Please state Index Number

Literature Review

Animal experiments were carried out by Aristotle, Erasistratus, and Galen who enhanced anatomy and pharmacology.

To meet contemporary norms, scientists modified our healthcare system (Hajar, 2011). Animals are frequently used in chemical testing of food products in the US. Rats, mice, guinea pigs, and rabbits are used in this procedure (Innis, 2019). The most common animal tests, according to Innis "include "lethal dose" tests, in which animals are force-fed "large amounts of... test chemical to determine the dose that causes death," applying chemicals to the shaved skin or eyes of restrained animals without analgesics, and repeatedly force-feeding animals to detect health risks like cancer. Following these tests, animals are decapitated, their necks shattered, or asphyxiated without anesthesia (Innis, 2019). Animal rights were rebuffed in the 20th century when many things injured Americans. When some goods, such as baby powder and cosmetics containing lead, were sold without going through animal testing, the United States soon modified its procedures. If their product is safe, cosmetic companies are free to use whatever method (Innis, 2019).
Initiatives to end animal testing on cosmetics in the EU have proved successful. First, animals feel emotions other than pain. As a result, the EU must defend their rights. The EU first outlawed cosmetics made with animal products. Animal testing was prohibited for EU cosmetics to safeguard product safety. The selling of cosmetics tested on animals outside the EU was prohibited in 2013.
An American company that does not practice cruelty cannot advertise in the EU. This EU rule increased environmental awareness among businesses (Innis, 2019).
New Zealand has made an effort to follow the EU's example, but the US has largely remained silent. Several rodent species and cosmetic firms are exempt from US animal welfare laws (primarily used in the testing for cosmetics). This objective is backed by two laws. For animal skin testing of pesticide sensitivity, the EPA was the first. Although unrelated to cosmetics, this may persuade businesses to use alternatives to animal testing (Innis, 2019). The Humane Cosmetic Act was debated in Congress in 2017. Cosmetics tested on animals would be outlawed, and offenders would face $10,000 fines. (Innis, 2019). The House and Senate bills for 2020 have not yet been passed (Humane Cosmetics Act, 2020).
The nation's top opponent of animal testing is California.
Several California laws prohibit animal testing.
According to California Senate Bill 2082, "an appropriate alternative test method has been scientifically validated and endorsed by the Inter-Agency Coordination Committee for the Validation of Alternative Methods," then animal testing for cosmetics, insecticides, and other household products is prohibited." (Innis, 2019). Animal testing on medications is not covered by this bill. The Hummance Cosmetic Act, presented by California, would limit state enforcement. Advocates for animal rights applaud this bill, despite the fact that it would hamper interstate commerce. The U.S. Constitution prohibits states from interfering with federal laws governing interstate trade. As Congress has acknowledged state sovereignty, states are responsible for their residents (Innis, 2019). In the US, support for animal rights has increased, but animal testing must end.