November 23rd, 2014

Maureen Chiquet
Chanel CEO
15 East 57th Street, 10022
Midtown, Manhattan
New York City, New York, USA
Ms. Maureen Chiquet,
On October 6, 2007, I requested your permission to perform a feasibility study that would
allow me to determine whether it would be viable to replace all forms of animal testing
with alternative methods. I am delighted to report that I have accomplished my goal in
completing the study and I would like to thank you for presenting me with the
opportunity to conduct the research necessary to form a conclusion on the topic.
Given modern technology and the increasingly progressive stances of other
nations in prohibiting animal testing, there is a need to replace animal testing with other
viable methods. I began the project by conducting secondary research on the Hamline
University online library database. I then expanded that research by conducting primary
research in which I developed and distributed a questionnaire to respondents who were
participants enrolled within English 1800.
Respondents from the survey indicated that Americans may not be well-educated
about animal testing. If we are exemplifying this onto a larger scale and assuming results
are conclusive of the population in total, this could be a leading cause as to why animal
testing is still happening today.
After reviewing the available information and careful consideration of the data, I
would recommend that all forms of animal testing be replaced with one of many other
alternative methods. The results of using alternative methods will prevent cruel and
inhumane treatment to animals, while still saving the company both time and money. The
main objective of the company is to create a consumer-friendly company in being able to
present your image as cruelty free while still being able to be just as, if not more
profitable than in the previous years. Once again I would like to thank you for the
opportunity to conduct this research study as this has been a tremendous honor. You
should find this study comprehensive enough to come to the same conclusion through the
presented data.
Sincerely,
Megan Aukrust

1
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Considering the Alternative Methods to Animal Testing

A Feasibility Report
English 1800: Introduction to Professional Writing and Rhetoric
Instructor: Krista Soria
Hamline University School of Business

2
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Abstract
The purpose of this project was to examine whether it would be feasible to replace forms of
animal testing with alternative methods. The research conducted includes: survey responses
provided by local students, an analysis of alternative methods to animal testing and reviews of
companies that currently are not testing on animals yet still manage to yield successful net
incomes. The results suggest it is feasible to end animal testing due to projected cost reductions,
modern and innovative technologies, consumer preferences, and other countries that have
already put these practices into effect. Recommendations include replacing all forms of animal
testing with alternative and more effective and efficient methods.

3
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Table of Contents
Cover Page...1
Abstract2
Table of Contents.3
Introduction..4-6
Research Methods7
Results
Alternative methods to animal testing8
In-silico models9
Studies with Human Volunteers.9-10
Figure 1.11
Figure 2.12
Figure 313
Conclusion.15
Recommendations..16
References17-18
Appendix A: Questionnaire19-21

4
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Introduction
This section will provide information surrounding the basic information relating to
animal testing. Opponents of animal testing have three major arguments. They often state it is
cruel and inhumane to experiment on animals, that there are alternative methods available to
researchers which can replace animal testing, and that animals are so different from human
beings that research on animals often yields extraneous results (Mone, 2014).
An estimated 26 million animals are used every year in the United States for cosmetic
and pharmaceutical testing. Animals are used to develop medical treatments, determine the
toxicity of medications, check the safety of products destined for human use, and other
biomedical, commercial, and health care uses (Goldacre, 2010). The experiments performed on
these animals are harsh and inhumane, yield dubious results, and expose an overdue replacement
of animal testing with more ethical alternatives. These alternatives include over 40 different and
ethical methods of testing products before consumer-use. The fact that a variety of alternatives
exists and that some developed markets have banned animal testing places the need of this
archaic method in question (Mone, 2014).
The former U.S. National Institutes of Health director Dr. Zerhouni admitted that
experimenting on animals to help humans has been and continues to be unsuccessful.
Dr.Zerhouni told colleagues: We have moved away from studying human disease in humans.
We all drank the Kool-Aid on that one, me included. The problem is that [animal testing]
hasnt worked, and its time we stopped dancing around the problem Dr. Zerhouni suggests
that modern sciences need to refocus and adapt new methodologies for use in humans to better
understand the biology of disease in humans. Some of the non-animal testing methods that are
available today include in-vitro research, computer modeling, virtual drug trials, microdosing

