Animal Testing

December 11, 2012

Kathy Guillermo

Senior Vice President, Laboratory Investigations of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

501 Front Street

Norfolk, VA 23510

Re: Eliminating Inhumane and Invalid Animal Testing at Maybelline

Dear Ms. Kathy Guillermo,

Although I currently attend Rutgers Business School and major in Supply Chain Management and Marketing Science, my true passion lies with animal rights and welfare. Because another one of my interests is cosmetics, I have done a lot of research about numerous companies who have vowed to abstain from animal testing. Unfortunately, multiple companies still partake in animal testing. Animal testing is neither the cheapest nor most accurate method to assess the safety of various ingredients of makeup. Research has shows that there is a large amount of tests that do not include animals and yield almost 100% accurate results. The research and development costs would significantly decline if alternative methods were to be used in laboratories. In addition to inaccurate results and high costs attributed to animal testing, the animals that are used in these experiments are subject to cruelty and pain every day. By withholding the basic necessities of interaction and companionship, animals suffer mentally and physically. Still, there are some companies that still use live animals in their research.

Maybelline is one company that has not pledged to eliminate animal testing. It is important for Maybelline to realize that by switching to alternative methods, there will be numerous benefits. From significantly reducing costs, to being able to have more reliable results and saving the lives of numerous animals, removing all live animals from their laboratories will reap benefits for many years into the future. They will be able to market their products as “cruelty-free” and attract new customers who were previously unwilling to buy products that were tested on animals. Also, they will be able to create a...