Ethical Issues In Animal Testing

What would you do if you saw someone slowly torching an animal to death. The background of animal testing is defined as some say it is cruel and some say it is necessary. In recent discussions of animal being used as test subjects. On one hand, some argue that it is cruel and inhuman. On the other hand, some say the test could not be performed without the animals. My own view is, I strongly am against animals being used as test subjects. Some view the test that are performed on the animals as innocent and harmless, it is clear that the test are cruel because the test torture the animals, and some test are inhuman.

It is no secret that millions of animals a year are used for medical experimentation. One study “found the number of animals tested rose from 1,566,994 in 1997 to 2,705,772 in 2012” (Casey). It is my belief that researchers use virtue theory to defend their experimentations. While animal activists approach experimentation through the ethics of care. I am against animal experimentation, but I will also provide insight into why people believe it is ethically just.

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.

Ferdowsian and Beck go on to add that more evidence supports that animal testing comes at a higher cost to animals than was initially acknowledged. Accounts of anxiety disorders, changes in behavior, hormone levels, and the amount of pain animals endure now drive the conversation regarding reforming animal testing practices. It is also noted that the predictive value of animal models do not translate into clinical success. The majority of animal research does not lead to improving human health. Most argue the use of animals overall is a needless endeavor when new technologies are in place that can provide similar levels of advancement, and when human tissue is available that can offer a better understand of human health.

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.

“Lots of people talk to animals…Not very many listen, though…That’s the problem”(Ben Hoffman). The controversy of animal testing is phenomenal; it always has been. I remember dissecting animals throughout my years of school in the "name of science". It was only until recently that I started questioning the government 's methods to teach us. We dissected a dog shark in my oceanography class last year. There had to been at least 80 dead sharks in about four different buckets; that was when it crossed the line. I understood a lamb eye or something, but breeding sharks in captivity just so they can be killed? Animal testing is wrong in every way to me.

Animal experimentation has been a commonly debated subject for many years, is it cruelty or science? Millions of animals die each year from animal testing. This is because of harsh ways animals are treated like by their experimenters. Animals should be free of the cruelty scientists expose them to. They have just as much sentient as humans do. Millions of animals a year are subject to being imprisoned and having terrible procedures done.

The controversy behind animals as research subjects is mainly one of morals and the ethical treatment of said animals. Many people believe we should use them in this way, so we aren 't actually harming people in the pursuit for better things for humans. Though animal testing was a viable resource for many years, it has proven to be extremely controversial and unethical, therefor the use of animals as research subjects should be outlawed.

How could one not feel guilty when looking into a test animal’s eyes and seeing all of the pain and suffering that they have endured? Over 75-100 million animals are used for scientific and medical research per year. (Baumans) Animals should not be used for scientific and medical research because it is unethical, humans and animals are not genetically identical resulting in failed tests, and there are other techniques to conduct research.

Cohen argues that humans may morally use animals for biomedical research, the study of biological processes and disease, because animals lack rights. He defines rights as moral claims that one human can hold against another, which are bound in both law as well as in comprehension of right and wrong. As animals lack self-conscious placement in a higher ethical order with the ability to weigh needs of self against the needs of others, they therefore lack the ability to have rights. (Cohen 1986: p. 215) To support the morality of animal research, I will show how it has led to many successful treatments of disease in humans, due to the common physiology that we share with other animals. Furthermore, I will argue that the pain caused on research

A long time of debates go back and forth on the rights of all animals with further argument or debates, do humans have the right to use animals on medical testing and lab use? There are several issues that can be placed in this argument this research will acknowledge four important topics in the rights of animal testing. Is it right to use animals for testing? Is it right to compare animal DNA to human DNA in these animal experiments? Is it right to use real animals instead of computers to generate results? Is it right to state animals are being protected and cared for while giving toxins to make them sick? Therefore, the question needs to be asked if animals should be used for scientific experiments in labs all across the globe.

For thousands of years animals have been used as research subjects, but with the advancement of science and society, animal experimentation has morphed into a controversial bioethics topic. Animal experimentation is the use of animals in scientific research. This experimentation ranges from testing pharmaceuticals on rats to measuring the elasticity of tendons in rabbits to implanting mechanical devices in calves. And while the FDA has dozens of guidelines to keep animal testing as ethical as possible, a strong opposition to animal research (particularly mammalian research) still exists.

Scientists use animals in order to make medical advancements to help humans however, it is often difficult to get the same results in both animals and humans. The biology of humans and animals is not the same, although there are some similarities. According to Akhtar, in an article titled “The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation”, “Annually, more than 115 million animals are used worldwide in experimentation or to supply the biomedical industry” (Akhtar). Millions of animals are used, against their will, to try to help humans. Although there are some instances in which the experiments have helped humans, is it really worth the pain and suffering that all of those animals have had to suffer. Akhtar also stated “Although it is widely accepted that medicine should be evidence based, animal experimentation as a means of informing human health has generally not been held, in practice, to this standard” (Akhtar). There has been some cases in which testing medicine on animals has benefitted humans, however this type of result is hard to duplicate. Often when a result is achieved in the lab, there are many influences that can cause these

An estimate of 1.4 million animals die each year due to animal testing. As people we have freedom, choice, and the right to live, however animals have a right to live in a world without suffering just as much as we do. Animals just like humans have emotions, thoughts, and feelings, so what makes it right to test on animals any more than to perform tests on humans? The benefits of testing on animals has still not been proven as the treatments that show promise in animals rarely work on humans. There are also many other options for testing techniques that we can use without performing harmful tests on animals, and finally it's entirely unethical. There are many alternatives overall so it is really still considered ethically right to take the freedom of animals just because we want to do research. Animal testing should no longer have a place in our modern day world.

For the past 20 years, there has a been an on going heated debate on whether experiments on animals for the benefit of medical and scientific research is ethical. Whether it is or isn't, most people believe that some form of cost-benefit test should be performed to determine if the action is right. The costs include: animal pain, distress and death where the benefits include the collection of new knowledge or the development of new medical therapies for humans. Looking into these different aspects of the experimentation, there is a large gap for argument between the different scientists' views. In the next few paragraphs, both sides of the argument will be expressed by the supporters.