Animal Testing, and Why "Cruelty-Free" Doesn't Actually Exist.

Aug 12, 2014

Jenna M.

I hope you guys realize how truly dangerous this thread is. Someone young who reads this might be scared to go to the hospital when they truly need help.

Aug 12, 2014

Shaye M.

Lol kitty, I could go with a burger right now. 😔😂

Aug 12, 2014

Ciciii C.

I support it. 50/50 Lol actually everything in this world is tested. So why won't they test on the animals? I still love this thread.And btw Emily were you working as a doctor or a scientist? How you know so much?

Aug 12, 2014

Amanda V.

Amen Kitty! I love animals to death, and the thought of animal testing breaks my heart. But I do eat meat, so that would be hypocritical of me to preach cruelty free.

And at the end of the day, it's not just makeup that's tested on animals. It's every single cosmetic product in addition to many household items.

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Ari: I acknowledged the history of medical testing as not being as squeaky clean as it should be (many atrocities have been committed in the name of research). The Alabama Syphilis experiments are a prime example of medical testing that was completely unethical. Cosmetics testing history is not as scandalous. What I meant was that in the last several decades, there has been a significant clamp-down on human testing, in both cosmetics and pharmaceuticals/medical research.

The standards I refer to are well-defined and widely accepted, as well as highly regulated both by government oversight as well as institutional oversight. Here are some excellent resources to read about these rules, if anyone is curious:

- A presentation from Columbia University regarding the legal and ethical regulations of human-subject experimentation: http://researchethics.cumc.columbia.edu/Larson-RulesofHumanExperimentation.pdf

- The National Institutes of Health (US) Research Involving Human Subjects portal: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/policy/hs/index.htm

Aug 12, 2014

Ciciii C.

@Jenna We , anyone who in this thread , was never having a discussion on how the hospitals are. They're not bad. I just think you have to be aware...

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Ciera: I am not a doctor (yet), but I do consider myself a scientist. I am a university student with an AA in physical anthropology (concentration in archaeology), which included fundamentals of scientific research, osteology and human pathology, lithic analysis, art history, psychology, chemistry (both organic and inorganic), and I was minoring in food science (which covers chemistry of everything ingestible, as well as ingredients that are added to both food as well as many other consumer products such as dyes, preservatives, flavoring, amino acids, etc.). Currently I am enrolled in a business program (due to health issues that caused me to change career paths) but I retain access to academic resources such as textbooks, journals, databases, and lectures. I frequently reference these resources in my posts on Beautylish. :)

Edit to add:
Regarding Hospitals and Doctors (I can't help myself, I have to respond since others are talking about it): Not all doctors are going to look out for the best interests of their patients, just like any other profession. They are humans, and are subject to the same human failings that make all that is evil in this world possible. Whether through greed and malicious intent, fatigue, or simple human error, they are not infallible.

Every patient has the responsibility to manage their own care. Research medications, and understand what they do. If possible, figure out HOW they do what they do in the body. Learn the side effects, and what to do if they occur. Most importantly, think critically. Weigh the pros and cons of everything (medications, procedures, etc.) and make an informed decision. Seek second (or third) opinions. Be an active participant in your healthcare (this is ESPECIALLY true if you have chronic conditions or multiple ailments that are being managed by different specialists). 

Aug 12, 2014

Ciciii C.

Emily no wonder your smart. Keep a open mind to everything. My aunt and grandmother are doctors. There's some stuff that they lie about.

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Ciera: Aww thanks hon. I'm just a huge nerd really. I definitely have an open mind, that's why I research stuff so much.

I am a firm advocate of empirical evidence over anecdote, and scientific principle over emotional thinking, psychology (placebo effect), and theological/spiritual belief. While those things may be helpful in certain situations, they can be very dangerous when they interfere with necessary medical treatment or when they guide people into making dangerous choices (herbal "remedies" that cause harm, or worse: refusing medical treatment/preventative care for dependents, especially children, because of a "belief" of the guardian). The opposite can be equally dangerous: blindly adhering to the word of medical professionals without any critical thought can cause problems as well.

