blog post #4
I read my fourth Better Lives assignment, peer reviews, among which I chose Sungkyung Park’s post, which was interesting to see the views of a friend who took the same lecture, because she was in the same class as me. She even majors like the same class and hair make-up for fashion. So I had a similar flow to my thoughts. In particular, the selection of cosmetic brands and the focus on eco-friendly and opposition to animal testing were similar and interesting.
The Body Shop was also pursuing the same goal as Rush. I found this very interesting when talking about sustainability. The reason is that if I put more emphasis on animal protection in eco-friendly and animal protection, she puts more emphasis on environmental aspects. An eco-friendly survey at her cosmetic brand made me feel a lot. Not only did she feel that her investigation was deep in this part, but she also excelled in the delivery.
In particular, I mentioned, “In particular, microplastics in cosmetics, which have become a big issue these days, are known to have a big problem polluting the ocean. Scientists say beauty products containing plastic microbeads pollute water supplies, harm sea creatures and leave tiny particles in human food. This means that the environment and humans are connected.” this part, the fact that microplastics are also related to marine pollution, I agree with what we need to be more careful about because they are harmful to marine animals as well as marine pollution. In this part of marine pollution, it came as a surprise because it was something I didn’t recognize even when I was investigating. There are many cases of waste thrown into the ocean as well as cosmetics, and more importantly, various creatures living on the coast often eat microplastics that exist in deposits or rise to the surface of the water at high tide, mistaking them for food. In addition, microplastics have been reported in the digestive organs of marine mammals and fish so far, and the number of species has been continuously increasing. Living things that consume microplastics can be physically influenced by small particles. It is said that chemicals added to plastic synthesis can also cause secondary toxicity in biological fire extinguishers, and we think we should use force for all of this.
“I think I can also participate in the sustainability they seek and empower their movement by using these brands’ products. In regards to sustainability, many makeup artists’ makeup kits contain a variety of chemicals and disposable products. This can be an environmental hazard enough. We cannot avoid this situation, but I think we can reduce the damage to the environment by using substitutes.” Through this sentence, I really agree with her 100 percent and think she has the same idea as me. In my third blog, I also mentioned the same idea as her had. People with jobs that use a lot of cosmetics need particular attention. With each of us paying attention and increasing use of eco-friendly and animal protection brands, we can also feel the change in our future toward a better life. Of course, we can’t reduce our use by 100 percent right now, but with this knowledge, I think that a steady little practice and effort can make a difference.
This article gave me more information. It could also be interesting, and I think it was well reflected in the Better Lives theme, and I agree with all of her arguments.