Arguments Against Animal Testing In Research

Animals, whether cats in the house or lions on the savannah, reserve the right to life. The disregard for animal life has been equated to racism or sexism; acting on principles of disrespect for life and thoughts of discrimination (Animal Testing and Ethics). The continuation of animal testing and experimentation take an enormous psychological toll on humanity, leading to rationalization and flawed justification. To carry on this path would darken the mark this animal abuse is currently leaving on our humanity, one step towards yet another fault in human nature.

Most of the procedures we have these days are there because animal testing has helped in developing it. In addition, when new treatments should be developed, there is no safer and more accurate way to prove it harmless than testing with animals. Although there are certain alternatives such as computers, undoubtedly for human rights scientists should choose the assured and guaranteed way of animal testing. Therefore, until a suitable substitution as exact and as precise as testing with animals appear, animal testing shall be mandatory. Animal rights should be protected, but it is not only animals that need to survive: we, as human beings, have the right, not a privilege, to live a healthy

There is much debate over whether animal testing should be allowed or not. Some people think that it is not essential to sacrifice animals for human benefits because they are being abused and tortured severely during experiments. Some others who stand against animal testing claim that humans eliminate many lives on earth in order to safe humans’ lives, so there is no justice because even animals have the right to live on earth, yet these people do not consider the truth that animals are being used in the food industry or in the laboratories. Thus, if someone asks how many animals are being used in the laboratory experiments around the world every year, who can give an accurate answer? It can be one, ten, or fifty million. It is difficult to find the exact figure on this question because people only read news through mass media such as having a new vaccine which can help human avoid uterus cancer or a new medicine help humans cure strokes, but they also need to know how many lives of the animals would have to take in order to get theses vaccines. Therefore, some organizes think that animal testing is one of the most disturbing experiments ever, and it should be banned. Despite many controversies with opposing opinions, a compromise can be made in order to reduce the use of animals in the laboratory experiments.

Have you ever had a sick relative? If so, have they used medication to help with said illness? Well that medication had to have come from somewhere. Animal testing has help conduct products such as vaccines for smallpox, hypothermia, and other major diseases. Now take into consideration what might have happened to that relative without the medication. As you can tell, animal testing has a positive impact on society, despite what might be claimed to be unjust. I will be explaining why this is so, and how some of the arguments are irrelevant.

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.

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.

The issue of animal testing is a widespread and very controversial topic. It entails carrying out torturous and harmful tests and experiments on animals (most commonly mice or rats, but also other animals like rabbits and guinea pigs) for scientific research, whether it be for medical causes, products or cosmetics. In many cases, animal testing is unavoidable – it is impossible to rid the world of something humans rely on so dearly; however, it is imperative that we recognize the moral impacts of our actions and stop relying on it as a major research tactic. It is quite odd that it continues to be commonly used, despite being largely ineffective, the abundance of alternatives available, and the moral issues it brings into light.

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.

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.

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

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.

Another way that animal research is justified is if the research is legitimate for human health issues. Animals that are used in studies to test the effects of beauty products do not deserve to be experimented on. However, in research for actual health issues, animal usage is justified. In an article written by Sheryl Gay Stolberg, “Debate over whether to defend animal tests,” she explains a study done by Dr. Podell. Podell says the study could not be done in people, but he says he did make an ethical calculation: “it's a small number of animals to get information to potentially help millions of people.” It is important for people to understand that a small amount of animals can equal a large gain. Millions of people can benefit from the

Dr. Ronald W. Davis of Stanford University says, “They are so ingrained in trying to cure mice that they forget we are trying to cure humans.” Researchers are so involved in the process of dissecting, hurting, and impairing animals, they forget what the real purpose is. Besides this, in the same study, it was brought to attention the gene in mice that was experimented on was a suppressed gene in humans. The Food and Drug Administration reports that 92% of the drugs that pass the animal tests, fail when used on humans. (Kolata 2013) Another aspect to this, is actually the moral status of animals. Although they cannot exercise free will, they still suffer and experience pain. Carl Cohen, a professor at the University of Michigan Medical School in Ann Arbor, points out that “To animate life, even in its simplest forms, we give a certain natural reverence…” and he further explains that even though human beings and animals may not have the same rights or ability to think and make decisions, “It does not follow from this, however, that we are morally free to do anything we please to

However, some would claim that animal commercial and scientific testing is justified because animals need to be sacrificed in order to make products safer for human use and consumption. The problem with that reasoning is that making human’s lives better should not be an excuse for touching and exploiting animals. Animal test subjects are injected with painful toxins, drowned, starved, and abandoned in their immaculate lives (“Examples of Severe Animal Suffering in Laboratories”). Thus, animal testing needs to end, the method’s are inhumane, torturing animals to death in the gain of human