BUSINESS ANALYSIS REPORT

Professor Pandey

English 205

October 24, 2016

Annotated Bibliography

"Fact Sheet: Cosmetic Testing." RSS. The Humane Society, n.d. Web.

The Humane Society’s article discusses animal use in cosmetic testing. The content begins with a simple overview of animal testing- what it is and the legal issues relating to that kind of testing. It then defines what exactly cosmetic products are, as this is important to clarify before getting more into the issue. The article is very specific when discussing exactly what practices are used on animals while testing cosmetics, it lists the methods in which are used as well as the absence of treatment. The article ends with providing some alternatives to animal testing as well as providing links for more information and ways to get involved and help make change. This website is relevant because it goes into multiple aspects of animal testing- definitions, laws, examples, and ways to help- as opposed to just stating the issue. The Humane Society is a credible source for my topic because this organization is the nation’s largest and most effective animal protection organization, and, therefore, will provide the proper information in which I am searching for.

Kangas, Cathy. "Cosmetics Industry and Animal Testing." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 27 Jan. 2016. Web.

Cathy Kangas’ article explores the various cosmetic brands that contribute to animal testing and focuses more on the international laws pertaining to the topic. She mentions the ‘Chinese Market” in which she discusses further and lists cosmetic brands in which contribute to the market: Benefit, Bliss, Caudalie, Clarins, Clinique, Dior, Estée Lauder and Gucci. Kangas talks about not only China, but The EU, Norway, Israel, India, Turkey, New Zealand, South Korea, Canada, Brazil, Australia, Taiwan and other countries. Throughout the article, Kangas also mentions multiple organizations- such as PETA, HSUS, HSLF, and SPANA- and what they are doing in order to put a stop to animal testing. This article is very fact-based, while providing multiple resources. I found this article to be a useful resource because the author is a member of the board of directors of The Humane Society; she is a credible person to conduct part of my research on. The Huffington Post, the website in which this article was posted on, is a well-known informative site, therefore this contributed to the article’s relevancy as well.

Edward M. Jackson (2011) Alternatives to Animal Testing, Journal of Toxicology: Cutaneous and Ocular Toxicology, 15:1, 29-31.

Edward Jackson’s scholarly journal introduces the issue with alternatives to animal testing on cosmetic products. Jackson starts the article off by discussing the animal rights movement and who is/can be involved in this movement. After the background information is discussed, Jackson then gets more into his main topic: alternatives to animal testing. Jackson mentions The Center for Alternatives to Animal Testing at the Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, in which is committed to discover alternatives. In additions to Johns Hopkins University, there are other research programs for alternatives to animal testing such as Rockefeller University in New York City and at Jefferson Medical College in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Jackson introduces the issue with alternatives to animal testing by stating that although computer applications are coming on strong as contenders in the race to become alternative test methods, the alternative types of testing are not as valid. The reasons for this are that less data are generated in alternative test methods than from animal experiments. This source is useful because it still identifies animal testing as an issue, however the author looks at the issue from a different point of view and reveals why the issue is not easily resolved.

@navs_us. "Animals Used in Testing | National Anti-Vivisection Society." National AntiVivisection Society. N.p., n.d. Web.

 National Anti-Vivisection Society (NAVS) is a leader of advocates for animals. The organization’s website contains a section in which discusses animal testing. The article begins by describing the use of animals in testing. Experiments include the irritation of chemicals in the eyes or on the skin of rabbits (the Draize test), and lethal dose (LD50) experiments that determine toxicity by the dosage of a chemical that kills half of the animals forced to consume, breathe or be injected with that chemical. The majority of animal tests are conducted using mice, rats and rabbits. Some also use dogs, primates and other species; this is required by the FDA or EPA. The article continues by stating the primary reasons why these experiments are still being put into play: safety, efficacy, and liability. Liability is a huge factor because companies do not want to market a product that could result in legal claims. This is a credible source because it was written by an organization that is dedicated to better care for animals and this dedication leads to uncovering the full truth to animal testing. The article also offers a call to action, stating that better tests are needed.

"Harm and Suffering | Animal Use in Research." Harm and Suffering | Animal Use in Research. Anti-Vivisection Society, 2016. Web.

Anti-Vivisection Society (NEAVS) is a Boston-based, national animal advocacy organization, their organization is dedicated to ending the use of animals in research, testing, and science education. The article posted on their website explores the issues with animal testing. The term “vivisection” is introduced which is defined as any use of animal experimentation. Vivisection is used within laboratory walls, and what can be done to animals has no limit due to the fact that is it a legal act. The article includes statistics; Every year in the U.S., over 25 million animals are used in biomedical experimentation, product and cosmetic testing, and science education, with over 90% being rats, mice, and birds. The issues with animal testing becomes clear in this article: animal experiments 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. Legal issues are also discussed, mentioning The Animal Welfare Act, a federal law that provides protection for animals in laboratories, but the protection is minimal. This article is a reliable source because it outlines the major effects of animal that are involuntarily used in experimental labs.