From: JIM.DIXON@f240.n353.z1.fidonet.org (JIM DIXON)
Newsgroups: k12.ed.science
Subject: Re: animals
Date: Thu, 07 Jan 93 11:12:00 PDT
Organization: FidoNet node 1:353/240 - The Polish Connecti, Westbank BC

 Jim Dixon is responding to Richard O'donovan's bytes to Jim Maroon
 about Re: animals used as guinea pigs.
 -=> Quoting Joshua Kramer to Sharon Harms <=-
 
 SH>question was, Should rabbits be used for testing of lotions,
 
 JK> I disagree... the cosmetics that are tested upon rabbits
 JM>are not
 JK> staples of life and they are not needed... and sacrificing
 JM>animals for
 JK> something that is not needed is illogical.

 RO> thousands of the things around.  Why sacrifice animals for the sake of
 RO> a new one that is infinitesimally different (if not only in brandname)
 RO> from something already available.  I'll have to chase up the article

There are regulations in place that force companies to provide lab results
that will show the product to be safe.  The company producing the product
has no choice.  Also, of a specical note, is that you, and the others here,
might be surprised at the chemicals that are in cosmetics...even shampoos,
hand soaps, simple lotions and others.

Each day, I read about 250k (on average) lab reports from around the world.
Each report is a clinical analysis of a base chemical.  Almost every report
mentions sacrifice of animals and the resulting finds.  When I get down to
the Use database, cosmetics is a item mentioned quite often.

Ethylen Oxide for example, because of it's toxicity, is used as a
sterilizer and was found to cause sponaneous abortions in hospitals where
it was used.  It is also used in manufacturing, museums, cosmetics and food
packaging.  10 year studies of workers in industry producing EO were found
to have cancer rates far higher than the local norms.

There is no doubt as to EO's toxicity and harmful side effects. What animal
studies indicate is a -safe- level of exposure/use...if that is logical.
The safe level, in most cases is determined by LD50/LC50 (lethal dose =Mg
per Kg Body weight) and NEF (No Effect).  If chem 'x' produces cancer,
reaction, mutatgenetic, carcinogenetic, teratagenetic results, the dosage
is reduced to the level where no results are obtained and a safe level is
assumed.  This is not always the case, but most often used as a becnhmark.

Recently, the 10 MILLIONTH chemcial was registered (CAS).  With 10 million
(plus) chems on the market, testing is a neccessity.  The suggestion of
computer models has been advanced as a alternative to animal testing but
unfortunately, computers still cannot emulate animal tissue. Only the
programmer can instruct the model.

No matter our personal views, chemicals are a way of life.  They are not
something we can easily stop or dispose of.  Because society depends so
much on chemicals, we also depend on animals to test those chemicals on.
The alternative is to market products and wait for the results to come in
from humans.

... Better hide when Father Nature finds out what we've done to his wife.  
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.11
                                                                 

--  
uucp: uunet!m2xenix!puddle!353!240!JIM.DIXON
Internet: JIM.DIXON@f240.n353.z1.fidonet.org
Newsgroups: k12.ed.science