5
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

technologies, and human cell and tissue methods including human skin models and human-ona-chip technology (Rogers, 2014).
Tarte cosmetics and LOreal cosmetics are two companies that have decided against
animal testing; however they have chosen to test their products prior to releasing them into the
consumer market in two very different ways. Although Loreal and Tarte are not direct
competitors, they have both proven to be strong players within their arena, outperforming their
opponents not only financially, but also ethically. According to MorningStar, LOreal ended the
2013 fiscal year with sales revenues peaking 28.78 billion (US dollars). Tarte cosmetics, still a
newer company, still managed to make 67.6 million in revenues last year.
Tarte cosmetics have decided to include product combinations of the thousands of
existing cosmetic raw ingredients that have already been established as safe for human use.
Some of these products consist of: Amazonian clay, Shea butter, sunflower-seed oil, beeswax,
peppermint oil, maracuja oil, and honey just to list a few. One may think this is specific to the
cosmetic industry; however natural remedies have proven to cure illnesses for hundreds of
thousands of years. LOreal on the other hand has decided to use Episkin tests, which are threedimensional reconstructed human skin models that use cell viability to measure the sensitivity of
topical exposures. In LOreals case, they are testing eye-shadows, foundations, lipsticks, etc. to
ensure there are not adverse reactions (Rumsby, 2006).
Novo Nordisk on the other hand, manufactures and markets pharmaceutical products and
services. Novo Nordisk uses live animals in the discovery and development of new products
when there is no other viable or legal alternative. The company has reduced their number of
animals used and between 1993 and 1999 by almost 70%. Since then, the company has kept the
number at approximately the same level even though its research activities have increased each

6
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

year. It is expected that new emerging technologies will make it possible to obtain even more
important information without the use of living animals (Holst, 2009).

7
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Research Methods
To better understand whether or not it would be feasible to replace all forms of animal
testing with alternative methods, my research consisted of the following methods:

I created a questionnaire to determine the mindset of the American relating to animal

testing.

I distributed 20 questionnaires to Hamline University, English 1800 Students.

I tabulated and analyzed the data collected from the questionnaire and prepared
graphical data with statistical information.

I reviewed several websites pertaining to the alternative methods to animal testing.

I reviewed websites pertaining to the other countries and companies that have
implemented alternative methods to animal testing.

Using the Hamline University Library, I researched surrounding the laws that are set
in place regarding animal testing using relevant and credible articles.

I completed research by reading arguments provided by advocates and protestors that

are for and against animal testing.

Criteria
After review and evaluation of the above-mentioned questionnaire and research,
recommendations were made based on the following criteria:
Are there alternative methods to animal testing?
If so, are these alternative methods cost and time effective?
Is there a societal need for alternative methods?

8
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Results
Over the past seven weeks, I have been conducting research to determine whether or not
it would be feasible to eliminate all forms of animal testing for commercial and pharmaceutical
purposes. To answer this question, I have been primarily relying on secondary research provided
by the Hamline University Librarys online database; however, one form of primary research has
been conducted through the form of a survey. The yielded results provided by the primary
research component will be highlighted below.
Alternative Methods to Animal Testing
In vitro methods are probably one of the more popular approaches. These modern
methods include sophisticated tests using human cells and tissues. A variety of cell-based tests
and tissue models can be used to assess the safety of drugs, chemicals, cosmetics, and consumer
products. EpiDerm and organs-on-chips are a couple of in vitro methods that we will discuss
further in depth below.
CeeTox is a company that has recently developed a method to evaluate the probable
likelihood that a substance will cause a skin allergy in humans; this method
incorporates EpiDerm. EpiDerm is a 3-dimensional, human cellderived skin tissue model that
mimics the traits of normal human skin. This model replaces the use of rabbits, guinea pigs and
mice, which typically would have been injected with a substance or had a substance applied to
their shaven skin to determine an allergic response. EpiDerm is also being used to replace
evaluate chemicals for their ability to decay or aggravate the skin. Once again, this act was
typically tested, primarily using rabbits.
Similar to EpiDerm is some respects, is a computerized version of human skin called
organs-on-chips. These chips contain human cells that are developed to imitate the structure

