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

Aug 12, 2014

Symone B.

Very true, Emily! Those tests are in place but like I said, they're costly and are still in the infant stages. Prices on products would sky rocket if that was the sole testing method. I think technology needs to advance some more before that method would be a efficient option.

And you're an actor too! So am I! How ironic.

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Yep, I am an actor in a haunted house. It's much easier to enjoy scaring the living crap out of people when you don't empathize with their experiences. ;) Though I've also done musicals, which are much less exciting to me but allow me to sing (which I enjoy).

Do you do theatre?

Aug 12, 2014

Symone B.

And I can't agree more with the sociopath part. I never considered myself one but it makes sense now that I think about it. It's just sooo hard to just be compassionate. It's not like an automatic response for me. It's definitely a leaned behavior that I still struggle with. It's like I have an on and an off switch. I just don't feel like being bothered at all or I'm trying to be "nice" lol I think the hardest part is knowing when an opportunity to be social comes up, and it would be appropriate to befriend someone or make conversation or comfort them. It's so awkward. I'm like fighting internally with myself. One part doesn't want to get involved, the other part thinks it's only right.

Gosh, it's hard!

Aug 12, 2014

Symone B.

Yes. I've been a local actress for the last 3 years now. I've done school plays, to competitions, gigs, local tv, community theatre,etc. I started kind of late in the game. I had no idea I could act until my junior year in high school (yup, I'm 18)

And that's sooo cool! A haunted house actor? That would explain your profile pic and the SFX pics lol. So awesome. How do you like it?

Aug 12, 2014

Caitlin M.

I am so glad you made this post Emily. I would add more but honestly a lot of what I feel has been said already so I don't feel the need to lol. But I will say that I definitely agree that it's a huge marketing ploy, just like the whole "all natural" and "paraben free" hype. It's a way to make people scared of their competitors' products so you buy theirs that are "safe" instead.

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Symone: Oh wow I could never get into all of that. I like watching theatre and stuff but I just can't get interested in it myself. I have a couple of "dream roles" that I would love to play on stage, but they are characters that I have a personal connection to.

Yeah I realized how interested I was in SFX when I started there. I assisted in the makeup trailer and that's where I learned everything I know so far. I plan on going to Cinema Makeup School after I graduate in order to learn the rest. :)

Sorry this thread got off topic!

Aug 12, 2014

Christine J.

I don't exactly agree on animal testing, but being an scientist also I know the importance if it. I'm also a vegan so it's a bit if a wish washy situation. I know that you can never be 100% cruelty free. If I had the option of knowing, I'd probably rather buy something on the market that has done the least amount of harm to animals (this is almost impossible to know though). A small portion of my makeup is "cruelty-free", I've been wanting to try more cruelty free brands, but like you said, it is a marketing gimmick. Just like those some of those dumb "organic" and "gluten-free" food items (GF is obviously good if you have celiac disease though). Now I'm on a tangent...Take away message: it's a constant battle between the science and the compassion in me. I don't agree with animal suffering over beauty products but there is really no way around it besides not wearing makeup. Honestly pretty scary if a product wasn't tested either. I love animals and it sucks but that's just how this industry works. I can't win this one.

Aug 12, 2014

Emily W.

Oh Christine, don't get me started on gluten-free, Non-GMO, paleo (that one especially since my specialization was the paleolithic), etc.

I think your attitude is a good balance of compassion and practicality.

Aug 12, 2014

Caitriona H.

Morning! This is going to be quick because I have to go in a minute. Ok first the doctor issue, I knew it would be a sensitive thing, and it should be taken on the person as what they want to do but it isn't disrespectful to me because cuturally we are a very casual nation and wouldn't use formal titles, even with the elderly, we typically refer to everyone by first name here or second name sometimes in a way friendly (my friends could call me Hickey if I liked, which I don't but they could) and secondly if they're seeing my vagina and injecting my butt they can handle being called their first name lol. Again though, its a touchy issue.
The animal thing. I believe the world would be better without us because we don't provide any benefit to the world. We destroy the trees, the ice, the ozone, the water, we are draining the world of irreplaceable oil, and we kill off a tons of species. Without us, nature would be balanced because it knows what to do. I'm biased though because animals are the only thing I have compassion for and I hate to see littering and pollution. I'm the type of person that will watch a live sumnami on the tv and think "oh god here we go, its all thats going to be on facebook for the next month" but will cry like a baby when the dog in the wheelchair falls off the car in Babe

Apr 6, 2018

Archana N.