Edit to Add: (I really should stop hitting post before I'm done thinking...)
I also note the importance of recognizing personal biases. In the interest of being honest, I will admit mine here so that it is obvious how my perceptions can influence my comments here. I am biased against theology because I have seen it lead loved ones into personal harm. I am also an atheist, which can color my view of religious ideas/solutions to problems as unfavorable. Psychologically, I lack empathy (to get technical, I am what is clinically referred to as a sociopath) which can make it hard for me to understand others' emotional states as well as take their feelings into account. [Y'all should feel privileged right now, I VERY RARELY mention that to anyone because of the strong negative stigma attached to it. Not all sociopaths are serial killers or criminals folks. We're just average people who see the world a little differently.] I have a strongly academic background, which lends itself to skepticism and being critical as well as detail-oriented; I cannot accept an idea on blind faith and I will not defend an idea/product/procedure without documentation of it's worth). I am a hunter and I was raised on a farm, so I feel that animals are not equals with humans and I have no issues using animals for purposes (labor, food, animal testing, animal hides for clothing, etc.).

I'm sure there are others, but I don't want to bore you (if you're even still reading this, haha). These are the major influences on my responses on Beautylish, so take my comments as you will based on this information. Sorry for the book.

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

I will mention though, I try to be as objective as possible and cite documented information whenever I can. I'm happy to provide articles from reputable journals to back up my claims or to supplement a discussion whenever someone asks. I'm also willing to search for information for you if you do not have access to academic databases (they can be very expensive), just ask. :)

Aug 12, 2014

R B.

Kitty k. You said it as it is!! I agree.
Ari g. I will also mention that part of the reason I'm able to post answers today is because of animal testing.

Aug 12, 2014

Caitriona H.

Animal testing makes me feel horrible because it reminds me how much humans torture and use these poor creatures for our whims. Animals, nature, you know what the whole planet would be so much better if the human race didn't exist. We are horrible creatures and we seem to just be getting worse :(

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

I've never understood the whole "humans shouldn't exist" argument. We're animals too, and part of the ecosystem. Yes, we are particularly destructive, but we are not the only species that devastates. All animals "use" other animals in some form. That's the natural system. Symbioses and parasitism.

Humans evolved eating and using animals. We hunted, used hides and bones and various other animal products from the very beginning. Our unique capacity for rational thought is what separates us from other species and has lead to us claiming the top of the ecological chain. Saying that humans shouldn't exist invalidates nature itself, which produced us as a species.

Aug 12, 2014

Rissa G.

Interesting thread.
I have to agree with Kitty, though.. As much as I love animals, I do eat meat and have purchased products tested on them. It's sad but I don't know..it's not worth being so paranoid about everything.

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Renay: I agree. Taking the weight of the world, the guilt of the entire human race and all of human history, upon oneself is just not worth it. All it does is cause unnecessary stress on oneself.

Aug 12, 2014

Caitriona H.

As for the doctors, I'm not a fan of doctors but I wouldn't ever recommend not going to one. I do have a few tips when dealing with doctors:
-go by word of mouth
-find someone young
-someone with a permanent position somewhere
-ask questions about everything
-don't ever let someone not tell you what's going on (they tried to do this to me when I was admitted)
-be careful googling, use webmd or mayo clinic, don't use yahoo answers.
-if someones just giving you heavy drugs and not offering any alternative treatments stop going to them.
- if your doctor seems annoyed at explaining things to you or rushes you stop going to them.

This one may be sensitive by I ALWAYS call every doctor by their first name. It may seem disrespectful but it makes them see you as an equal and I've noticed they don't talk down to you as much.

Aug 12, 2014

Caitriona H.

Its half 3 am, I'll try and explain why I think the world would be better if we weren't in it in the morning haha

Aug 12, 2014

Emily B.

I agree with animal testing because without it I wouldn't be alive. I'm not a vegetarian nor am I vegan. I cannot honestly say that I am against animal cruelty. However I am against animal cruelty because I don't think they should be mistreated to an extreme

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Those are great tips, Caitriona! I will add that one caveat though:

Younger doctors may be more up-to-date when it comes to the latest treatments, research, and methodology, but they can lack experience. They also *may* lack the humility that comes with experience, having made mistakes before. I'm not saying that older doctors are free from egotism (in fact, for some they may get MORE megalomaniacal as they age because they feel that their experience outweighs everything and everybody else), but don't discount a doctor just because they are older.

