Arguments Against Animal Research

Although there have been significant medical breakthroughs based in animal testing and experimentation, animal testing is a poor method of science as it is largely useless and

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.

In the article Defending Animal Research, it starts off explaining how scientist who use animals for their research are becoming targets of many people who are against animal testing. There has been many incidents where people have placed car bombs on the scientists vehicles and sent these men and women blades in the male.

Some people might argue that there is no better alternatives for testing then animals. Over the years, however, science has created many alternatives for animal use in testing. One alternative is, using donated human tissue and organs. With this method less animals will die for human research. This has also been proven to be up to 20% more accurate than an animal testing (Neavs). Another alternative would be microdosing. Microdosing would take human volunteers and give them small doses of drugs high enough to cause an effect but not high enough to affect the entire body (The Hastings Center). By using these alternatives, less animals will be used

There is no denying that animal testing has led to many medical discoveries which have saved many lives. The first pancreases taken from dogs directly led to the discovery of insulin, which has saved many diabetics’ lives. This discovery is the back-bone to allowing animal testing to continue because it is proof that animal testing can lead to lives being saved. Animal testing is a controversy that has lasted for over 30 years, and it will continue to be the center of many debates until an equivalent form of testing is discovered that no longer puts animals in the line of fire. But until that day arrives, the question still stands. Should animals be used as test subjects? Though there are two answers to this question, each making logical points, I say that animals should no longer be used.

Finally, the products test on animals is completely pointless because feasible alternatives are available. Advances in technology have conveyed many other applicable alternatives to research on animals. Some of the alternatives are the use of new imaging technologies, using human cell and tissue cultures, post-mortem studies, laboratory results analysis and endoscopic analysis. Moreover, molecular epidemiology has also shown substantial potential in identifying the causes of human diseases. Currently, medical students are also taught using new and emerging technologies which are more effective and may not engage using animals for the research. Such technologies include clinical experience, interactive computer programs, human-patient simulators, studying case reports, didactic methods, and safe human-based teaching methods. The above-mentioned methods have proven to be more effective as the student is not distracted with the possibility of potentially maiming or killing an innocent animal. Therefore, when successful means of product testing are available without the use of animals, so testing potentially deadly substances on animals is

What comes to mind when thinking about animal experimentation? Thoughts of innocent, lovable animals being stabbed with sharp needles? Well, that is not exactly the case, as animal experimentation plays a very important role in human health today. However, the idea of animals testing has become quite a controversial topic. Over the past few decades, there has been an extensive debate over the use of animals in medical and product testing. The majority of people seem to think that it is an unnecessary measure. Protests, threats, and even property damage has occurred because of the dispute between the two sides of this debate. A good majority of these protesters are unaware of the benefits animal testing brings to the human race, as well as

Animals are the most used thing to test products on. Animals used everyday to test products damages them mentally and physically. Animal suffer every single day from inhumane testing. Some of the testing that they do is on wild caught primates. Animal shouldn’t be tested on because it’s inhumane to do and is injuring the animals.

Animals have suffered as a result for thousands of years. However, there is no longer a need to involve the use of animals in experimentation, as there are different techniques that would produce more generalizable results to humans (e.g. in-vitro cultures). It has been shown that a small percentage of successful trials involving animal testing actually lead to the observation of those same results in human trials. For this reason, animal testing should not be used in scientific experimentation, as there are superior alternatives that avoid the suffering experienced by animals, without losing any progress on medical

Another argument made by supporters of animal testing is that alternative methods are not adequate enough for companies to feel confident putting a product on the market. Cheryl Wischhover quotes the executive vice president of government affairs at the Personal Care Products Council in her article saying, “the FDA hasn’t approved many alternative testing methods that would satisfy their requirements on the safety of certain ingredients,” so this makes it harder for companies to trust in alternative methods (Wischhover). The FDA themselves state that though they do not require animal testing for safety, “the agency has consistently advised cosmetic manufacturers to employ whatever testing is appropriate and effective for substantiating the

U.S. Food and Drug administration declared that “currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies” (qtd. in "Experiments on Animals: Overview" n.d.).Therefore animal testing is not used in great number to advance knowledge but rather to find the “one-in-a-million” chance that it could help. The fact that animal research for scientific purposes cannot be directly implied to humans most of the time in it of itself brings controversy. This is because subjecting animals to harmful testing for human medical advancement with a great chance that the results cannot be used to achieve said advancement seems inhumane to many.

In a study conducted by Bishop, Willet, and Sandler (2012) it is given that animal tests and human results are the same only 5% to 25% of the time. Eighty-eight percent of doctors agreed that animal experiments can be misleading due to anatomical and physiological differences between animals and humans. When comparing certain drugs and their different effects on humans and then on amimals, the results are startling. For example, the drug Thaliomide was found safe in mice and approved for distribution from the German government but was later found to cause severe birth defects in humans after thousands of babies were born with debilitating defects. Most of the children died before the age of

In this world today we don’t think about much. There are multiple things going on behind the scenes, and we’re oblivious to it all. One of those things being animal testing, animal testing is a big problem in today's society, not many people know what's going on in hiding. Animals can feel pain just like us, and with some of these experiments, the pain an animal can experience is tremendous. Therefore, animals should not have to suffer excruciating pain for our beauty products or medicine when there will always be a first human tester, especially when there are multiple times the test could pass on animals but not on humans.

Animal research is a practice that dates back to ancient Greece used by physician-scientists like Aristotle. One cannot deny that throughout the history of this practice, researchers have treated animals poorly. However, in the modern era of science, researchers understand the poor treatment of animals, is both unethical and counterproductive to advances in science. Scientists now follow guidelines set for what is the fair and humane treatment of animals used in research, as well as when the use of animals is ethical. Undoubtedly, there are times when animal research may seem unjustified as the experiment are not designed to increase mankind’s knowledge in a way that will further improve the world, but these occasions are few and “whenever

Commencing, contrasting viewpoints proclaim animal testing as an excellent way of medically progressing, for the sake of humanity. Scientists, researchers, and professors, claim that researching on animals is vital to understanding human health and diseases, for the emergence of new medicines and surgical techniques, and for preventing harm to humans from new medicines or vaccines. Their belief if that human lives would be put at jeopardy without animal experimentation. Biologist and professor Gerard Ian Evan (at Cambridge University) states that mice are “close enough” to humans, in the YouTube video “Fighting cancer: Animal research at Cambridge,” for justifying the availing of the mice, as 92% of the deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) between people