Argumentative Essay On Animal Testing

Another importance of animal testing is this testing makes large contribution in toxicity; a study of harmful effects of chemical substance on living organisms besides finding cure for human diseases (The MSPCA–Angell, 2013). In fact, Daston, Procter and Gamble made a clarification in their article of Alternatives in Reproductive Toxicity: A Way Forward, that animal tests are being relied on for the prediction of potential harm of chemicals which may affect human reproductive system. This is because, as some animals and human have identical characteristics in complex body system, animal tests that is conducted for evaluating toxicity of reproductive are designed to apply on the complete reproductive cycle. Those three authors also added that animal testing become a medium for good prediction of toxicity as animal body systems are as complex as human’s. Rather than testing the chemical substances on human which is used for predicting potential harmful effects on body system, animal testing is the most appropriate and safest medium to save human lives.

The use of animals in scientific research has hugely increased in the last few years. A research conducted by Dr. Hadwen Trust suggests that approximately 115 millions animals are used in scientific experimentation every year (qtd in “Fact and figures”). Animal testing, also known as animal vivisection, is a process before human clinical trials, where animals are used in experiments to determine toxicity, dosing and efficacy of drugs (Biology dictionary). Although some scientists argue that animal testing is necessary to ensure safety, animal testing is unreliable, dangerous and unnecessary.

Many people often oversee the effects of animal testing. This has been going on for decades and many are unaware of the results and the damages animal testing can cause. Animals undergo a lot of stress and pain when they are put through experimentations. Many have debated that it is unethical to test on animals while others say it helps to protect the safety of humans. In my opinion, animal testing is cruel and should be made illegal. Their lives are just as important as human lives and should not be treated as experimental animals. The system of an animal differs from the human system, therefore even if a tested product did not harm the animal, it may or may not be harmful to humans. Hence, our body system reactions differ from the bodies of an animal. It has been scientifically proven that 90% of the animals being tested in labs results in death while only a handful of animal experiments are successful. There are multiple alternative methods rather than forcefully harming innocent animals. I will explore how animal testing can affect the health of the animals and if there is possibly a better alternative rather than testing on animals.

Over one million animals are burned, immobilized, poisoned, and tortured in US labs every year (DoSomething.org). Animal testing is considered a very controversial topic that evolves to protesting rather large companies, and also leads to boycotting a specific brand that is known to test on animals. Animals should not be used for testing products because it is cruel to the animals, there are now new ways to test products, and animals are very different from humans so they are not accurate results.

Animal research has served a vital role in the scientific community for many centuries and continues to do so.

Ever since the late sixties and early seventies, animal research has been under fire for what they do. This is mainly due to the changing perspectives on the

The structural differences between animals and humans sometimes lead to inaccurate result. Not only have that, the harsh and brutal experiment on the experimental animals caused them to go through dreadful, painful emotions. Since alternative tests like in vitro continue to improve and evolve in the research community, animal testing can slowly be replaced. According to Gregory Mone “In vitro and in silico testing will play a much larger part in how we assess chemicals in the future” (Mone). The advancement in science is encouraging but at cost of the animal’s suffering and lives is inhumane and should be done away

Animal testing protests have had a long and turbulent history. This argument is one that has been debated since the early 1960’s. It all began when animal rights activists began to take interest in the ethics, or lack thereof, of testing animals for scientific and cosmetic studies. Some of these activists call for researchers to ensure that all of their animals are humanely cared for, while other activists called for the complete end of animal testing. These debates would continue on into the 21st century. Since the inception of this debate there have been factions of radical activists, such as the Animal Rights Miltia, that focus on direct action, performing actions ranging from breaking and entering to arson and car bombings. The issue

Humankind would not be developed and improved without advancement of biosciences and technology. Besides many aspects of life that scientists are working on researching to provide a high-quality life for human beings, public health is one of the main areas. As a matter of fact, scientists have conducted a number of experiments to evaluate side effects of new medicines. As a result, animals are the top testing samples which have brought into many controversies for years about using testing them for scientific purpose. In this essay, the idea of supporting this practice will argue reasons why scientists should use animals for testing.

Multiple studies have revealed that experimenting on animals is a rather expensive investment. “PETA found $56.4 million of government funds spent on animal experiments that, despite running over many years, failed to provide any useful results” (ProCon.org). This exorbitant cost disables scientists from being able to evaluate the thousands of chemicals that are being commercialized, that could potentially be a considerable risk to the human species. “An alternative test...was reported to do in days what it takes animal studies months to do, and estimates that it can test five or six products for less than half the cost to study a single product in animals” (neavs.org). When compared to alternative methods, such as computer modelling, the difference in costs between the two techniques is over $600,000.

This is a review of multiple works regarding animal testing and its need today. This is 2014 and there are other alternatives for testing that doesn’t involve animals. The questions are, “What are the alternatives to testing that doesn’t use animals?” and “How accurate are the results for tests where animals were used as the subjects?” In general, the literature seems to indicate that animal testing is just not worthwhile and animals should not be used anymore.

Animals are used by scientists to develop research for new medications and experiments daily. The Humane Society is working to decrease the use of animals in laboratories by promoting the advancement of affective alternative approaches. Animal testing provides a useful model for treatments of diseases and possible cures. According to the US-based foundation of Biomedical Research, animal testing has made a major advance within the last century- for veterinary health and humans. The practice of using animals for testing has been debated for many decades. Is it morally right or wrong to use animals during experiments? Does federal law ensure that animals used in research are treated humanely? When considering the benefits of animal testing,

In conclusion, animal testing is experimentation carried out on living animals to enhance our understanding of biology, the majority being aimed to increase knowledge of human biology. However, animal testing is not a necessity to expand our biological understanding and should be outlawed. These tests are a waste of resources as their results are not valid when predicting outcomes in humans. Animals testing is completely dispensable due to the presence of in vitro testing. In addition, these tests cause a great deal of physical and psychological damage to a multitude of faultless animals.

Using animals in research and to test the safety of products has been a topic of heated debate for decades. According to data collected by F. Barbara Orlans for her book, In the Name of Science: Issues in Responsible Animal Experimentation, sixty percent of all animals used in testing are used in biomedical research and product-safety testing (62). People have different feelings for animals; many look upon animals as companions while others view animals as a means for advancing medical techniques or furthering experimental research. However individuals perceive animals, the fact remains that animals are being exploited by research facilities and cosmetics

It first explores two published articles that describes pro and cons of use of animal for testing. Stephanie (2009) argued about issue and ethics for laboratory animals. Doke and Dhawale (2013) suggest an alternative of animal testing. It explores the strategy of 3 Rs that is reduction, refinement and replacement needs to be applied for laboratory to use on animals. However, Simon and Robin (2007) acknowledged article that is on support of animal testing. He stated that testing on animals have developed many life-saving cures for both humans and animals. There is no adequate alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system. A brief account of these alternatives and advantages associated is discussed in this review.