Here's a brief story about a young lady who agreed to submit herself to animal testing procedures in a London mall. Apparently animals are regularly subjected to these testing procedures during the development of cosmetics and perfume. Setting the general ethics of such testing to one side (how eye irritants and electrodes further perfume research is a mystery to me) - or even the accuracy of the statement this lady was trying to make (do companies really uses these tests for these types of products?) - the display raises some serious questions about strategy.

Even if we were to accept Jennifer's premise that animal testing is inhumane, is her display really helping further that cause? By submitting herself to such testing, do we really empathize any more with the animals that undergo this treatment? Or would publicly submitting a dog to this same display accomplish the same purposes? In that line of thought, could she possibly be accomplishing (accidentally) an alternative goal desensitizing us to human suffering? Even modestly paving the way for the use of human subjects in such testing? If nothing else, her submitting herself to such tests seems to improperly conflate the value of animals with humans - there is a world of difference between the two.