Animal Experimentation at New York University Essay example

Around the world, millions of scientists conduct their studies by testing their research on animals. Many people believe that experimenting on animals is crucial to the advancement of medical discoveries. Studies show however, that animal experimentation is brutal and unnecessary. There are alternatives though: “replacement, reduction, and refinement” (Howard 2).

Although animal experimentation has been around for centuries, the ethical revival of realization on the moral status of animals began in the 1970’s. This problem was a few among many that had been quietly hidden for years until the 1970’s.

Aziz, T., & Stein, J. (2011). Animal testing: TV or not TV? Two views on whether scientists

For years, scientists have experimented with animals to study how diseases and disabilities affect them. Take neurologist Thomas Gennarelli for example. Dr. Thomas Gennarelli used primates as test subjects. For a little bit over 15 years, he bashed primates to imitate head injuries in human beings. He believed the results of his experiments would be beneficial in the future on how we should treat head injuries. The team that worked for him recorded the data via videotapes. Unfortunately, as much as he tried, Thomas Gennarelli flopped and could not create duplicate head injuries. In 1984, participants of the Animal Liberation Front broke into the University of Pennsylvania’s Medical school and swindled the tapes that’s withheld the data from the experiments. They edited the tapes to show the most gruesome abuses of the primates and submitted it to People for Ethical Treatments of Animals. Peta then submitted it to Congress and the media. Participants of these experiments claimed they appease the primates with drugs, so they would feel not pain. The videotapes told a different story. Just before the hammer smashed their heads, the primates tried to escape. The researchers used foul language and performed unsanitary procedures upon the primates. They mocked and chuckled at attentive primates with broken arms. The National Institutes of Health analyzed the videotapes. Thomas Gennarelli was condemned of 9 charges such as unacceptable veterinary care and lack of guidance for the

The experimentation of animals has been used for a multitude of years for research to advance a scientific understanding of a living organism. To this day animals are being tested on for the use of human products. In 3D-printing human skin: The end of animal testing? by Jessica Mendoza, Speculative Philosophy, the Troubled Middle, and the Ethics of Animal Experimentation by Strachan Donnelley, “Animals and Medical Science: A Vision of a New Era” by David O. Wiebers, Cruelty-free cosmetics benefit consumers as well as animals by The Sydney Morning Herald, and Technological Alternatives Can End the Experimental Use of Animals by George Dvorsky, show how Animal experimentation is redundant and needs to be diminished because there are

One of the largest controversies involving the testing on animals is the harm that is inflicted on them. Prove lies in the many leaked photographs showing the horrific pain that has been forced onto beings that cannot speak

A lot of human success is due to vivisection, otherwise known as animal experimentation. Some experiments involve infecting animals with a deadly disease, poisoning them for testing toxicity levels, and subjecting them to other painful, and even life threatening experiments. There are new alternatives ways of testing without involving the lives of helpless animals, it is no longer necessary to test with these creatures. They do not provide scientists with completely accurate information. Although it is now deemed as cruel, in the past, animal testing was responsible for many cures.

At the University of Wisconsin, cruel and immoral experiments are being conducted on newborn baby monkeys to provide doctors with further understanding of anxiety disorders and the effects it has on the cognitive features of the brain. The experiments involve restraining the monkey from their mother and placing them in solitary confinement where they await for the harsh grasp of rubber gloves from scientists, and the cold insertion of a needle under their skin. Filled with drugs, the monkeys are then exposed to a variety of stress provoking stimuli, such as live snakes, painful biopsies, and epileptic-inducing brain scans. This puts so much stress on the monkeys’ little bodies that they usually do not live past the age of two. However, those that survive will still have to live with the traumatic experiences and deprivation of their mothers, which usually resorts them to self-mutilation and going into shock. Regardless, the doctors have it in their plans to kill them even if they do survive. I do not think that this is morally permissible because any living being capable of feeling pain, should not be exposed to it as soon as birth, and it should not be the only thing ever felt in only two years of existence.

