Mahatma Gandhi once said, “The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.”[1] Humanity is all about how humans treat each other as well as other living beings. Humans being the superior being are supposed to look after the other beings like the animals who don’t even have a voice and can’t help themselves. However, because of greed and ignorance humans have lost their humanity. Every day, countless number of cats and dogs and other animals suffer and die at the hands of the very people who are supposed to care for them. Physical violence, emotional abuse and life-threatening neglect are daily realities for many animals. Their only hope is that a kind person will speak up before it’s too late. However, Animal hoarders aren’t just those who own a few too many pets, they are persons whose mental disorders or compulsive tendencies can lead to illegal behaviour with terrible repercussions for animals. Hoarders that operate under the idea of being “shelters” or “rescues” are a troubling and increasingly prevalent practise. Raids on these institutional hoarding facilities have uncovered hundreds of sick, hungry, injured, dead, and dying animals. Hoarders’ homes frequently have accumulated faeces and urine covering every available surface, which can lead to dangerously high ammonia levels that can cause burns to the skin, eyes, and lungs.[2] In these congested circumstances, illness outbreaks and parasite infestations spread swiftly. If food and water are provided to the animals, they are frequently insufficient.

Animal cruelty involves gratuitously inflicting harm, injuring, or killing an animal. The cruelty can be intentional, such as kicking, burning, stabbing, beating, or shooting; or it can involve neglect, such as depriving an animal of water, shelter, food, and necessary medical treatment. Animal fighting, in which animals are trained or forced to attack each other in violent confrontations at the risk of grave injury or death, is another form of animal cruelty.  It is often broken into two main categories: active and passive, also referred to as commission and omission, respectively.

• Active cruelty (acts of commission): When someone purposefully harms an animal, it implies malevolent intent and is frequently referred to as NAI (Non-Accidental Injury). Intentional acts of cruelty are frequently among the most upsetting and should be taken as a warning sign for major psychological issues. It is important to take this type of behaviour extremely seriously because it is frequently linked to sociopathic behaviour. Animal cruelty can take many different forms and have many different causes in families where violence is prevalent.[3]
• Passive cruelty (acts of omission): Neglect is an example of passive cruelty because the crime is the absence of action rather than the deed itself. Do not be misled by the term, though. Animals who have been subjected to severe neglect may experience excruciating pain and suffering. Examples of neglect include malnutrition, dehydration, parasite infestations, allowing a collar to dig into an animal’s skin, providing insufficient shelter during extreme weather, and failing to seek veterinary care when an animal needs it.

How makeup industries abuse animals.

Another atrocious form of animal abuse can be seen in the cosmetics industry. In the United States, an estimated 26 million animals are used annually for testing purposes, both scientific and industrial.[4] Animals are used for a variety of biological, commercial, and health care purposes, including the development of medical therapies, testing the toxicity of pharmaceuticals, determining the safety of products intended for human use, and more. When the idea of animal testing arises, makeup appears innocent but is everything but. We frequently overlook the possibility that daily things we use have undergone animal testing. Any scientific experiment that could endanger the animal by causing it pain, stress, or other injury is considered to be an animal testing activity. The majority of the animals are killed or seriously injured during the experiment and die. Animal testing is defined by Cruelty Free International as “any scientific experiment or test in which a live animal is forced to undergo something that is likely to cause them pain, suffering, distress or lasting harm.”[5] Other forms of animal cruelty include the injecting or force feeding of harmful substances, the exposure of radiation, the inhalation of toxic gases or the removal of organs and tissues. Animal testing has been criticized for years by various governments and animal protection organizations. Animal testing is essentially useless, according to Cruelty Free International, and the research behind it is useless because animals don’t contract human diseases. The reactions of animals used in cosmetic trials could not be at all comparable to human reactions.

Despite the fact that it is not mandated by law, as it is in China, according to the Humane Society[6], businesses nonetheless opt to use animal experimentation. Guinea pigs, mice, rats, and rabbits are the animals that are employed the most commonly. They go through evaluations for eye and skin irritancy as well as any form of toxicity during these testing for cosmetic products. As a result, the animal may suffer serious harm or perhaps pass away. Unfortunately, these animals are often not protected under the Animal Welfare Act. 

