June 1, 2016 Ed Royce 210 W. Birch Street Suite 201 Brea, CA 92821 Dear Mr. Royce: My name is Kylie McCaughin, and I am a student at Santiago Canyon College. I am writing you regarding the Humane Cosmetics Act, which states to phase out cosmetic animal testing and the sale of cosmetics tested on animals, and for other purposes. I am a strong advocate and enforcer who is against animal cruelty or any abuse to animals of any kind and I am very appreciative of your time. I would like to start of by addressing the harms in cosmetic testing on animals. The United States should ban the testing of cosmetic products on animals because it is cruel. A few examples to support this claim would be the conditions that the animals are put in and the …show more content…
It can include protocols that cause severe suffering, such as long-term social isolation, electric shocks, withholding of food and water, or repeated breeding and separating of infants from mothers. With this being a normal and everyday activity for cosmetic companies then what is considered wrong abuse towards animals? Animal abuse is illegal yet these horrible acts that happen through these animals lifetimes are considered to be okay and ethical to the public who is uneducated. Secondly, the difference between humans and animals is a factor as to why this isn’t accurate testing. According to Theodora Capaldo, a writer for Live Science, stated in June of 2014 that chimps have 99% of their DNA compatible with humans and mice are 98% genetically similar to humans. This is a small percentage that makes humans different than these animals but its still a difference. This small percentage could be enough to not detect on animals, but could be the reason for …show more content…
The U.S. must look for other options to testing cosmetic products. I have two propositions as to how to go about this. One of them being a scientific alternative excluding animals from the equation and the other being a protest against any company that decides to continue with testing on animals. First the scientific alternative offered by Harvard Institute. The Harvard Institute has created “organs-on-chips”. This was created so that testing would be as close as possible to human testing without actually harming anyone. The way it works is human cells are placed on a chip that the product can be placed on to see if there is any reaction or irritation that would happen on humans. With new technology expanding, the world of science also expands. This is blessing to all the thousands of animals that die or get tortured every year in order to test the materialistic items of our cosmetic society. Next, a protest against animal testing is the only way these capitalist companies will stop. Having companies that don't test on animals receive a tax break for not allowing animal testing may cause companies that do test on animals to be more open to the thought of ending the