Arguments Against Animal Testing

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

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.

To support or not support animal testing practices has been a long debated topic. Animals have been used in medical and cosmetic tests since the 1900s leading to numerous medical treatment breakthroughs and ensuring the safety of everyday products we use. Recently animal advocate groups have called for the abolishment of animal testing, causing a divide on whether or not to continue animal testing. In order to keep innovating new solutions for diseases that plague our communities and loved ones, allowing the use of animal testing to end preventable tragedies must occur.

Animal activists and scientists experience ongoing conflict between animal experimentation and biomedical ethics. Animal testing is one of the oldest methods of experimentation. In the 1980s, the animal rights movement and the argument surrounding the ethics came under fire. As a result of this movement, the experimental procedures became public, giving more incentive to the activists and momentum to their cause. The ethics of animal experimentation come into question in everything from beauty products to the food and vitamins that are sent to consumers worldwide. However, because of the industries ' involvement within animal experimentation, many consumers do not know how these products they are purchasing are tested. Although the ethics of experimentation have come into question, new ideas of experimentation have progressed. Within the biomedical field, new testing methods for both medicine and beauty products have evolved. Because of this new technology, activists against animal experimentation argue that the necessity of animal experimentation is unneeded. In contrast, scientists argue it is not outdated. Despite the progress made by the activists many scientists still believe that animal experimentation will be needed. Although animal testing may have served as a useful tool in the past, it no longer is as accurate as the new technology and research methods from the 21st century.

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.

It has been proven that “animal research has played a vital part in nearly every medical breakthrough over the last decade” states Understanding Animal Research, an advocacy group that aims to demonstrate the need for humane animal research. Animal testing acts as a huge help to the well-being and health of

The supporters of this concept argue that computers can be unreliable in giving accurate results or information on issues related to cells, environment or molecules (Christopher 17). Animal testing has therefore been used to give very reliable and substantial scientific information in the last century. On the other hand, opponents or individuals who challenge the concept of animal experimentation argue that animals, like humans, feel and experience pain and should not be subjected to unnecessary pain and suffering. Furthermore, they posit that animals used for research are often subjected to cruel and traumatizing conditions, therefore, negating fundamental animal rights. Moreover, other arguments indicate that animals should be respected because they have natural rights just like all other beings (Hackman

Animal testing remains a controversial subject and objections have been present virtually since its beginning. Over the past decades, medical and cosmetic companies have increased the number of animals in labs to test the effectiveness of their products. It is undeniable that animal testing has contributed to our advances in the fields of science; however, this method is not always requisite. Many times, animal data is unreliable because the anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between animals and people which may mislead researchers into disregard potential cures and treatments. Commonly animals used in experiments are forced to a prolonged periods of physical restraints, inhalation, and food and water deprivation. Large numbers of

Have you ever lost a loved one or even heard of someone passing away from a preventable disease that could’ve been stopped if the medicine to cure them was tested? About 21,000 people died around the world today from preventable illnesses. That number can easily be reduced to a much smaller number if doctors and scientists had the capability to test medications on animals. However, some argue that making an animal suffer is terrible, who would you rather want suffering? Your best friend? Or a random rat or mouse? The choice is yours. Animal testing should be used because, it can save lives, there is no other way to test the medicine properly and they help us to figure out what to change in the medicine so that it works the next time.

When it comes to the topic of Animal Testing, most of us will readily agree that alternative methods do exist that can replace the need for animals. Where this agreement usually ends is on animals are different from humans and therefore make poor test subjects. I agree that there are other methods but I also disagree that the animal are poor test subjects because a drug might work on a cell in a test tube but how will it work on a human. We don’t know until we test a living creature.

Thesis: The debate on whether using animals is the correct choice of method for testing out experiments and products, is still up for discussion, considering that animals have helped us in finding many treatments and cures in the past. Today, with new technology, we no longer need the use of animals, as there are now alternatives to this practice. Companies and labs that originally started out using animals as test subjects are starting to switch over to new alternatives, as they are more accurate compared to the old methods that was used in the past.

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

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

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

Physicians are known to have performed vivisection on animals for hundreds of years, and nowadays animal testing remains an essential element of research in medicine and pharmacology. Animal experimentation has generated heated discussions among scientists, philosophers, and politicians. This issue is very controversial, since it involves ethical questions. While it is generally accepted that testing cosmetics on animals is unnecessary and immoral, there is a debate concerning the use of animals for medical purposes. Our society is split into supporters and opponents of animal experimentation. The latter tend to resort to violent methods of protest, namely they intimidate physicians involved in animal testing, etc. Whereas proponents of