In support of this, over the years, Sydney University has used marmosets in experiments in which “Their eyes were removed for testing. The animals were then put down”(Panahi 2). No experiment is so vital that colleges have to take the eyes of hundreds of monkeys, then kill them when they've finished. Isn’t this why people all over the US donate their bodies to research? Yes, because these people are giving permission to do research and experiments on them when they become diseased, so that innocent creatures don’t have to. In addition, the British Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (BUAV) home office states “In 2013 there were 4,121,582 licensed scientific experiments carried out on 4,017,758 animals, some of which experienced ‘distressing and disturbing’ procedures”(Connor 1). Too high, way to high of a number when it represents the amount of animals living in distraught. For these animals, their lives are sitting in a cage and being taken out on a daily bases to be given shots, and possibly never waking up from anesthesia given. Some people say that it’s not enough to test cells in a petri dish, that scientists need something with an immune system and central nervous system to test products. On the contrary, primates are genetically similar to humans as “With the same high cognitive abilities, which makes the attractive to

In animal testing primates are treated horrible in laboratories. Primates are sensitive, intelligent, and share many important biological and psychological characteristics with human beings, unfortunately, makes them prime targets for experimenters, who treat them as if they were disposable pieces of laboratory equipment. “At the Oregon National Primate Research Center scientists fed monkeys excessive amounts of food and restricted their movement, essentially simulating the

Each year in U.S. laboratories, small animals are tortured in several ways such as being deafened, having their skin burned off, and having holes drilled in their heads (PETA, “Animals in Medical Experiments”). These cruel abuses can be prevented if animal testing is eliminated. Animal testing is an inhumane method of research that uses animals to ensure the safety of medicines and cosmetic products for human beings. As suggested by Kristina Cook, small animals such as mice, rabbits, and guinea pigs are the creatures who are subjected most to the torture, but larger animals including primates and dogs are also frequently used for experimentation.

An animal researcher, J.P Glick, spoke out about his own experience and how negatively he felt about his work. He informed readers that what he was doing was wrong, “we kept young, intelligent monkeys separated from their families and others of their kind for months,” (Glick, 2016) he knew there were faults in the process and now is becoming aware and sharing how inhumane his work was. Although there are a variety of severities of the experiments, they each cause harm. The ones conducting the tests don’t support the work so it shouldn’t continue.

Though the problem with this is that it restricts the freedom of researchers which ultimately affects the integrity of the research and these actions will produce weak results. Although all researchers aren’t knowledgeable or have a fixed standard when it comes to animal ethics personally, the fact is that most researchers don’t intent to harm animals. Intent is just as important to consider when accusing researchers of ethical violations. It is acceptable to have certain guidelines such as Psychologists should make every effort to ensure that those responsible for transporting the nonhuman animals to the facility provide adequate food, water, ventilation, space, and impose no unnecessary stress on the animals (American Psychological Association [APA], 2012)..It’s not acceptable to impose more stringent sanctions such as..... use procedures that minimize the number of nonhuman animals in research (APA, 2012). Such propositions although it’s already been implemented in the APA’s Guidelines for Ethical Conduct in the Care and Use of Nonhuman Animals (APA, 2012), is going way and beyond the absolute requirements needed to fulfill moral obligations to animals. This guideline is yet another example of controlling researchers’ autonomy to do what is best to achieve scientific

Experimentation is a vital aspect of all sciences, as it validates hypothesis and furthers scientific development. However, many believe that science crosses the line when animals become subjected to experimentation as a way to further research. This is a controversial topic, as it examines what to us, as humans, is more important, morality or science? These animals are forced to endure pain and suffering, in an attempt to prolong and ease the lives of humans. Animal vivisection is unethical, and there are alternatives that can be utilized, therefore, it should be lessened, and ultimately eradicated.

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