Though I’m an animal rights enthusiast for the most part—I would never wear fur, I don’t agree with circuses or other forms of abuse for entertainment, and I’m appalled at the way we treat our factory-farmed animals—I am on the fence a bit when it comes to animal testing.

Regarding cosmetic testing, I am easily against such things 100%. No rabbit should have his eyes sewn shut so I can be happy about my shampoo; we can simply use all-natural ingredients to refrain from such bizarre forms of torture, anyway. The shampoos we use in our home are nearly edible; I feel comfortable using them on my scalp just fine without animals having to die for it.

I realize that we have much safer, more humane ways to conduct scientific research rather than animal testing, and I think we should always use those methods when they are available. That said, I do know that some of the life-saving measures that were used to save my premature baby were based on some animal research at the hospital where she was born. When I learned that, my whole view changed. I know it’s incredibly biased, but I refused to protest this hospital when I learned of their testing years later.

That said, right now, even as more and more cosmetic companies are moving away from animal tests—and more and more medical groups are as well, thankfully, for better, more accurate research models—the Environmental Protection Agency is still functioning out of the Dark Ages. Even multinational, big dollar companies are beating this group that’s supposed to help protect the environment—which includes its resident animals.

The EPA currently mandates that every cleaner used to kill germs, insecticide, water pollutants, and weed killer be tested on animals. Can you believe this madness? This results in 12,000 deaths per chemical, a massive slaughter in the name of supposed science. The EPA claims its trying to make tests more humane, but any tests at all are too many when used this way. We’ve already learned that technological and other tests simply work better, are cheaper on the taxpayer, and do not result in unnecessary death; why aren’t we, therefore, using them already?

Please write to the EPA today and urge them to stop this unnecessary animal testing. Let them know that you’d rather save money and lives—both animal and human—by using better, modern testing methods.