9
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

and function of human organs and organ systems. Instead of using animals, these chips can be
used to test for disease research, drug testing, and toxicity testing. Furthermore, organs-on-chips
have been shown to replicate human physiology, diseases, and drug responses more accurately
than the previously used animal-based methods.
Researchers at the European Union Reference Library for Alternatives to Animal
Testing developed five different tests that use human blood cells to detect contaminants in drugs.
If left unnoticed, these contaminates in blood can lead to a dangerous and potentially fatal fever
when they enter the body. This non-animal method replaces the need for animals to under-go
harsh and painful procedures (Willett & Sullivan, 2013).

Advanced computer-modeling techniques (in silico models)

In silico models are additional alternatives that modern sciences have formulated to
replace the need for animal testing. Researchers have developed a wide range of advanced
computer models that have the ability to replicate human biology and the progression of
developing diseases. Past studies have shown that these models can precisely predict the ways
that new drugs will respond and react in the human body. This particular alternative has the
ability to replace the use of animals in research related to pharmaceutical drug tests.
Quantitative structure-activity relationships (QSARs) are computer-based techniques that
have the ability to animal tests by making sophisticated estimates of a substances likelihood of
being hazardous. The results are yielded are based on the tested substances and then compared to
and analyzed based on existing substances along with our familiarity with human biology. Since
QSAR has been given government endorsements, many companies are increasingly using it

10
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

instead of performing the tests on a variety of animals.

Studies with human volunteers

Instead of testing with animals, the use human volunteers are becoming
increasingly popular as compensations are typically awarded. When using human volunteers, a
method called microdosing can provide essential information surrounding the safety of the
drug that is being examined. The results of microdosing will indicate how a drug is metabolized
in humans prior to releasing the drug for human trials on a larger scale. The volunteers are given
an exceptionally small one-time drug dose and then imaging techniques are then used to
monitor how the drug behaves in the body. Microdosing can replace certain tests on animals and
helps screen out drug compounds that wont work in humans. This is step important because if
inadequate drug compounds are not eliminated, they would then advance senselessly to
government-required testing, which is done on a much larger scale, hence losing both time and
money.
Functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI) is considered to be advance level brain
imaging and recording techniques. FMRIs use human volunteers to replace experiments that
previously used monkeys. When using live animals, this test was extremely harsh as it left the
monkeys brain damaged and often yielded questioning results. In humans however, these modern
techniques have allowed the human brain to be safely studied down to the level of a single
neuron. Additionally, with this method, researchers can temporarily and reversibly induce brain
disorders using trans-cranial magnetic stimulation.
Medical schools now days are using life-like computerized human-patient simulators that
have the ability to breathe, bleed, convulse, talk, and even die. This simulator has the ability to

11
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

illustrate and educate and students about human physiology and pharmacology better than
previous training activities that involve dissecting animals. The most high-tech simulators have
the ability to mimic any given illness and/or injury and then give the appropriate biological
response to medical interventions and injections of medications. A great amount of medical
schools across the United States have completely replaced the use of animal laboratories in
medical training with human-patient simulators.
Although computerized human-patient simulators is an excellent source for alternative
training methods. The system TraumaMan offers and even more advanced level of medical
training. TraumaMan replicates a breathing, bleeding human torso and has realistic layers of
skin and tissue, ribs, and internal organs. This system is used to teach emergency surgical
procedures and have been shown in numerous studies to teach lifesaving skills better than
the other options that would once again require students to cut into live animals such as pigs,
goats, or dogs ( Ranganatha, & Kuppast, 2012).

