Human Animals Should Not Be Banned

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.

For many years, the field of science has used animals in medical experiments worldwide, because of this innocent animals are being killed everyday. They are being tested with new drugs, new treatments, and by many makeup companies. Connecticut recently celebrated the passage of the “Beagle Freedom Law”, a law that requires laboratories to work with charities and rescue groups to find homes for research cats and dogs. Animals are being tested so humans do not have to be but animal tests do not reliably predict results in human beings, although animals are the closest thing to humans. Most experiments involving animals are flawed, wasting the lives of innocent animal subjects. Over 100 million animals suffer a year from testing. Testing animals is a lot more expensive than alternative methods and it is wasting government research dollars. Animal testing is not only a bad idea, but it is also inhuman and it should not be tolerated. The FDA should stop allowing animal testing. An animal does not give out the same results on a test than a human would.

When discussing the issues faced from an ethical standpoint of animal rights it is important to consider the benefits animals bring to people and then question what rights animals are entitled to due to this (Fisher). Taking that into account, one must ask if giving them rights could possibly overstep on human rights and would animals even be able to enjoy rights (Fisher). It is often debated that the benefits and knowledge through experimentation of animals have led to life-saving advancements in the field of science and medicine (Fisher). The other side of the debate argues that even if these past benefits are justified, these type of experiments are no longer necessary and it is deemed unacceptable that wrongful treatment of animals is done for this purpose (Fisher). When it comes to the question of

In this country we use animals for all sorts of uses, whether that has to do with medical testing or the other countless uses. But there has always been question’s when It comes to the human thought process is whether or not the animals are suffering? The way that I look at the correlation between humans and animals. I believe this reasoning can be acceptable because if a human steps on the tail of a dog, or brands a horse or a cow, these animals are suffering. They are in pain and they try to avoid these situations but this leads to more pain and suffering. But if someone in this country was being treated this way and was publicly documented, then there would be an uprising, if not a jail sentence or a death penalty. Or when it comes to the interests of the animals, as a human being who is given the moral capacity to weigh decisions between right and wrong is a human right. But we are obligated to take every things best interests in to account, whether that is a human or an animal. These interests are what help us make the most correct decision between animals because if we aren’t taking into full account of a situation that could possibly put harm or suffering to an animal is where we think about these interests. It’s hard to think about because humans are inclined to think what is best for them, while not taking into account of the others interests.

If you had the choice to live or die which would you choose? If you had the alternative to live in a cage or in a house which would you select? If you had the option to have experiments that caused you pain preformed on you would you? The truth is that most of use would rather live, reside in a house and would not be a part of an experiment that caused us pain. However, most people accept the elements of the above conditions for non-human animals. Non-human animals should not be a part of destruction, pain, incarceration and underprivileged conditions that are caused by humans.

Animal testing goes back to the Greeks in 4th and 3rd centuries, with Aristotle and Erasistratus among the first to perform experiments on living animals. Using birds, mice, eels, snails, and flies early physicist conducted experiments trying to discover cures for illness. In the 18th century a physicist by the name of Antoine Lavoisier, used a guinea pig in a calorimeter to demonstrate that respiration was a form of combustion. Later on Luigi Galvani demonstrated that electricity applied to a dead, dissected, frog’s leg muscle caused it to twitch. It wasn’t until the 1880’s and 1890’s that physicists made medical advances, Emil von Behring isolated the diphtheria toxin and demonstrated its effect in guinea pigs. He went to demonstrate immunity

One of the first recorded to use living animals for testing was a well-known philosopher, Aristotle. Later in the second century a Roman physician named Galen was recorded dissecting pigs and goats where he was later nicknamed "the father of vivisection." Much later in the 1600s significant progress was made by William Harvey when he used animals to observe and explain the blood circulatory system. Following William Harvey was Stephen Hales that used a horse to describe the measurement of blood pressure; then Antoine Lavoisier later used a calorimeter as well as a guinea pig to tell that respiration was a type of combustion. More recently an experiment was conducted by Ivan Pavlov in the 1890s, which at the sound of a bell trained dogs to salivate teaching them to affiliate sound with food. Experimentation on animals for benefit has been occurring for centuries but has recently been brought to the forefront because of the morally wrong ways it has recently been done. However, the advancements in the medical field and research would not have been possible without the use of animals hat have been beneficial to

Animal experiments date back long ago, the first use of animals in experiments date back to when ancient Greek physicians first used animals as models for anatomy and physiology. (Franco) Since then testing has been an ongoing even into the twenty first century. During that time, many treatments of diseases and procedures for humans and animals alike owe

