In this day and age, animals are still being used to test products. Millions of animals suffer and die in painful tests to determine the safety of products such as cosmetics, soaps and medicines. The fact is that the test results often don t help prevent or treat human illness or injury. In the past people said that this type of testing was justified, the truth is that this testing should be banned.

The testing of cosmetics on animals is cruel. Substances such as eye shadow and soaps are tested on rabbits, rats, guinea pigs, dogs, cats, and other animals. According to the companies that perform these tests, they are done to establish the safety of a product and the ingredients. However, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) which regulates cosmetic products, does not require animal testing. Some of the tests on animals are eye irritancy tests, acute toxicity tests, and skin irritancy tests.

There are many alternatives methods to collect data about a product rather than using animal testing. The product can be tested on plants, bacteria or skin tissue and sometimes humans volunteer themselves for medical experiments. (eg. sick patients may volunteer themselves for testing new drugs and medicines).

Another method that may avoid using animal testing is by computer simulating the effects of the products. There are many alternative methods other than animal testing, which should provide sufficient data on the effects of a product so animals aren t required to be harmed.

Despite the difference in intelligence between animals and humans, there is no reasons to treat animals as "machines," incapable of feeling pain. It is quite clear that animals do suffer and feel pain. It has been stated by the Animal Rights organisation that animals subjected to Draize method of testing suffer

and going through pain during tests. This testing is preformed by dropping substances in the eyes of animals. As described by one researcher employed by a large chemical company, the animals suffered. "Total loss of vision due to serious internal injury to cornea or internal structure. Animal holds eye shut urgently. May squeal, claw at eye, jump and try to escape." To prevent this the animals are usually secured well so they can t move and their eye is clamped open.

Some people think animal testing is acceptable because it may prevent pain, suffering or illness to people. This means that the pain is endured by animals so that humans are assured of a safe product. I believe this would not always save humans pain because animals are different to humans and different substances effect animals and humans in different ways. For human safety animals are tested first to check a product hasn t got lethal substances which may poison humans. Manufactures do this to prevent being sued for incompetence through harm or death to the public. I think that if a company produces a product that they are sure is absolutely-completely safe for animals or humans it should not be tested and the product abandon. This would save animals pain because products would not require animal testing to be sure it is safe.

It is clearly evident that animal testing as far as animal rights are concerned is immoral and should be banned. It was found that approximately 80 percent of Australians are against using animals testing. Hundreds of companies have responded by switching to animal-friendly test methods. To help put an end to animal testing, people can stop buying products that were tested on animals. They can also call and write to these companies expressing their opposition to animal testing and suggest the company use alternative testing methods.