According to the Humane Society International[7], 100,000–200,000 animals suffer and pass away each year as a result of aesthetic experimentation. In these tests, chemicals are injected into the animals’ eyes, down their mouths, and onto their shaved skin in order to record their reactions and guarantee that they are safe for human consumption. These studies establish whether the products are a source of widespread disease or health risks like cancer or birth problems. In order to determine what dose of a test chemical can result in death, they also perform lethal dose tests in which the animals are made to ingest huge amounts of the chemical. The animals subjected to these studies may experience excruciating pain, anguish, blindness, enlarged eyes, painful and bleeding skin, internal bleeding, organ damage, birth defects, convulsions, and even death. However, some scientists support testing for cosmetics. They believe that the most crucial benefit of animal experimentation is the clear reduction of human suffering. Understanding Animal Research claims that since mice and humans share 95% of the same genes, employing mice as test subjects is reliable[8]. The use of animal testing in veterinary research is another point of contention. Numerous medicines and cures that save lives have been made possible thanks in part to animal research. Despite this, cosmetic testing is still viewed as needless and incredibly cruel.

Some of the tests done on animals are as follows:

• Acute Toxicity Testing: The now-famous fatal dosage 50 percent (LD50) test, which is still often used in animal poisoning studies today, was the first acute toxicity test performed during the World War I era[9]. In this experiment, groups of animals are forced-fed progressively larger doses of a test drug, or progressively larger doses are administered topically, until half of them perish. Despite being in use for many years, the LD50 test and more recent modifications have never been proven by science to accurately predict chemical effects in humans. One international study that looked at the outcomes of rat and mouse LD50 testing for 50 compounds discovered that these tests only had a 67% accuracy in predicting human toxicity, but a set of human cell-line tests were shown to have an 80% accuracy in predicting toxicity.
• Eye and Skin Irritation/Corrosion Testing: The Draize corrosion and eye and skin irritation tests were developed in the 1940s. In these tests, a chemical is smeared across the shaved skin or dripped into the eyes of rabbits. At predetermined intervals for up to two weeks, laboratory technicians then document the damage, which may include inflamed skin, ulcers, bleeding, bloody scabs, swollen eyelids, irritated and hazy eyes, or even blindness. Throughout this drawn-out procedure, there is no obligation to administer any anaesthetics to the animals. The anatomical and physiological variations between human and rabbit eyes also contribute to the sometimes-incorrect outcomes of the Draize eye irritation and corrosion tests.[10] Using rabbits in irritation or corrosion experiments produces unreliable results since their skin is far more porous than human skin.
• Skin Sensitization Testing: In order to evaluate any allergic reaction, researchers repeatedly inject test substances into animals as part of the guinea pig maximisation test (GPMT), which was first reported in 1969.[11] Due to an allergic reaction, this test could make guinea pigs’ skin unpleasant, swollen, ulcerated, or otherwise uncomfortable. Adjuvants are used to further amplify this reaction by boosting the immunological response of the organism. The mouse local lymph node assay (LLNA), in which a test chemical is administered to the ears of mice before they are killed so that the lymph node next to the ear can be excised and the mice’s immune response can be assessed, has entirely superseded the GPMT in several industries. The quantity of separated lymphocytes from the lymph node is then used as a measure of skin sensitization
• Carcinogenicity Testing: In a test known as a “rodent carcinogenicity bioassay,” rats or mice are made to swallow, breathe, or have the test material injected into or applied to their skin. Before the animals are slaughtered, the drugs are given to them for up to two years so that scientists can look for cancer-related indicators like the emergence of tumours or abnormal cell growth. When using rodents to predict human carcinogenicity, there is a substantial likelihood of both false positives and false negatives, according to a 2002 evaluation of the available evidence[12].
• Reproductive and Developmental Toxicity Testing: Tests for reproductive and developmental toxicity aim to evaluate how a drug affects an animal’s capacity for reproduction and the development of its progeny. These studies involve the administration of a test chemical to rats several weeks prior to mating through gestation. The growth, survival, and development of the offspring as well as the adult rats’ fertility are then assessed. In two-generation studies, the developmental toxicity study’s first-generation offspring are mated to determine how a chemical affects the fertility and toxicity of the second-generation offspring. With the two-generation test, more animals are used in these experiments and they are exposed to potentially dangerous compounds for longer periods of time.