I disagree about calling them by their first name. Unless they invite you or offer permission, using their given name instead of their title is disrespectful to the work they have done to earn their PhD and their MD. That said, I don't think I have ever even spoken to a doctor and used their name in a conversation. It's just never come up.

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Emily, I agree. I am not against using animals, I am against cruelty. Beating an animal, starving an animal, forcing them to live in filth, overworking an animal, etc. serve no purpose and are cruel and wasteful. Using them for food, for hides, for testing, etc. serves a purpose, and is part of our symbiotic relationship with other species.

Aug 12, 2014

Symone B.

I love this thread! I wrote my composition college final paper on this very topic (I have an AA too 😊) I'm a biopsychology major and this is sooo juicy! Lol I'm like swooning over all these psych terms.

I still think you're awesome Emily!
1. I totally agree with you on the topic at hand. In my paper, I did a lot of research and I found that there wasn't a company that was totally innocent of animal testing. It's just not possible. There has to be some type of testing conducted before selling to the public, period. Animals just so happen to be the most ethical way to go about the testing, as human testing would could easily violate the code of ethics. Though, some testing animals aren't that biologically similar to humans to get the most accurate result. For example, rabbits are often test subjects of eye makeup ingredients but they lack tear ducts. We, humans, are able to flush our eyes through our tear ducts. Testing on rabbits doesn't give the most accurate reaction that a human would have. Also, test animals are more cost effective. The financial resources to test from human samples instead of test animals (who are bred for that purpose) would probably drive cosmetics/products prices up. Scientists do have methods to test on human samples. For example, using a skin sample with the help of genetic engineering to grow in the lab for sensitization testing. (Sometimes they do use mouse skin cells)

2. I can totally get where you're coming from with saying that buying "cruelty free" products just limiting your collection. Amen to that! I get where you're coming from. I'm a vegetarian. But not because I believe in not killing animals for consumption. (My reason is totally off topic lol) I just don't think that me not buying meat is going to stop the next person from buying it.

3. I'm glad someone can admit to lacking empathy too! I thought I was the only one. I'm not really that compassionate. It's hard when people just think I'm just outrageously selfish. It's hard to see from others standpoint. I usually just focused on myself. Which sounds so bad to say in pseudo-humanitarian America 😝 We love to pretend we care, when this country is rooted in egoistism and our society is super legalistic lol

Aug 12, 2014

Symone B.

And this reminds me of what my bio teacher said: "would you rather companies test on a bunny rabbit or your teenage daughters' face?"

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Yes Symone! Oo biopsych is fascinating. Go you! :)

The problem with alternative non-animal tests that they are developing is that they are less effective than the current animal versions. While this is promising for the future as they find new ways to test, it doesn't replace animal testing right now. Plus, they add expense because those tests are not widely available and tests need to be repeated due to the slightly unreliable results, which would increase product costs significantly.

I hate when people think that I am just being selfish! It's because of those accusations I learned how to be extremely manipulative and a very good liar at a young age. Comes in handy as an actor, not so much as a decent human being. I realize that I am missing something that pretty much everyone else has, and I try to make up for it by consciously thinking about it and making myself be empathetic--which is a lot harder than people realize. Interestingly, sociopathy is prevalent among the most successful people in capitalist societies. Lack of empathy is beneficial in highly competitive environments.

Aug 12, 2014

Symone B.

Forgot to conclude my #1: but at the end of the day, I do believe in testing on animals. Humans happen to be at the top of the food chain. Should the "lesser" animals have to be subject to our cruelty out of vanity and greed? Probably not. But that's life. Tests have to be done and scientists are pick the lesser of the two evils.

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

You're exactly right Symone. I would like to note that not all relationships in nature are free of pain and suffering. Many symbioses hurt one or both parties, but are still beneficial to both. Many relationships are parasitic, where one organism is benefited and one is harmed. Our testing on animals may be considered a parasitic relationship, which does not automatically mean that it is wrong.