THE
COSMETIC USE OF BOTOX Summary of article in FRAME News Issue 57
Botulinum toxin, produced by Clostridium botulinum, is one of the
most powerful poisons known.
In 1989 the US Food and Drug Administration approved the use of
BOTOX for the treatment of strabismus (squint) and blepharospasm
(involuntary and uncontrollable, forcible closure of the eyelids).
In 1987 an ophthalmologist noticed that patients treated for blepharospasm
also showed shallower frown lines between their eyes.
The effect of botulinum toxin on facial wrinkles has caught the
imagination of celebrities and its uptake has been fueled by the
media hype arising around the promise of a semblance of youth.
The toxin can also prevent the functioning of sweat glands, thus
making it a treatment for excessive sweating. Underarm BOTOX injections
were part of a package offered to the participants in the Oscar
ceremony in 2002!
The paralytic action of BOTOX on wrinkles is temporary. It is necessary
to receive a new injection every 3-4 months. There is therefore
continuing demand from BOTOX users. Over the four years up to 2002,
the use of BOTOX to treat facial wrinkles increased by 1500% in
the United States. It is estimated that future sales could reach
a figure of $1 billion per year by 2006.
The eagerness of some people to be injected with a highly potent
toxin in order to turn their faces into expressionless masks would
be simply risible were it not for the fact that the benefit of such
a sop to vanity is obtained at an extremely high cost in terms of
animal suffering.
Like other biological products, such as vaccines, the potency of
botulinum toxin varies from batch to batch. Therefore each batch
has to be tested and this consists of the classic LD50 test in which
mice are injected with various doses of the toxin to see which dose
will kill half of them. The testing of each batch requires at least
100 mice to be observed for 3-4 days. During this time, the animals
experience diffuse muscular paralysis, impaired vision, and paralysis
of the diaphragm leading to suffocation and death. This lethality
test remains the gold standard used by all manufacturers to express
the potency of their preparations.
It is a paradox that the public opposition to the testing of cosmetics
has seemingly not been transferred to the testing of botulinum toxin
for cosmetic use. However, information on this topic is lacking.
An extensive search of news and internet sources did not retrieve
a single article aimed at the general public.
There is no excuse for the fact that animals are being subjected
to very severe procedures in order to permit the marketing of a
product for cosmetic purposes. It is scandalous that this poor,
universally criticised LD50 test is still being used. In an ideal
world, a moratorium would be declared on the trivial, non-medical
use of botulinum toxin, at least until such time it can be tested
by humane methods. In reality commercial opportunism and individual
vanity will undoubtedly prevail over ethics, especially if public
pressure is lacking. This sad fact adds even more urgency to the
pressing need for valid alternatives to the in vivo potency test.
The IAVS is producing a leaflet to highlight the cruelty behind
Botox injections.