Is Animal Testing Cruel Or Unjustified

Animal testing is always a behind closed doors situation. Most people are aware that it is happening yet never give it a second thought. An estimate of more then 115 million animals all around the world, including the most common mice, rats, rabbits, and monkeys, are used in experiments every single year (“11 Facts About Animal Testing”, n.d.). And according to change.org the “USA spends $16 billion dollars annually for animal testing at tax payers' expense.” (“Sign the Petition”, n.d.)

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.

Animal testing is crucial because without it, scientists might never find developments for biomedical research. Worldwide, there are millions of diseases that create devastation in countless families. However, there are vaccines, cures, and processes that scientists have came up with to help fix this problem. How fast and efficiently they come up with these treatments is the difference in many lives saved. Animal testing has been proven to speed up the process of collecting research

Somewhere, in the United States, an animal is in terror. It cowers fearfully as scientists hold it down, and a doctor grips a massive, sharp needle next to its neck, ready to inject the animal with a lethal dose of a new, experimental drug. The animal is one of 26 million other creatures facing the same, painful, fate annually (The Hasting Center). Animal testing is the downfall of humanity, a practice of humans testing chemicals, drugs, and cosmetics on animals. Animal testing is an atrocity that is an unnecessary and dangerous ordeal to the subjects being tested on. The fact that it is cruel, is highly inaccurate, and that there are many other ways to achieve the results being pursued all

Throughout the years the use of animals in medical research has been a hot debate around the world. Although animal testing may be cruel and inhumane, thousands of humans are saved thanks to the research that animals supply researchers with. Animals testing have taken over our knowledge of medicine and treatments to a whole different level. Animal testing also does this in a cheap and effective way. Without animals testing out knowledge wouldn’t be up to date, in other words animals’ testing is good.

Animal testing has been a controversial topic for many generations throughout the world. People against animal testing say that animal testing is cruel and inhumane and

Is testing animals for medical treatments cruel? How do you feel about sending out treatments that were thought to work and cure someone’s disease when in truth the said treatment makes their disease worse or even kills that person? What if you were told that it could have been prevented? That is one reason why testing live tissue is an important and crucial part of developing treatments for diseases. Testing animals for medical treatments is reasonable because testing on non-living tissue will not get accurate results. Also, animal testing has created many cures to a broad spectrum of diseases on multiple different species.

They long to be free. All they can do is sit alone in their cells, in fear, waiting for the net experiment to begin. These poor creatures are commonly subject to force feeding, force inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, the infliction of burns and other wounds to study healing processes, and much more, all in the name of “science.” Animal testing is cruel and inhumane. Animals feel pain in many of the same ways that humans do; in fact, their reactions to pain are virtually identical (both humans and animals scream, for instance). Animals undergo many scientific tests such as the Draize eye test and the LD50 test. The Draize eye test, used by cosmetics companies to evaluate irritation caused by shampoos and other products, involves rabbits being incapacitated in stocks with their eyelids held open by clips, sometimes for multiple days, so they cannot blink away the products being tested (Animal Testing. Wikipedia.). The commonly used LD50 test involves finding out which dose of a chemical will kill 50% of the animals being used in the experiment (Animal Testing. Wikipedia.). To perform this test, the researchers hook the animals up to tubes that pump huge amounts of the test product into their stomachs until they die. This test is extremely painful to the animals because death can take days or even weeks. Not only do the animals suffer from "vomiting, diarrhea, paralysis, convulsion, and internal bleeding, but since death is the

Subsequently, alternative methods now exist to the use of animal testing. Some of these testing methods include computer models and simulations, micro-dosing, stem cell and genetic testing, etc. Scientific tests are more reliable than animal tests. As well as, human tissue testing is more accurate than animal testing. There is many varieties of ways to advance science in more reliable ways then by the use of a creature and that provide more relevant results. Moreover, human cells can

In conclusion, animal testing is unreliable, expensive and inhumane to our beloved animals around the world. I believe that governments should fully ban animal testing. “Earth was created for all us, not some of us” - Simon Vogel. Let's end animal

Animals are getting brutally hurt everyday from scientists’ testing on them. Everyday creatures such as rabbits, cats, dogs, and rats are getting tested on all the time. Rabbits and bunnies are tormented by the notorious ”Drain Eye Durancy Test.” Would you like to have your eyes dried out just to see if a vaccine works? These animals are then killed when the testing is done. Kittens sometimes have to get tubes drilled in their head so scientists can experiment chemicals on their brain. At Michigan State University labs, experimenters cut into cats faces, crushing their optic nerves, removing their eyes, and then killing them after they remove their eyes, states the article,”Animals Used for Experimentation”. For any kind of experiment

Animal testing is first and for most pointless and a waste of time and money. After the passing of an animal trial, there must always be human trials as well. Since animal testing is unreliable, the real testing still solely relies on the human tests. This demonstrates that this method is unnecessary. Greek and Greek argue that “those who say we test on animals to avoid testing on people are wrong. Once animal studies are complete, all new medications are evaluated on humans. The first people to take a new substance are being experimented on as surely as if they were guinea pigs locked in a laboratory” (59). In addition to that, the 21st century has brought many new advances in technology and science and because we have these new advances, animal testing now is completely unnecessary. Bif Naked states, “It doesn't just make sense for animals, but for people, too, because state-of-the-art non-animal tests offer a far more reliable way to predict how consumers like you or me will react to a product in the real world.” While many of these method have not been explored fully, they are still extremely promising, less harmful, cheaper, and produce more accurate results. Rachel Rutter states, “Effective, affordable, and humane research methods include studies of human populations, volunteers, and patients, as well as sophisticated in vitro, genomic, and computer-modeling techniques.” None of these methods

If the test results are not giving us correct answers then why do we continue to put our money into the research? When it comes to testing animals, there are multiple costly thing that are needed, for example, money is needed for an institution, feeding and housing the animals for many months, and the most expensive need, the drugs being used in the experiments. (Klazema, June 13, 2014.) Also, the animals are becoming very expensive because most of them are specifically bred for certain tests. American author and clinical researcher Dr. Neal Barnard M.D. made a very good point when he said, “Not only are the studies themselves often lacking face value, but they also drain badly needed funds away from patient care needs.” With this statement he is simply saying that people are wasting their money when they test animals (Murnaghan, November 7, 2016). One way in which we can prevent all of this wasteful time, money, and animal lives, is to come up with an alternative for animal testing. These alternatives are much more reliable, resemble actual humans more accurately, and are less expensive, so we can stop wasting government money. With today’s technology, animals are not the perfect solution for finding cures for diseases or testing the safety of cosmetic products. Some scientists have interest in testing that does not use a whole animal. Possible alternatives could be animal organs, animal or human cells, or computer modeling. The future of testing is also looking to use less complex organisms like bacteria, flies, or even plants because they are lower in moral standings than animals (Liou, July 6,

This bibliography contains different kinds of sources: four articles are from popular animal advocate websites; two are scholarly articles; and one is from a scholarly journal. These sources answered most of our initial questions and also added further knowledge to the group. They provided the difference between the success and the failure rates of animal testing and they explained the advantages of alternative testing. The sources that were most valuable to our research was the article by PETA, and the article by the Humane Society of America. They both provided different alternatives, the cost effectiveness of each, and their benefits to today’s