Clarification: Why testing make up on animals bad but not medications and other medical treatments?
In: 0
They are not testing the color or look, but if it will cause pain or scarring. Basically they are testing new chemical compounds are lethal or harmful on animals as it is cheaper then chemical and computer models
I think the big thing is animals can’t consent.
I.e, what if the chemical is actually corrosive and you just melted a pigs face. That animal has really just been subjected to unnecessary cruelty.
They don’t know if their new chemical will harm people, so they test it on animals that can simulate the properties of human skin close enough. Many people find it cruel to potentially harm these animals for the sake of a company being able to sell a product for their own profit. Sure, it’d likely be more cruel to test on humans. At the end of the day the goal is to produce a product that doesn’t hurt anyone. But many people would argue a company’s right to earn a profit is not worth putting either human or animal in harms way, so if they can’t test in a safer way that puts no one and nothing at risk, they shouldn’t bother.
>Clarification: Why testing make up on animals bad but not medications and other medical treatments?
Mostly because makeup isn’t necessary. Testing on animals often harms the animal.
For medicine, where we *must* see what happens on a live creature, that’s a necessary evil. For makeup, we’d be harming animals simply for vanity. Same reason fur coats are frowned on in the age of synthetic materials that keep people just as warm.
Animal testing of cosmetics is bad for the same reasons that animal testing of medicine is bad – it causes them harm and suffering to which they can’t consent. However, there is an argument that medical testing can be justified for its social benefits. This argument is less persuasive for cosmetics. Some people believe all animal testing is bad. Some believe all animal testing is justified. But a substantial number are persuaded that can be justified for medicine but not for cosmetics.
To your specific question: makeup is optional, medicine typically isn’t. That doesn’t necessarily align with everyone’s morality, but that’s thinking for folks who hate one and tolerate the other.
I’d also wonder if saying makeup isn’t tested on animals is just cheap advertising now. We already know a lot of ingredients that are safe, so a makeup brand can just use them without any testing.
Okay! Imagine you have a teddy bear, and you want to put some makeup on
it to see how it looks. You might think that putting makeup on the teddy bear is fun, but it’s not nice to the teddy bear. The teddy bear might
get a sore eye or skin because the makeup can be harsh. Also, teddy bears and humans are different, so what looks good on a teddy bear might not look good on a person. So, if you want to know if makeup is safe for people to use, it’s better to test it on people, not teddy bears. Testing makeup on animals is not nice, and it doesn’t give us all the information we need to make sure makeup is safe for people. There are better ways to test makeup that don’t hurt animals, like testing it on special pads or on people who want to help. It’s important to be kind to animals, and testing makeup on them is kind That’s why many people think we should not test makeup on animals.
Make-up, in MOST cases, is a luxury product. It’s not a necessity. Endangering mammallian lives and wellbeing to test how much you can subject someone to some ingredient of it can thus be viewed as a form of cruelty that was entirely unnecessary.
Medication is another issue, because you’re not “throwing away lives” but sacrificing the lives and wellbeing of mammals to save human lives. Generally, you would think that saving or drastically improving a human’s live through medication is worth more than improving that live through the limited benefits that make-up provides.
Latest Answers