pig look fabulous, obviously

Hello there, lovely people, Amy here on DNews. I wear cosmetic products, obviously, and probably

you do, too, even if you don’t think you do. That’s because along with makeup, moisturizers,

and nail polish, the US Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) definition of cosmetics includes things

like shampoo, deodorant, and toothpaste. Unless those cosmetics also treat something like

dandruff or cavities, provide sun protection, or have a color additive, the FDA has no authority

to regulate them and it’s up to the cosmetic company to make sure they’re safe before

they hit the market

There are a lot of factors to consider when testing a cosmetic. Manufacturers need to

know if products will cause an allergic reaction; if they’ll cause temporary or irreversible

skin or eye damage; at what point they’re toxic if absorbed through the skin, lungs,

or digestive tract; the effects of long-term exposure; if they’re carcinogenic; if they

cause infertility; or if they cause birth defects. Pretty much all the things you need

to worry about if you’re a teenage boy who overuses body spray

But cosmetic companies can’t jump straight to testing on teenage boys because they’d

probably get a call from their irate mothers. No. Companies don’t test on humans because

it’s inhumane and if something goes wrong, it might irreparably harm a human being. Before

a human uses a product, we have to be sure they’re reasonably safe, so for a long time

animals were used to test the chemicals in cosmetics first. Usually the tests involve

mice, rats, guinea pigs, or bunnies. Understandably, many people consider these tests inhumane,

and some places like Europe have banned products that have been tested on animals entirely.

Other places like China actually require animal testing on the finished products. The FDA’s

stance falls somewhere in the middle: companies are neither encouraged or discouraged to test

on animals, though the FDA has stated they would like to gain the maximum amount of information

using the fewest animals as humanely as possible. Depending on what they’re testing for, scientists

might use just one bunny or as many as 2,600 mice.

Cosmetic makers would probably rather not test on animals if they could avoid it. It’s

expensive and a PR nightmare. Plus using an animal for testing a chemical’s effects

on people can be imprecise because, well, they’re not people. But scientists are developing

methods that substitute animals for test tubes. The Johns Hopkins Center for Alternatives

to Animal Testing, appropriately acronymed to CAAT, is foremost in in vitro testing.

But some things, like how a product behaves when inhaled, still can’t be replicated

artificially. Other proposed methods involve using mathematical models to extrapolate how

thousands of different chemicals will behave after testing just a tiny fraction. Either

way, learning more about what we put on and in our bodies is always a valuable pursuit,

otherwise we could end up like the Romans, who unknowingly poisoned themselves with white

lead used for makeup foundation. All for the sake of beauty

Ultimately, moving away from animal testing will require some innovative changes

Tech innovations are constantly changing our lives – both professionally and personally

If you are fascinated with the latest in tech innovations and how they're impacting the

world around you, check out Full Sail University. Full Sail has spent 30 years developing degree

programs that help you build a skill set for the tech industry. To learn more about these

programs, and all of Full Sail’s technology degree programs, visit fullsail.edu/DNews

A lot of research depends on using animals, particularly lab mice. But why mice? Trace

explains right here.

Though cosmetic testing on animals gets more attention, most animal testing is done for

pharmaceutical or biomedical research. Is using animals okay for one but not the other?

Share your thoughts in the comments and remember to subscribe so you never miss an episode

of DNews. Thanks for watching.