Some of the main animal-based ingredients used in beauty products:

1. KERATIN – Taken from the hair and horns of various animals, keratin is used in shampoos and conditioners to strengthen hair and nails.
2. TALLOW – Itis animal fat used in many nail polishes, soups, eye makeup, and foundations. Moreover, this ingredient can also be called oleic acid, oleylsterate, and oleyl oleate.
3. BEESWAX (CERA ALBA) – It is most commonly used to make lip balms, soaps, moisturizers. This ingredient increases the skin’s absorption of moisture.
4. GUANINE – It is used to make a shimmering effect in eyeshadows.
5. LANOLIN– It comes from sheep’s wool, and it is used to make lip balms, lipsticks, and lip glosses.
6. CARMINE– It gives lipsticks, blushes, and nail polishes that vibrant red colour. It comes from crushing insects called cochineals. You can also spot this ingredient as natural red 4, E120, and C.I 75470.
7. SHELLAC– Itis another ingredient that comes from insects. More precisely, lac bugs. Shellac is famous due to the shine and strength it gives to nail polishes.

Choosing products that contain any ingredient mentioned above could mean that animals were both tested on and hurt while making the product.[13]

Many cosmetics companies either conduct their own animal testing, or they pay others to do so. According to PETA research[14], these companies include Benefit, Clinique, Estée Lauder, L’Oréal, Makeup Forever, Maybelline, OPI, and Victoria’s Secret. While many nations have restricted or outright prohibited the sale of cosmetics based on nonhuman animal testing, there are frequently still legal loopholes that let such testing to go place.

The Coalition for Consumer Information on Cosmetics (CCIC) was created by a number of non-governmental organisations because businesses frequently keep their use of animal testing under wraps. The CCIC also created the Leaping Bunny certification programme for personal care and household products made by American or Canadian businesses. The Leaping Bunny Compassionate Shopping Guide’s list of makeup brands no longer uses animal experimentation in the course of developing new products. These businesses included Alba Botanica, Badger, Beautycounter, Beauty Without Cruelty, Burt’s Bees, CoverGirl, Crazy Rumors, Derma E, Desert Essence, Dr. Bronner’s Magic Soaps, J-S-N, YES to Inc., and Zuzu Luxe as of 2021. The Leaping Bunny website states that the certification programme has more than 2000 companies signed up. Many businesses with Leaping Bunny certification also took the trouble to register as EWG Verified Brands. EWG is a group that promotes chemical safety and places a high value on ingredient disclosure to protect public and environmental health. Several beauty brands, including Beautycounter, Biossance, Coastal Classic Creations, Elaluz, Just the Goods, Marin Bee Company, Mineral Fusion, Qet Botanicals, Sally B’s Skin Yummies, Versed, and W3LL PEOPLE, have their products certified by both the Leaping Bunny and the EWG.

Countries Banning Animal Testing on Cosmetics:

Due to growing concern over the use of animals on cosmetic testing, many countries have taken initiative, prepared plans to either completely ban or limit and regulate animal testing in respective countries. Few countries have implemented the ban process, while in some countries, it is under progress.

 Europe – Animal testing on cosmetics was initially prohibited by the EU. The very first ban on the sale of finished goods was lifted in 2014, while a ban on the use of goods subjected to animal testing was enacted in 2008[15]. Cosmetics that have undergone animal testing or use substances that have undergone animal testing are completely prohibited from being sold or imported by the European Union as of March 2013. Since the EU represents a sizable market for cosmetics businesses worldwide, this legislation has compelled those businesses to create alternatives to animal testing techniques in countries like China and South America.

 Israel- Israel prohibited the production, sale and promotion of cosmetics, toiletries and household cleaners that were tested on animals. Personal-care and household products were banned within the country in 2007[16]. The government introduced a new law in 2010, which entered into force on 1 January 2013, regarding the banning of imported products that have been tested on animals in other countries.

 Brazil– Sao Paulo became the first of the four Brazilian states to outlaw the use of animals in the testing of cosmetic ingredients and goods in January 2014[17]. A Brazilian politician proposed changes to the cosmetics bill in September 2015 that would prohibit the sale of formerly animal-tested cosmetics as well as ingredients.

 Taiwan – Legislation prohibiting the testing of cosmetics on animals had been introduced in Taiwan. The legislation took effect in 2019[18]. The sale of imported cosmetics was exempted from the restriction, though. With the passage of this proposed legislation, Taiwan has joined the approximately 30 other nations that have outlawed the use of animals in the testing of cosmetics. The sale of imported goods won’t be impacted by the prohibition, though.

