Animal Testing Inhumane

As of 2015, 200 to 225 million animals are said to used in laboratory research for the biomedical industry annually worldwide. Typically defended by arguments of reliability and human health benefits, recently the question of ethics and values placed on animal testing have caused it to become a relevant and pressing topic that has been more widely discussed and debated. First off, the laboratory conditions that are instigated upon millions of animal models for the sake of medical research has been said to be unethical and cruel. Additionally, it has been debated that the results of animal experimentation are unreliable across a wide range of areas. Lastly, animal testing not only leads away from the direction of resources from more effective testing methods but also prolongs the duration of time humans may need to wait for an effective cure. Therefore, the potential benefits of animal experimentation are greatly outweighed by the risks and collective harm of humans and animals which is why resources should be directed towards more human-based testing procedures.

Approximately 26 million animals are used every year in the United States alone for research and commercial testing (“Background of the Issue” 1). For years, legislators have debated the pros and cons of animal testing, and laws were passed to attempt to fix the inhumane treatment of the cute, innocent testing subjects, the animals. Although the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) was revised numerous times, “the species most commonly used in experiments (mice, rats, birds, fish, reptiles, and amphibians) comprise 99% of all animals in laboratories” and are the animals that are specifically exempted from protection under the act (“Experiments on Animals” 2). A simple fix to animal cruelty during testing is to use alternative methods since human and animal bodies already vary greatly. For years, animal testing was the best option because there was no alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system; however, in the age of technology, there is no reason for millions of animals to be killed due to the severity of the testing. Therefore, animal testing should be banned because alternative methods provide more accurate results since human bodies are very different than animal bodies; furthermore, animal advocacy organizations should promote cruelty-free products more so customers know what to purchase and use.

Imagine being born, only to live a life of torture. You are brought to a lab, and cruelly tested on against your will. Toxins poured into your eyes, painful injections to your skin, then left to die when you’re no longer useful. Although many do not realize it, people use products tested on animals in their everyday lives. For girls, many of your favorite makeup brands, such as Estee Lauder, Makeup Forever, and Maybelline take part in animal testing. Products such as toothpaste, cologne, deodorant, laundry detergent, razors, and even band-aids aren’t tested innocently, either. As a makeup enthusiast, I am passionate about how the products I use daily are tested. Today I will help you understand what animal testing is and how it started, how it’s currently affecting animals around the world, and what organizations are doing to help make a difference in the future. To begin, I will explain the history of animal testing. An animal test is any scientific experiment or test in which a live animal is forced to undergo something that is likely to cause them pain, suffering, distress, or lasting harm.(https://www.crueltyfreeinternational.org/why-we-do-it/what-animal-testing) Animal experiments are not the same as taking your animal to the vet. Animals used in laboratories are harmed, not for their own good, and usually killed at the end of an experiment. Animal experiments include injecting or force feeding animals with potentially harmful substances, exposing animals to radiation,

Do you know how many animals are killed yearly for the use of animal testing? More than 100 million animals are murdered. Testing on animals is cruel and inhumane. However, alternate methods can be used to replace the need for animals. As a final point, animal tests are more expensive than other methods. Animals have been used to practice on since antient times.

Alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals. In vitro (in glass) testing, such as studying cell cultures in a petri dish, can produce more relevant results than animal testing because human cells can be used. [15] Microdosing, the administering of doses too small to cause adverse reactions, can be used in human volunteers, whose blood is then analyzed. Artificial human skin, such as the commercially available products EpiDerm and ThinCert, is made from sheets of human skin cells grown in test tubes or plastic wells and can produce more useful results than testing chemicals on animal skin. [15][50][51] Microfluidic chips ("organs on a chip"), which are lined with human cells and recreate the functions of human organs, are in advanced stages of development. Computer models, such as virtual reconstructions of human molecular structures, can predict the toxicity of substances without invasive experiments on animals. [50]

Animal testing, also known as animal research or experimentation refers to the use of non-human animals to conduct experiments which seek to control certain variables that have the potential to impact the biological systems or behaviors under study. The most commonly used animals are usually mice, cats, rats, dogs and primates. More than 20 million animals are usually subjected to food, drugs, chemical and cosmetic testing each year in the United States alone (Sharma et al, p.1). These animals usually suffer and die in the cruelest of ways despite the fact that there exist more modern non-animal tests which have been found out to save time, money and with more educational value. This essay explains why animal testing is bad and provides

Countless brands that people continue to use in their everyday lives test their products on animals. So many products that people keep in their homes stem from some sort of animal cruelty. Animals are being tested on products for the benefit of human use. " These include tests for cosmetics, food additives, household cleaners, pesticides, and industrial chemicals" (Baier, 136). Many people are not aware that animals are being tortured for products used in everyday life. Millions of animals are being tortured during animal experiments; when this cruelty is unnecessary. The results researchers receive from animal tests are inaccurate and wasteful. Animal testing should be eliminated due to the fact that animals endure inhumane suffering and long-term effects when alternative methods are available, and the information is unreliable and wasteful.