This is a very old thread now, but if anyone new is looking at these comments, I want to make sure that a different opinion is shared. I do not expect replies on this, nor will I keep up with them, as I solely created a community profile in order to post this comment.

Too long; won't read? solution-
~Yes, everything has been tested on animals before, which is precisely why it does not need to be tested on animals again and again. We can benefit from the cruelty of the past without repeating it on new lives, especially when there are other methods of testing that are proven to be just as productive and informative.

~Medical vs cosmetic animal testing. Very different. Let's minimize our negative impact on animal lives in an area we can definitely afford to while the medical field continues to find newer, safer ways of experimentation and discovery.

~Now 4 years after the original post, plenty of companies have switched or been formed on cruelty-free practices. Not supporting companies who are unwilling to change their policies can help force them to listen to what the public deems acceptable. This has worked in effectively changing some companies' stance on testing. Meanwhile, we have better options so let's use them.
------
As far as I read, I did not see anyone mention why cruelty-free brands exist and why people actually support this concept. It only really mentions that every ingredient [in the Western world of cosmetics] has been tested at some point. I feel that this truth is being used as a "gotcha moment" for people who otherwise would want to support cruelty-free practices.

The idea behind cruelty-free products IS that every material has been tested on animals already, so there is no need to newly test products formulated with these materials. That is, there is no need to subject more animals to experimentation when we have all of the information on existing materials that we need. The creation and testing of newly patented materials is a different question. So while we can throw our hands up and say, "what is the point of looking so hard for something not tested on animals when every raw ingredient is already tested at some point," that ignores that more testing is done everyday on products with ingredients that have already been tested. The additional testing is an unnecessary step. The ethical payoff of harming animals for human benefit of the testing is negligible.

Additionally, the general theme of animal ethics is to reduce as much harm as possible. While it may seem hypocritical to pick and choose what practices you are involved in, there is a productive and positive effect from minimizing harm. If you eat meat and wear leather, etc, you can still advocate for people to not abuse animals. You can look for more synthetic alternatives to leather-based products, etc. There is true benefit from minimizing your impact on animals in a negative way. Think of carbon footprints as a comparison.

And it is not the testing itself, as one would hope that a mascara would not be so harmful that it blinds rabbits (except this has happened). If generally the products could only cause mild irritation or not be effective in its performance as product (like a toner that doesn't do its job), there would also be less outcry over experimenting on animals. The problem primarily lies in the methods behind the scenes. These animals are raised in captivity and in harsh conditions that resemble torture. Their lives are forever altered and when they are no longer "useful" for testing, there is no space nor desire to create space and care for them in the labs, so unless a rescue group extracts and cares for them, they are killed. It is called "cruelty" because of the living conditions and the inhumane handling of the animals. You don't have to take my word for it- actually please don't because researching for yourself is always better. What you wouldn't want done to your pets happens to other animals.

Medical testing is different from cosmetic. There are alternative methods to cosmetic testing, and more are being researched every day to provide to companies who won't change their animal testing policy. These new methods are being proven to be as safe in preventing harm to humans who wear the final products. Honestly, the differences between medical and cosmetic testing and the reasons for them are so vast. And beauty products in no way compare to the importance of medicine and new discoveries in medical knowledge of the body and its pathology. While I disagree with torturing animals for this information, right now people are working on better alternatives that will be widely accepted as the new norm, and until that becomes solidified in all areas of medicine, animal testing in medicine will unfortunately be a reality. That does not affect or dictate testing in cosmetics.

I have studied philosophy, biology, and chemistry. If you made it this far, thank you for your dedication in listening to various viewpoints. The world is better for it, and I am grateful for your patience with the length of my post. Now that I have opened your mind with some general points, I encourage you to delve further into the topic with specific research on the issues above. :)