Animal Cruelty is one of the most notable rising issues in today's world, as a society we have seen the prominent rise of movements such as veganism and the significant impact of organisations such as PETA. In fact, we see many brands start to move towards animal-testing free habits all in the collective effort to improve the lives of animals around the globe. Recently, Aveda announced the renunciation of animals from its testing sites, thus further shedding light on the controversial topic. Furthermore, many economists have noted the weakness of government implemented restrictions - such as the banning of animal testing for cosmetic purposes in 1998 - as major brands seem to avoid compliance and instead result in merely shifting their resources. However, this imminent rise in care overlies a key question: How long has this been an issue and since when do we care?
The condemnation of animal cruelty has been notably highlighted throughout the continuum of time.In the east, religious sects such as Hinduism dictate that all living creatures have souls and all share the same deserving quality to be protected by humanity. Although, abrahamic religions such as Christianity argue that all life on earth is sacred seeing as we all came from the same omnipotent god and thus should all be treated with respect. They also highlight a focus on human domination and control of the earth, with most Christian domination stating that man is the pinnacle of creation. Therefore, throughout time individuals have accepted that this interpretation means animals are placed on earth for the benefit of humans thus making cosmetic testing and drug testing perfectly acceptable as in the long run, they improved the life of humans. Through the evident impact of religion on society, we see these morals interlaced with the laws we have in place today, especially if we delve deeper into the laws of ASPA of 1998.
The ASPA laws were created in response to public outrage around the frequency of animal cruelty in Great Britain. Previously, only testing on Apes and Chimpanzees was banned back in 1986, however pharmaceutical giants such as Pfizer simply shifted their focus onto ferrets, dogs and virtually any rodent you could possibly name. In return, the UK aimed to tighten their regulations on the matter as the act itself aims to regulate the use of protected animals in any experimental or other scientific procedure which may cause pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm to the animal - regardless of the economic loss or gain.
This may seem like the perfect solution to the deeply depressing issue, and in a perfect world big corporate CEOs would listen as they test their cosmetics holistically, reserving animal testing to only the most primordial of cases. However, it is impossible to deny that such a great shift also causes a shift in corporate spending, as finding ethical alternatives is not only expensive, but scarce. As a result, many companies such as Johnson & Johnson have just simply shifted their testing sights into lower income countries, countries which lack both the infrastructure to house and look after a variety of animals, but also lack workplace regulations formatted for the safety of both employee and animal. Obviously, this may lead to exploitation of both stakeholders as there is not a vigilant security net to ensure the safety of the counterparts involved.This also in turn is detrimental to a countries economy because it is taking away jobs and income from circulating within that nation and giving them to another nation - thus stunting the possible economic growth of the entirety of a nation simply for the benefit of a single company.
Ultimately, the focus of the priority of animal welfare is a personal one. No matter what government regulations are put in place, a loophole is always found, thus further cementing the importance of ethical decision making within an economic setting. Moreover, animal testing is the perfect example of how Western, Christian ideals have formatted global economic law and somewhat blinded the intrinsic moral compass. As PETA intensifies their campaigns and continues to call out habitual bad behaviour, one can only hope the welfare of animals will no longer be targeted in order to just maximise profit revenue. After all, Big Pharma preaches its extensive will to better life on earth - Why does this concern end abruptly at human life?
Written By Aurore Lebrun, Edited by Annika Bjerregaard and Aurore Lebrun
Very interesting article about a major life question;
😤
Love it
interesting, perplexing read