 Turkey – The Turkish Cosmetics Regulation forbids testing cosmetic components or formulations on animals where a suitable alternative approach is available. Through an amended regulation that was passed and published in the Official Gazette, Turkey’s Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Administration put the prohibition into effect. It states that goods created utilizing animal testing are no longer permitted to be sold in the nation if the testing took place after an appropriate alternative method had been approved at the EU or OECD level. The amendment also outlaws the sale of finished goods that have undergone animal testing.

 South Korea -The Korea National Assembly made the decision to outlaw the manufacturing of cosmetics that undergo animal testing in 2018[19]. Animal experimentation on cosmetics will soon be prohibited, according to the South Korean Ministry of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Affairs. The government’s Five-Year Plan for Animal Welfare forbids testing finished goods on animals, and a ban on testing ingredients will be the subject of additional discussion

 China – Animal testing for cosmetics is really required by law in China. Therefore, if a corporation sells its goods in China, they are aware that animal testing will take place. But China is gradually moving toward using cruelty-free cosmetics. This criterion may no longer apply to some cosmetics according to recently established regulations. After four years of collaboration with the Chinese government and supporting researchers from the Institute of In Vitro Sciences in Maryland to develop a new, cruelty-free cosmetic testing technique, China reportedly approved its first non-animal cosmetics test in 2016[20], according to PETA.

USA – Companies will continue to test on animals as long as some nations, like China, mandate it and other nations, like the U.S., allow it. In the United States, animal testing for cosmetics or household products has not yet been outlawed. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the US controls industrial chemicals and goods that are classified as pesticides, including weedkillers, antimicrobials, and lawn fertilizers. Every pesticide must, by law, go through dozens of different painful and lethal animal studies, including testing on dogs, before it can be marketed. Animal research can be conducted on animals if a corporation wants to, even if it is not required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

India – India became the first nation in South Asia to outlaw the use of animals in the testing of cosmetics and their constituents. The decision was made in 2014[21] during a meeting of the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) Cosmetics Sectional Committee, which was chaired by the Indian Drugs Controller General and is in line with the viewpoint of the European Union. The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), India, had also started a number of initiatives to end animal testing on domestic goods and their ingredients. In compliance with the rules of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act and the Animal Cruelty Act, action will be taken against any cosmetic product that uses animal experiments. Animal-free modern substitutes for animal testing must be used. Cosmetics tested on animals and the import of such products is banned as per rules 135B and 148C of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945[22].

Remedy to Animal Cruelty

Although, so many countries have implemented ban on animal cruelty it still is a rigorous practise which happens behind the curtains. Animal testing is cruel and harmful to animals. It is also no longer the most effective way to determine the quality of the product. There so many alternatives to animal testing that are more accurate and ethical, as well as completely harmless. According to the New England Anti-Vivisection Society (NEAVS), some of these alternatives include computer models, cultured cell tissues and in vitro testing. 

It seems completely ridiculous that humans continue to cause agony to animals for experimentation when there are so many alternatives available. The following companies test on animals: NARS, L’Oréal, MAC, Clinique, Maybelline, and Benefit. These are all very large companies with millions of customers and high-quality products. Unfortunately, buying makeup from companies like this amount to supporting and promoting animal testing. Even worse, the majority of these individuals do it unintentionally. One of the most well-known beauty companies in the world was scandalized a few years back for mislabelling their cosmetics: Despite producing their goods in China, where animal testing is necessary, Loreal Paris promoted themselves as a 100 percent vegan, cruelty-free company[23]. Although the brand attracted a lot of media attention because to the scandal, numerous other well-known beauty brands, including Estee Lauder, Clinique, Bobbi Brown, Nars, Maybelline, Makeup Forever, and Benefit, all use animal testing. Although it is not required, in the US, brands use animal testing to test out new substances in their product releases. 