Most people agree that animals acquire at least some moral status as people have pets and speak out against crimes against animals, an example being animal shelters using euthanasia. Animals should be given the same level of respectful treatment as a human test subject would. We do not have the right to force animals to further benefit discoveries and our own goals, putting them into dangerous conditions that could alter their health. Peter Singer writes, “...whenever experimenters claim that their experiments are important enough to justify the use of animals, we should ask them whether they would be prepared to use a brain-damaged human being at a similar mental level to the animals they are planning to use” (Animal Liberation). Just because ‘we are human’ is not an adequate excuse for us to degrade animals and other living creatures to a lower moral

An animal should have as much right as a human being to live out a full live, free of pain and suffering.” When humans decide the destiny of animals in research environments, the animals’ rights are taken away without any thought of their well-being or the quality of their lives. As a result, animal experimentation should be stopped because it violates the rights of animals. How and when are animals’ rights violated? When they are used in research and the animal is not given a choice to either participate or not to participate. Animals are exposed to tests that are often painful or cause enduring injury or even death. The animals are never given the option of not partaking in the experiment. Lou further states that, “Being of a particular race or gender does not give one any grounds

Imagine you are locked in a closet with no access to the outside world or any communications at all. You can’t decide when or what you will eat or drink. You can’t decide who will be your mate or if you’ll have children. You can’t even decide if you want air. It’s like being prisoner even though you have committed no crime. It is isolating, painful, and lonely. This is what it’s like to live as an animal suffering under experimentally cruelty in laboratory facilities. Animals such as dogs, cats, rats, turtles, monkeys, frogs, guinea pigs, goats, and lizards are forced to contribute to these horrible experiments that involve spine crushing, jaw twisting, injections of lethal chemicals, drowned, or frozen, and sometimes even electrocuted to death by implanting wires into their brains. No animals should ever have to live through this, which is why I firmly believe in stopping animal experimentation.

When it comes to the topic of animal testing, most of us will readily agree that the use of animals as research for the purpose of the humans concerns, that the drug is efficacy with the cosmetics to endeavor controversy and may have experience discomfort, suffering towards animals. “As the consumer in Europe would not have access to any new products, because we can’t really ensure that some of the ingredient’s will be safe to be without suitable an adequate testing”. Where this agreement usually ends, however, is on the question of animal testing, “special use of this cosmetics wave products (shampoo, hair removal, dye), will continue to mandatory the animal testing”. Whereas some are convinced that the types of animals testing will be continuing, others maintain that when the full sales ban is in place, they will simply conduct (animal testing) in non-Europe companies. There is some support for animal testing for medicine use because it helps in human health and extends human life as well. As some point they don’t support animal testing for cosmetics because it will cost and won’t justify the research on animals. Although there is no finish cosmetics products, still have some substances that have both cosmetics and medical use, Example, “include the wrinkle treatment botulinum toxin, sold and advertised under the name Botox, (Murnaghan)”. My own view, however, is that it works better than any other alternative in human testing and especially animal

Locked in a small cage with restraints holding their limbs down. While scientists pour burning chemicals onto the poor and innocent creatures. They scream for help in pain but no one will come to their rescue. The Humane Society estimates thousands of animal deaths a year in the United States alone that are caused by cosmetic animal testing. Animals typically used in this specific type of testing are guinea pigs, rats, mice, and rabbits. Today, we have technology that can replace jobs yet, we still use primitive procedures that no longer cater the best to our current society. Cosmetic animal testing is not only harmful but it is also ineffective Animal testing is unethical and unnecessary, cruel and should no longer continue.

In our world, protests occur each day on the issues of animal cruelty and human rights, but when the issues are put together which will reign over the other? The author Peter Singer of “All Animals are Equal” and “Tools for Research” presents his argument for determining when animal experiments are justified. The author starts his paper with a counter argument, questioning if one would be willing to let thousands of people die if those people could be saved by experimentation on a single animal. The answer is a unanimous no; in our culture we value human life over everything else. The author follows by asking the reader if they would be prepared to carry out their experiments on humans who are mentally retarded or orphaned babies, if that

There she sits in her favorite restaurant at her favorite steak house ordering her most favorite meal, steak. It 's hunting season and he has been waiting all year to go deer hunting with his father and he just can 't wait. The 8 year old girl goes to the doctor sick and discovers she has diabetes. In order to live, she has to inject herself with insulin everyday for the rest of her life. If animal rights is a law then we wouldn 't have the luxury of any of these things. Although animals deserve welfare to protect them, animals should not be allowed to have rights because they are essential to medical research, nutrition, and if we didn 't consume and use animals there would be an over abundance of them.