Should Animal Testing be Banned

18
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Yes

No

I don't know

Figure 1 illustrates the feelings of consumers regarding animal testing. 71% of survey takers
stated that animal testing should be banned. 21% of survey takers indicated that animal testing

12
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

should not be banned and lastly, 8% of survey takers indicated that they were unsure due to the
fact that they did not have enough prior knowledge on the topic to come to a conclusion.
An interesting point to note is that survey respondents who indicated animal testing
should not be banned followed their response by stating they felt this way because modern day
science did not have the alternative technologies that would allow us to acquire the same results.
Given the information previously conducted, this is something we now know to be false. With
that being said, these results lead me to believe that with over 70% of survey takers wanting
animal testing banned, and those who dont are unaware of the alternative methods, I can
confidently say, based on consumer preferences, there is a society need to eliminate animal
testing.

Assessing whether consumers believe

animal testing is cheaper than
alternative methods

True
False

Figure 2 illustrates whether consumers believe animal testing is cheaper than

alternative methods. According to the test subjects, 26.09% believe that animal testing is

13
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

cheaper than alternative methods, while 73.91% believe that animal testing is more expensive
than alternative methods.
Based on the all of the research I have conducted thus far, I have found the opposite of
societal beliefs to be true. All evidence I have found claims animal testing is more expensive
than any other form of testing that is currently available.
For example, inVitro Internationals Corrositex (synthetic skin) can provide a chemical
corrosivity determination in as little as three minutes to four hours, unlike animal testing that
often takes two to four weeks. DakDak is an alternative test used to measure the effectiveness of
sunscreens. DakDak was reported to do in days what it takes animal studies months to do, and
estimates that it can test five or six products for less than half the cost to study a single product in
animals. The traditional testing of chemicals using animals can take up to five years per
substance and cost millions of dollars, while non-animal alternatives can test hundreds of
chemicals in a week for a fraction of the cost (Willett & Sullivan, 2013). One study conducted
by Peta found that more than $16 Billion in taxpayer money is wasted annually on animal
testing. This is another indication that leads me to believe that it may be not only feasible, but
also beneficial to eliminate all forms of animal testing.

14
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Assessing whether consumers are

informed if their medications/cosmetics
have been tested on animal.

Yes
No

Figure 3 illustrates whether consumers are informed if their medications/cosmetics

have been tested on animals. According to the test subjects, 30.43% believe they are aware if
the products they use are tested on animals prior to using them. On the other hand 69.57% stated
they were unaware if the products they use have been tested on animal prior to using them.
These statistics lead to me believe that society as a whole is not informed on this subject
matter. If education or even increased clarity regarding the ingredients that are used within a
product is heightened, the statistics may have yield different results. The lack of consumer
knowledge may be a reason that animal testing is still a valid and practiced method for testing
products.

15
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Conclusion
To conclude, given the consumer preference, along with the cost and time reduction,
eliminating animal testing and replacing it with alternative methods makes logical sense for all
parties involved. After reviewing my research materials, I have concluded that it is feasible and
practical to replace animal testing for cosmetic and pharmaceutical purposed with alternative
methods.
Concerning cosmetics, there is a great amount of push-back within the media, and along
with that comes a strong desire from present day consumers. Initiatives have already been taken
in some of our neighboring countries. Europe is the largest cosmetics market in the world and
since the marketing of animal-tested cosmetics is now prohibited there, moving away from
animal testing makes good economic and trade sense in addition to simply being the right thing
to do. Other countries have also been modernizing; Israel and Norway have had bans on animal
testing in place for several years and, in 2013, India became the first country in Asia to announce
a ban animal testing for cosmetics. Korea, Brazil and Association Southeast Asian Nations
(ASEAN) are also making strides toward ending cosmetics testing on animals (Currie, 2013).
Regarding pharmaceutical testing, although it is feasible and practical, as mentioned
above, I was unable to locate a company within the United States that does not test on animals. It
appears as if great strides have been made in regards to reducing the number of animals tested;
however it may be a while until all forms of testing are eliminated for good.

16
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Recommendations
If a company were to move forward in activating this feasibility study proposal, I would
be conscious in expanding marketing efforts in order to not only highlight the importance of
acting socially and ethically responsible corporation, but also to create a core competency, and
therefore capitalize on the target demographic. I believe that in order for animal testing to be outlawed by alternative methods, a greater amount of consumers need to expand their awareness on
the topic.
Furthermore, I think further research needs to be conducted on the research relating to
medical and pharmaceutical purposes. Although valid research was found, questions are still
unanswered.

