal testing still occurs and explain how the ban in other countries has many

loopholes and can easily be manipulated.