Cons of Cosmetic Animal Testing - Assignment Example

nt victory for both animal rights activists and the very animals, the European Union (EU) in March 2013 (The EU Animal Testing Ban, n.d.), imposed a ban on the sale of cosmetics and/or cosmetic ingredients used in animal testing (Cosmetics and Household-Product Animal Testing, n.d.). That marketing ban meant that companies who intended to trade within the EU, the world over, had no choice but to abandon cosmetic animal testing. The European Union further pointed to the abolishment of all activities relating to testing of products and ingredients that are acquired or sold within the EU.

However, interested firms can continue carrying on animal experiments provided they are outside the EU and the products used are not sold within the EU. However, it is not easy for such firms to sell products in the global market due to various restrictions imposed by other countries. For instance, the Chinese government demands samples for a variety of thorough animal tests before allowing any sales in China. Prior to that decision, there were numerous protests vented by People for The Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) activists through emails, public protests and phone calls.

Through PETA’s scientific expertise and funding, China is also making enormous strides in steering away from cosmetic animal testing and will soon approve non-animal tests to replace cosmetic tests. In the same spirit of conservation, Israel and India have also banned the practice. The ban imposed by the Indian government is temporary, but there are measures to establish a permanent one. In a contrasting scenario, the United States have not taken the same steps. It is unbelievable that researchers persist with animal experiments for cosmetics despite the presence of reliable non-animal tests.

Recently, research experts have proven that manufacturers can use 3-D human cell generated tissues to measure how long a chemical takes to burn the rabbit eye’s cornea. The chemical is dropped by the researchers