  The European (EU) Parliament called for an end to animal testing in the cosmetic business globally by 2023[24] after seeing the procedures and negative effects that these animals must endure. Numerous nations, including Japan, the USA, Canada, Russia, and South Africa, have started to phase out animal testing since the publication of this suggested prohibition. It is important to recognise how urgent it is for this prohibition to become international. Recently, the European Parliament passed a resolution calling on the European Commission to establish an EU-wide action plan to actively phase out animal testing, followed by a call for a blanket ban on animal testing worldwide. The EU’s animal protection organisations, including PETA, Cruelty-Free International, and 450 other businesses, encouraged EU policymakers to uphold the prohibition on cosmetic testing in 2020[25]. They demanded that new testing cease and that non-animal testing methods be accepted by the European Chemical Agency (ECHA) in the open letter that was sent to the commission and other authorities. In addition, with the help of the aforementioned open letter sent to the EU Commission, alignment on the animal testing issue had arisen during the course of the previous year amongst ingredient suppliers, significant players in the cosmetics industry, NGOs, and trade organisations. The necessity to internationalise the ban on animal testing, while not an easy task, cannot be overlooked any longer given the rise in the number of innocent animal deaths each year. Despite the incremental but significant advancements in this area, much more has to be done to convince many more nations to accept the ban as a whole.

Link to Sustainable Developmental Goals

The contribution of animals in achieving the SDGs is not recognized nor made explicit. Nevertheless, there are obvious areas where animals play an important role in the context of sustainable development. These include for instance food security, transport, employment, and livelihoods. Animals are the key in poverty eradication by sustaining communities via ecotourism or source of income for poor families through trade. With proper Animal welfare practises, we can strike a balance between sustainable agricultural practises that reduces biodiversity destruction and over dependence on human edible food items which will in turn enhance food security. By proper management of waste, we can avert plastic plaques in our seas, give aquatic life chance to life and by doing so provide better sanitation for humans as well. “Fish carbon”[26] defines the marine life ability to address climate change and thus prevent global biodiversity loss. Humans depend on both plants and animals, so preserving both is equally necessary. All species are connected by the way of their interaction is at the core of achieving the SDGs. Protecting and improving the welfare of animals contributes to the realization of many goals and target in the 2030 agenda[27].

Conclusion

It is cruel and pointless to test cosmetics on animals when businesses can already make inventive goods with thousands of ingredients that have a track record of safety and don’t need any more testing. Additionally, new non-animal testing techniques have replaced outmoded animal procedures with frequently quicker, more affordable, and more reliable non-animal alternatives such as human cell-based assays and sophisticated computer models. Instead of measuring how long it takes a chemical to burn the cornea of a rabbit’s eye, manufacturers can now drop that chemical onto cornea-like 3D tissue structures produced from human cells. Likewise, human skin cultures can be grown and purchased for skin irritation tests. Because of heavy industrialization and growing competition, some human beings have lost their humanity. Just so that their product can be different and can be liked and purchased by a huge mass of people they do not hesitate to commit heinous crimes like that of killing and torturing small, voiceless animals. The best way to punish them is to stop purchasing their products and even boycotting it. The governments of different countries should be stricter while implementing laws against animal cruelty and give severe punishments to these blinded by money individuals. The majority of aesthetic safety concerns can now be addressed without using animals, and it has been demonstrated that these methods outperform animal testing in terms of predicting human reactions in the real world. Cruelty-free companies like Lush, Dove, and Herbal Essences develop cutting-edge new products without harming animals by using existing components with a track record of safe use in combination with contemporary non-animal tests. Animals do not have rights, but that does not mean humans can take away their lives as they please.

---

[1] Akbarsha, Mohammad Abdulkader, and Shiranee Pereira. 2010. “Mahatma Gandhi–Doerenkamp Center for Alternatives to Use of Animals in Life Science Education.” Journal of Pharmacology & Pharmacotherapeutics 1 (2): 108–10. https://doi.org/10.4103/0976-500X.7235.

[2] PETA UK. 2015. “Cruelty to Animals | Animals Are Not Ours to Abuse | Animals Are Not Ours to Abuse | PETA UK.” PETA UK. 2015. https://www.peta.org.uk/issues/animals-not-abuse/cruelty-to-animals/.

