Serena Arce

Adam Padgett
English 102
February 28th, 2016
Annotated Bibliography
Inquiry: What alternatives can be used to stop animal testing?
Proposed thesis: The abundance of animal testing is inhumane and there are many different
alternatives that can be used to stop this kind of testing.
"Ban on Animal Testing: Looming Clash Over Deadline." LexisNexis. N.p., 22 June 2012. Web.
29 Feb. 2016.
The article talks about how in 2012, there was going to be a ban on the use of animals in
testing. The companies then responded to this saying it would be impossible to develop
substitution methods before 2013. The companies also argue that by eliminating animal
research, they would also be eliminating peoples jobs. The article goes into depth on the
argument about the ban on the research and on how companies have time to prepare for
finding and creating alternatives. The article is a bit dated so it may not be the best source
to use.
Dayu, Zhang. "China Considers End to Mandatory Animal Testing on Cosmetics." CNN. Cable
News Network, 15 Nov. 2013. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.
In China there are products that are required to be tested on animals in order for the
product to be sold in the Chinese market. This article talks about how animal testing
would no longer be mandatory for non-specialized cosmetics. The article brings to light
different companies that have also began to ban the use of animal testing in their

products. This article includes quotes from organizations such as Cruelty Free
International and European Union. The author of this piece is against animal testing
which helps my thesis. CNN is a reliable source because it is a globally known news
channel that has a high sense of credibility due to the fact that they are usually there to
cover breaking news.
Joham, Anju. "Why Animals Die to Save Humans." LexisNexis. N.p., 18 Sept. 1995. Web. 29
Feb. 2016.
This article talks about how the different alternatives of animal testing are beneficial. It
compares the alternatives to the two main tests that are used in cosmetic testing, the
Draize Test and the LD50 Test. The Draize Test is a toxicity test that tests whether or
not a product is damaging to eyes. This is usually tested on rabbits and causes major
irritation and blindness. The LD50 Test is a test where a substance is entered into the
animal determining the concentration of a dose that will achieve any predetermined death
rate. The author then shifts views and talks about how animal testing is beneficial in
different aspects. What he says is that animal testing is even beneficial to the animals in
finding vaccines for some painful diseases of which animals were silent victims. With
the author shifting views on the testing it brings a sense of mediation to the topic though
the author doesnt explicitly state which side of the argument he is on.
NEAVS. "Alternatives to Animal Testing and Research." NEAVS. N.p., n.d. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
This article is written by a nonprofit organization called The New England AntiVivisection Society, which is an organization that supports animal rights. The article they
wrote talks about the alternatives that could be used for animal testing. The organization
uses a quote that says, There is no doubt that the best test species for humans are
humans. It is not possible to extrapolate animal data directly to humans due to

interspecies variation in anatomy, physiology and biochemistry. This quote is basically

the thesis of my argument so I feel as though this piece might be beneficial to my paper.
"Should Animals Be Used for Scientific or Commercial Testing?" ProCon. N.p., 10 Dec. 2015.
Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
This article doesnt have a specific author, the article was created by a nonprofit,
nonpartisan website that presents both sides to all kinds of controversial issues. The
article shows both sides of the argument to whether or not animals should be used for
scientific or commercial testing which makes this article non-bias. The organization that
wrote this piece, ProCon, state facts and data that can back up either side of the argument.
ProCon also explains when the controversy broke out stating that the public outcry over
animal testing and treatment of animals in general broke out in the United States in the
mid 1960s, leading to the passage of the AWA. In that statement, the AWA refers to
the Animal Welfare Act. I feel as though this piece plays the mediator in the argument
and allows the reader to make their own informed decision on how they feel about the
argument.
Zhihua, Liu. "Get Beautiful Without Harming Animals." LexisNexis. China Daily: European
Weekly, 2 Apr. 2014. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
This article brings to light the animal testing controversy from not only the United States,
but in China as well. Zhihua states The rules on animal testing for beauty products differ
from country to country, and in European Union countries, the sale of such cosmetics are
banned completely. The author then explains how in China is then required to have
animal testing on specialized products such as hair dyes, sunscreens and skinwhiteners. Some products even have to be tested on animals twice. The piece advocates
the ending of animal testing and tells the anecdote of a Chinese MTV hostess that is

involved in a rising campaign to stop animal cruelty. The anecdote evokes a sense of
pathos in the piece which can decrease the credibility of the article.