Animal Experimentation And My Personal Stance On The Matter

Throughout history, animal experimentation has played an important role in leading to new discoveries and human benefit. However, what many people tend to forget are the great numbers of animal subjects that have suffered serious harm during the process of experimentation. Many people are believed to be ignorant or misunderstand the nature of the lives that animals actually live, and are unable to understand the actual laboratory procedures and techniques. Other than the philosophical questions that arise, ethical (moral) questions are the main reason why many animal right activists want it banned in every country. Activists feel that to this day, there should be no good reason why any living thing should be subjected to this cruel punishment and unwanted torture just for serving another being’s needs.

Through the infliction of burns, wounds, and side effects, researchers examine the animal to study the healing process, and the infliction of pain to determine its effects and remedies.

Verbal language is not the only means of communication. We can notice a person's emotions without him saying anything because of non-verbal language or body language he expressed. If we can examine body language in human, then we are also able to observe non-verbal language of animals. In accordance to Charles Darwin in his book, The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals, many of the non-verbal reactions of human in expressing emotions are identical with those of animals (Darwin, 1873). Thus, there is no reason that one, especially a scientist who has conducted a lot of experiments with animals, does not know whether an animal is suffering from mental pain or not. As psychological pains caused by animal testing offends the tested animals' welfare, alternative methods must be used to replace animal testing.

The subject of animal testing when it comes to religion is exceedingly debated. As long as there is no unnecessary pain inflicted onto the animals and there is a real possibility of benefit to human beings, then Jewish, Christian, and Muslim teaching allows for animal experimentation. On the other hand, many people believe that since religious traditions, such as Hindu or Buddashism, tell us to be merciful to animals, we should not cause them suffering by experimenting on them.

). By the time religious leaders lifted these prohibitions, it was already too late—vivisection had already been ingrained in medical and educational institutions.

Nonetheless, that was over 700 years ago, the world has made many advances since then. Scientist are now able to grow cell cultures resulting in the creation of organs and different tissues that can be used in place of the animals for testing (Lloyd). When these horrendous diseases were actively seen in the world scientists did not have the laboratories and donors to enable their research. However, these resources are available today making it so the scientist choose the testing on animals over the other available options.

All through the world animals have, and are still being used in science for research, education, medical, and cosmetic purposes. Millions of animals, including rats, dogs, cats, and birds have been used in procedures in just this decade alone. Testing on animals can be painful, and deadly. Even though animal research is easier than human research, animal experimentation should be put to an end, because animals should not have to suffer while testing products for human purposes.

Carbon, L. (2011, September 7). Pain in laboratory animals: The ethical and regulatory imperatives. PLoS ONE, 6(9), p. 1-6. doi:10.137Vjournal.pone.0021578. (2015, November 16).

Other people think that animal testing is acceptable because animals they believe that animals are lower than humans and therefore have no significant rights because they can talk or comprehend like humans. People feel that animals have no rights because they lack the capacity to understand and exercise those rights. However, that does not mean that animal experimentation in medical research and cosmetics testing can be all of a sudden justified on the basis that animals are lower on the evolutionary chart than humans because animals resemble humans in so many ways. Many animals possess internal systems and organs that are identical to the structures and functions of human internal organs. Animals have feelings,, goals, needs, and wants that

The last major form of treatment in testing labs is the forced infliction of pain. This pain can come in the form of burns and cuts. These experiments are performed in order to get a full understanding of the body’s healing process. The severity of the wounds depend on which phase in the healing process the scientists want to analyze. Individuals will argue that animals have no mental or cognitive capacity, therefore they cannot feel pain or express any type of emotion. This does not make the act of enforcing pain any more humane. It is understandable that these inflictions of pain are merely for scientific purposes but unfortunately, the Animal Welfare Act is not properly administered to ensure that the procedures are humane.

Every year, millions of animals suffer through painful and unnecessary tests. Animals in laboratories all over the world live lives of deprivation, pain, isolation, and torture. Even though vast studies show that animal experimentation often lacks validity, leading to harmful human reactions, we still continue to use this method of experimentation, while many other less-expensive and more beneficial alternatives exist. Going beyond the issue of animal experimentation being morally wrong, this form of research is also hindering medical progress. Although the use of animals in laboratories is said to be necessary for the welfare and health of humans, people mistakenly believe that this immoral and unscientific method of experimentation is

infected with diseases that they would never normally contract, tiny mice grow tumors as large as their own bodies, kittens are purposely blinded, rats are made to suffer seizures, and primates’ skulls are cut open and electrodes are implanted in them. Experimenters force-feed chemicals to animals, conduct repeated surgeries on them, implant wires in their brains, crush their spines, and much more. (PETA, Cruelty to Animals in Laboratories)

Animal experimentation has been the basis of human knowledge for the advancement of medical and biological breakthroughs as early as 200 C.E.. It has been estimated that more than 100 million animals are killed in U.S. laboratories alone for scientists’ tests. Organizations and laws have been formed to prevent harmful experiments from taking the lives of animals, however, scientists argue that there would be a crushing blow to the future and current research in our world.

Innocent animals are locked inside cages in laboratories languishing in pain. All they want to do is roam free but instead they ache with loneliness. Annually over one hundred million animals are used for a variety of painful and torturous experimentations, also knows as vivisection, every year – without accountability. Animals used for experiments did not choose to donate their bodies to science. All they can do is wait for the next for the next terrifying and painful procedure that will be performed on them. Animals should not be experimented on because they are living, sentient beings. There are alternatives due to modern and up coming technology, and because the majority of what is tested on animals fails in humans. (The State of Animal Research)

For the past 20 years, there has a been an on going heated debate on whether experiments on animals for the benefit of medical and scientific research is ethical. Whether it is or isn't, most people believe that some form of cost-benefit test should be performed to determine if the action is right. The costs include: animal pain, distress and death where the benefits include the collection of new knowledge or the development of new medical therapies for humans. Looking into these different aspects of the experimentation, there is a large gap for argument between the different scientists' views. In the next few paragraphs, both sides of the argument will be expressed by the supporters.