17
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

References
Goldacre, B. (2010, January 22). Animal Research Study Shows Many Tests Are Full of Flaws.
Retrieved November 6, 2014, from http://animal-testing.procon.org/ tml
Currie, A. (2013, January 1). Implications of Postponement of the 2013 Deadline for
Implementation of the 7 th Amendment to the Cosmetics Directive. Retrieved October
21, 2014, from http://www.piscltd.org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2013/04/AIC_Linz_poster.pdf
Hammond, J., Bermann, M., Chen, B., & Kushins, L. (2002, December 1). Incorporation of a
Computerized Human Patient Simulator in C... : Journal of Trauma and Acute Care
Surgery. Retrieved November 5, 2014, from
http://journals.lww.com/jtrauma/Abstract/2002/12000/Incorporation_of_a_Computerize
d_Human_Patient.6.aspx
Holst, L. (2009, January 1). Animals in pharmaceutical research and development. Retrieved
November 5, 2014, from
http://www.novonordisk.com/images/science/Bioethics/Downloads/Bioethics_Animals
UK_25-09.pdf
Manuppello, J. (2013, May 2). AltTox Forum. Retrieved October 20, 2014, from
http://forums.alttox.org/index.php?topic=979.0
Ranganatha, N., & Kuppast, J. (2012, September 3). A REVIEW ON ALTERNATIVES TO
ANIMAL TESTING METHODS IN DRUG DEVELOPMENT. Retrieved November 5,
2014, from http://www.ijppsjournal.com/Vol4Suppl5/5081.pdf
Rumsby, M. (2006, February 28). Episkin, Subsidiary Of L'Oral, Acquires Skinethic, Leader In
Tissue Engineering - Press releases - L'Oral Group. Retrieved November 2, 2014, from

18
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

http://www.loreal.com/press-releases/episkin-subsidiary-of-loreal-acquires-skinethicleader-in-tissue-engineering.aspx
Sullivan, K., Manuppello, J., & Willett, C. (2014, February 21). Building on a solid foundation:
SAR and QSAR as a fundamental strategy to reduce animal testing$. Retrieved October
20, 2014, from http://www.piscltd.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/Sullivan-et-al2014-Veith.pdf
Willett, C., & Sullivan, K. (2003, January 1). The Impact of US Adoption of the UN Globally
Harmonized System on the Use of In Vitro Methods for Ocular and Dermal Irritation
and Corrosion. Retrieved November 5, 2014, from http://www.piscltd.org.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2013/04/GHS-Poster.pdf

19
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Appendix A: Questionnaire
Hello. My name is Megan Aukrust and I am completing a feasibility study for my
Professional Writing and Rhetoric course at Hamline Universitys School of Business. I am
interested in finding out whether it is feasible to eliminate all forms of animal testing for
pharmaceutical and cosmetic purposes. Part of my study is to gauge public opinion, so I have
created a questionnaire for your completion.
Thank you for your time in completing this questionnaire. Your participation is greatly
appreciated!

If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me via email at:
Maukrust01@hamline.edu

20
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

Survey Questionnaire
1. How do you identify yourself?
Male
Female
Other
2. What is your zip code?
3. In your opinion, what are the benefits and disadvantages to animal testing?
4. Should animal testing be banned? (Please explain your answer)
5. If youre taking medication that has been knowingly testing on animals are you like to
feel?
a. Safe and comfortable
b. Unsafe and uncomfortable
c. Indecisive and no preference
6. Are you aware if your medications and/or cosmetics have been tested on animals prior to
being used by humans?
a. Yes
b. No
7. Does modern science allow us to use alternatives methods to animal testing?
a. Yes
b. No
8. Animal testing is cheaper than any other form of tests that may be available?
a. Yes
b. No

21
ALTERNATIVES TO ANIMAL TESTING

9. You perceive animal testing as:

a. Cruel and inhumane
b. Normal and necessary
c. Other (Please elaborate)
10. Animals and humans do not have the same DNA, how do you think this affects animal
testing?
a.

It makes the testing un-useful

b. It is still helpful
c. Other (Please Specify)