On the more sensitive side of the issue, animal testing has been noticeably recognized as inhuman. As an article in ProCon.org states, “…animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to…pain during experiments while be given no anesthesia for relief…” (“Animal Testing- ProCon.org”). Shannon Keith, the President of Beagle Freedom Project, shares her experience as a rescue leader. She sadly informs me, “…these animals have undergone numerous tests and have been deprived of the proper care, nourishment, environment, and basic rights.” The Beagle Freedom Project dedicates their time to rescue beagles and other animals from the inhuman and cruel living conditions (Keith). There have been arguments made by the “Understanding Animal Research”

Over 26 million animals are tortured and tested on every year, in the United States alone. Most are used for testing medical treatments, which people for animal testing say has saved countless numbers of lives, but how many has it destroyed in the making? Although testing on animals has lead to major scientific breakthroughs, the way in which they reach them is incredibly inhumane. We having the ability, should try our best to stop this wide spread animal testing because the tests are inhumane, the animals are abused during the tests, and the results can be achieved in other ways.

Using animals for research is not reliable in predicting the outcome of new chemicals on the human body system. According to American Anti-Vivisection Society, “Nine out of ten drugs that appear promising in animals studies go on to fail in human clinical trials.” That indicates that almost ninety percent of traditional animal experiments fail in human trials. Although humans are similar to animals, they still do not have the exact genetic make up as animals. American Anti-Vivisection Society claims that, “Even the same species have similar differences that can be found among different genders, breeds, ages and weight ranges, and ethnic backgrounds.” For example, humans react to new products differently because nobody is genetically the same. Some people experience the therapeutic effect of a drug and then others may have an allergic reaction to the drug. Even in the human species researchers see that not all drugs or products produce the same ideal results that are expected. If there were such wide variations of results between the same species why would it be logical to test products intended for human use on animals? This is a question that most advocates for alternative methods to animal testing would ask.

“Over 100 million animals are burned, crippled, poisoned, and abused in US labs every year” (11 Facts). Animal testing is a very flawed creation in today’s world. This innovation has caused much harm to many animals while also hurting the opinions of animal activists around the world. Animal testing is also known as the use of animals in experiments and development projects usually to determine toxicity, dosing and efficacy of test drugs before proceeding to human clinical trials (Biology Online). The use of animal testing has been around for throughout all of history, it also carries its disadvantages as they diminish the lives of many animals along with their unspoken opinion while also having some advantages, and lastly this notion is very expensive (Scutti).

Animal rights argue that researches on animal is an unethical or a cruel way of obtaining cures for humans. During examination more than 10 billion animals die due to the wrong administration of injections. Many animals are subjected to forced inhalation, feeding, dehydration and burns. During assessment animals are put through severe sufferings such as electric shocks, brain damage, blinding, withholding of food and water, immobilization of entire body and other painful procedures. Many of the animals die before or sometimes after the experiment. Some of the lab experiments which cause extreme discomfort and sufferings are anesthetization, intubations and euthanasia, when performed improperly. Unfortunately, the lack of experience and

Animal testing is a cruel and a horrible way which scientist are able to test chemicals on

Animal testing has long played a part in the science of testing, and it still plays a very important role in the medical world. Testing on animals in order to create a cure for AIDS is one thing, but testing on animals for human vanity is another. Animal testing is used to test the safety of a product. It has kept some very unsafe substances out of the cosmetic world. However, in this day in age, animal testing is not the only way to test the safety of a product. Animal testing in cosmetics has decreased over the years. However, it is still used by many companies in America. Animal testing is not only cruel, but it is also unnecessary in today’s advanced scientific world.

Observation and experimentation are how we as humans have been able to learn more about ourselves and the world and universe we live in. One of the most common methods of experimentation is animal testing. However, there are controversies surrounding animal testing. There are some that believe animal testing to be cruel and overdone, advocating for the eradication of the practice and further reliance alternative research methods. Groups like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and other animal rights advocates fall in this category. There are some that believe animal testing to be an invaluable resource and should continue, such as some scientists and research groups. However, there appears to me to be a consensus that is closer to the middle: the belief and understanding that while there are benefits to animal testing, there are flaws in the practice and there should be changes to increase its efficacy while we simultaneously explore alternate testing methods. Many scientists and the National Institute of Health (NIH) subscribe to this idea. I aim to explore the benefits, problems, and implications of animal testing in order to reach a more informed conclusion about a position that is most validated by the information I have used.