Article: Alternatives to Animal Testing

Animal testing is experimentation on animals. It usually tests if a product is safe for human use. The cosmetic industry is notorious for animal testing. Companies like Benefit, Clinique, Estee Lauder, Maybelline, and Avon all use animal testing.

Animal testing is very cruel to animals. We don’t even need it, it’s just bad science. The Food and Drug Administration claims that 92 out of 100 test that pass on animals fail on humans. says that “…human skin cultures can be grown and purchased for skin irritation testing.” This means cosmetic companies can use animal testing for predicting how a new eyeliner or powder will react with human skin. These tests rarely work and harm the animals involved. Here are some frightening images of animals being used in animal testing.


You can see  this rodent has a stitch of some kind on its head.

Image result for animal testing

This mouse has an eye infection caused by animal testing.


Instead of this inhumane, useless method, here are some alternatives that are superior. Viro-testing is a method where they use chips that contain human growth cells.This can be used for drugs chemical consumer products, and cosmetics.  A company called Ceetox (bought by Cyprotex) uses the viro-testing methods to predict potential skin reactions.

Another substitute for animal testing could be computer modeling. Scientists have created programs to mimic human biology where they can test and find possible reactions or irritations. These programs are a good replacement because you only need the computer to do it instead of expensive chips.

Along with these brand new sophisticated methods, we can take it back to the basics, after all, nothing can test you in reactions better than real live humans. Human volunteers would be the most effective, cheapest, but most dangerous alternative. Some drug companies do this already. They use a technique called “microdosing”. Microdosing is where they give the testers small amounts of the medicine and find reactions on a smaller scale to predict larger reactions.While human testing is the most accurate option it’s is still very dangerous because they are testing drugs, unknowing of the possible reactions. Some reactions could possibly result in death!

Which method do you think is best for replacing animal testing in the, drug, cosmetic and chemical industries? Should we use viro-testing, the method with chips containing human growth cells? Would computer modeling, a program to mimic the human biology to find possible skin or body irritations, be best? Or should we stick to old-fashioned human testing?


By  Jordyn Carter

Photo Credit : a humane nation

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s