Arguments Against Animal Testing

Jeremy Bentham once said, “The question is not, ‘Can they reason?’ nor, ‘Can they talk?’ but ‘Can they suffer?’” Animal testing is becoming a conflict right now and I believe that Animal testing should be stopped because it is cruel and inhuman, Alternative testing technologies exist, the lack of reliability, and it is expensive. Another quote once said was by Martin Luther King Jr stating “Never, never be afraid to do what’s right, especially if the well-being of a person or animal is at stake” That quote is saying why do wrong when right can be done, especially when people and animals are involved. Animals have feelings and enjoy life as much as humans do so keeping them in captivity and testing drugs on them is cruel and inhuman.

Over 100 million animals get burned, crippled, poisoned and abused in United States labs every year. Animal experimentation or commonly known as animal testing, is where scientists test their chemicals and products on animals to make sure it is safe for human use. Animal testing should be used because it's not only harming the animals it's costing a lot of money and animal lives.Animal testing should not be used because it harms the animals. Some tests involve killing pregnant animals to test on their fetuses. ¨Many of the tests performed on animals in the name of science, opponents maintain, are downright barbaric, rendering their subjects damaged and disfigured.¨ (Animal testing: Is animal testing morally justified?)With the amount of tests being performed

Imagine walking into a cosmetic or medical research laboratory and seeing thousands of animals locked up in cages, deformed, injured, even dead. In 2010 a total of 26 million animals in the US were tested on (thehastingscenter.org). Animals have the closest genetics to humans than anything else yet animal testing is a cruel and inhumane job and not all animals have similar organ functions to humans. Animals should not be used for scientific or commercial testing.

Animal testing, as previously mentioned, is not as reliable as it is made out to be. It is extremely difficult to replicate the complexity of a disease in humans and translate it to an animal through artificial induce it into an animal. Even if the disease is successfully replicated animals often don't react the same to medications as humans do (Akhtar, 1). The best example of this is that of Thalidomide, which despite animal testing caused deformations in babies born from women who took this drug. After the incident, producers retested the drug on animals, still not finding said deformities in any of the animals it was tested on (Greek, 1). In the article “How Reliable is Animal Testing” Author C Ray Greek makes the statement “An animal that responds like humans to one medication will not necessarily respond the same way to another medicine”, which was the case in the incident with the Thalidomide. This oversight when testing animals can lead to unforeseen fatalities and did lead to the deformation and in many cases death of thousands of babies affected by Thalidomide (Greek, 1). Animal testing is not only unreliable but in some cases even harmful and often does not lead to break through discoveries in the scientific field. In the article “The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation”

95% of drugs fail in human trials despite promising results in animal tests. This is because of the different genes between a human and an animal. The failure of the drugs can also be caused due to the fact that out of 93 dangerous drug side effects, only 19% could have been predicated by animal tests. Another piece of evidence that has been brought to the attention of many is that the testing of animals is a waste. Only 6% of 4,300 international companies involved in drug development have registered a new drug with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration since 1950. Even those drugs that are approved are not universally effective due to individual reactions, the top ten highest-grossing drugs in the U.S. only help between 1 in 4 and 1 in 25 people who take them. The last reason why animal testing should be reconsidered is common sense but overlooked. Animals are much more different from humans than imagined. Animals are incapable of being diagnosed of the same diseases that humans are. Their bodies do not allow them to have illnesses such as Parkinson’s disease, major types of heart disease, many types of cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, HIV or schizophrenia. A simple drug like aspirin is toxic to many animals, including cats, mice and rats and would not be on our pharmacy shelves if it had been tested according to current animal testing

Have you ever witnessed a white mouse with the terror filling his eyes as he looked out of his bleak cage and into the face of the big man with the lab coat? Or have you ever seen a pregnant rabbit being tortured by the people you call scientists? One of the questions facing society today is whether or not animals should be used in scientific experimentation. Animal rights activists have pointed out the fact that animals play an important role in nature and human’s lives. Killing animals for any purpose is one of the steps that will destroy Mother Nature as well as the human race. For this reason, animal testing should not be used in scientific welfare and cosmetic industry.

Animal testing in medical trials is the process of using living animals in research to assess whether a new drug is effective in curing a disease or sickness. Animals including mice, fish, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, farm animals , birds, cats, dogs, mini-pigs, monkeys and in some countries chimpanzees are used as test subjects. An Australian study found that [approximately 6.7 million animals were used in research and teaching in Australia in 2013].

In 2016, the number of laboratory animals used for research was 820,812. This number indicates a 7% rise in laboratory animals since 2015 (“US Statistics”). That may not sound like a large change, but that could have been your favorite animal trying on your favorite mascara. I am one hundred percent against the use of animals for any type of laboratory testing. I am against animal testing because I know there is a more effective way to find the cures and medication that human beings need without harming animals. Also, the act is just cruel: the animal suffers extreme burns and pains; which is why I argue against the use of animals for laboratory testing.

In the article the author explains that nearly every medical breakthrough in the last century have been achieved by the use of animals in research. The animals in the article are referred to as heroes for their contributions to discovering life saving material for both humans and animals. Veterinarians have also been able to treat more ailments, as well as prevent more diseases, and this allows our pets to live longer and healthier. With the research that has been preformed the people of our society has benefited from both tests and research.

Jeremy Bentham, an 18th century English philosopher, once said, “The question is not, can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But, can they suffer?” Peter Singer’s 1975 book Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals, in which he discusses animal suffering, rights, and equality, prompted the discussion of animal cruelty and experimentation in the cosmetics and medical industry. Industries should not test their products on animals because it is unethical and there are alternative methods that prove to be more accurate. Technology permits researchers to create alternative tests that deliver more accurate results.

Animal testing is cruel and inhumane to the animals. We are force feeding them. Forced inhalation. And also, we sometimes are depriving them of food and/or water. This is unfair to the animals who don’t even know what is happening to them.

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 the only whole, living body other than humans to perform scientific study on. In many cases there is just no other choice than to use animals because they are the only other thing besides humans that have sophisticated, detailed operations in the body systems. The testing process requires a circulatory system to carry a drug to different parts and areas of the body in order to see the effects it has on them. For example, things such as blindness and high blood pressure can not be studied from a tissue culture, tube, or little dish(“Animal Testing”). Although many argue you do not need the body to test, we do not currently have the technology to make computer programs or other methods of replicating the intricate and highly sensitive

Animals are also different from humans in another way. Animals do not get major types of heart diseases, many types of cancer, human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), Parkinson’s disease, or schizophrenia (Arguments Against Animal Testing). If animals do not get these diseases, how will the researchers know if new medicines accidently cause these diseases? Some medicines and experiments may react differently in animals than humans. A recent study found that out of ninety three dangerous side effects, only 19% could have been predicted by animal tests (Arguments Against Animal Testing). Animals are not the same as humans, therefore, animals should not be tested

Animal testing has been around for along time . Some people are for animal testing and some are against animal testing.I think animal testing should be aloud because it helps with people's medicine. Many modern advancements are from animal testing and advanced organ transplant methods.