[3] “April Is Animal Cruelty Prevention Month.” n.d. MSPCA-Angell. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://www.mspca.org

[4] “Pro and Con: Animal Testing | Britannica.” n.d. http://Www.britannica.com. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://www.britannica.com

[5] Cruelty Free International. 2023. “What Is Animal Testing? | Cruelty Free International.” Crueltyfreeinternational.org. 2023. https://crueltyfreeinternational.org.‌

[6] “Breaking News: China Says It Will No Longer Require Animal Tests for Most Imported Cosmetics like Shampoo and Mascara.” n.d. The Humane Society of the United States. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://www.humanesociety.org

[7] The Humane Society of the United States. 2022. “Ending Cosmetics Animal Testing.” The Humane Society of the United States. 2022. https://www.humanesociety.org.

[8] J.N. Carlson, Animal Models For the Study of Human Disease (Second Edition), 2017, chp 23 pg 315-317.

[9] “Acute Toxicity Test with Terrestrial Animals.” n.d. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://www.lkouniv.ac.in/site

[10] “Eye Irritation and Corrosion.” 2021. PETA. October 6, 2021. https://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/eye-irritation/.

[11] Basketter, David A., and George F. Gerberick. 2022. “Skin Sensitization Testing: The Ascendancy of Non-Animal Methods.” Cosmetics 9 (2): 38. https://doi.org/10.3390/cosmetics9020038.‌

[12] Fanny K. Ennever, Lester B. Lave, Implications of the lack of accuracy of the lifetime rodent bioassay for predicting human carcinogenicity, Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, Volume 38, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 52-57, ISSN 0273-2300,

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0273-2300(03)00068-0.

[13] “Animal Ingredients in ‘Cruelty Free’ Cosmetics | Animal Liberation Victoria.” n.d. http://Www.alv.org.au. https://www.alv.org.au.

[14] PETA. 2017. “These Beauty Brands Are Still Tested on Animals | PETA.” PETA. PETA. May 8, 2017. https://www.peta.org.

[15] D., Sreedhar, Manjula N., Ajay Pise, Shilpa Pise, and Ligade VS. 2020. “Ban of Cosmetic Testing on Animals: A Brief Overview.” International Journal of Current Research and Review 12 (14): 113–16. https://doi.org/10.31782/ijcrr.2020.121424.

[16] Press, Viva Sarah. 2013. “Israel Bans Import of Cosmetics Tested on Animals.” ISRAEL21c. January 8, 2013. https://www.israel21c.org

[17] D., Sreedhar, Manjula N., Ajay Pise, Shilpa Pise, and Ligade VS. 2020. “Ban of Cosmetic Testing on Animals: A Brief Overview.” International Journal of Current Research and Review 12 (14): 113–16. https://doi.org/10.31782/ijcrr.2020.121424.

[18] “Taiwan Bans Animal Testing in Cosmetics Products.” n.d. UL Solutions. https://www.ul.com/news/taiwan-bans-animal-testing-cosmetics-products.‌

[19] “Korea Announces Ban on Animal Testing for Cosmetics | Cruelty Free International.” 2016. Crueltyfreeinternational.org. January 5, 2016. https://crueltyfreeinternational.org.

[20] “Update: China to Approve First Non-Animal Cosmetics Test.” 2016. PETA. November 2, 2016. https://www.peta.org/blog/china-approve-first-non-animal-cosmetics-test/.‌

[21] Pandey, Kundan. 2014. “India Bans Import of Animal-Tested Beauty Products.” Down to Earth. October 15, 2014. https://www.downtoearth.org.in.

[22] The Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945.

[23] Rose, Suzana. 2019. “How L’Oreal Is Misleading Customers about Being Cruelty-Free – Cruelty-Free Kitty.” Cruelty-Free Kitty. November 8, 2019. https://www.crueltyfreekitty.com.

[24] “Animal Testing of Cosmetics: MEPs Call for Worldwide Ban | News | European Parliament.” 2018. http://Www.europarl.europa.eu. February 20, 2018. https://www.europarl.europa.eu.

[25] “Ending Animal Testing: Europe Commits to Accelerating Phase-.” 2023. Unilever. July 26, 2023. https://www.unilever.com/news/news-search/2023/ending-animal-testing-europe-commits-to-accelerating-phaseout/.

‌

[26] “Fish, Fisheries and Carbon: Ocean Carbon & Biogeochemistry.” n.d. Accessed July 19, 2024. https://www.us-ocb.org/fish-fisheries-and-carbon/.

[27] “Animal Welfare in the Context of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) OIE Global Forum on Animal Welfare.” n.d. https://www.woah.org

---

Author: Ishika Bajpai

---