Pro Con Arguments Against Animal Testing

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.

This concept is not always a valid one. Drugs that pass animal tests are not necessarily safe. In the 1950s, a company produced the sleeping pill Thalidomide. They released an advertising commercial which showed that the drug was tested on pregnant mice, rats, guinea pigs, cats, and hamsters. After the release, the drug was reported to have caused severe deformities in over 10,000 babies, and did not result in birth defects unless the drug was administered in extremely high doses (“Animal Testing ProCon.org”). Fortunately, with today’s technology, scientists can use different alternative testing methods that can replace animal testing, a practice which may not guarantee the product’s safety anyway. According to Kara Rogers, a biomedical sciences editor and is also a member of the National Association of Science Writers, “In vitro (in glass) testing, such as studying cell cultures in a petri dish, can produce more relevant results than animal testing because human cells can be used” (“Animal Testing ProCon.org”). Furthermore, the Draize test, which is a severe toxicity test devised in 1944, “has become practically obsolete because of the development of a synthetic cellular tissue that closely resembles human skin” (“Animal Testing ProCon.org”). Researchers can test the potential damage that a product can do to the skin by using this artificial “membrane” instead of conducting tests on animals (“Animal Testing ProCon.org”). With the growth of technology, animal testing is now not the only way to verify the product’s safety. Using animals as a means to verify the safety of a product is no longer necessary in today’s research and development programs. It is simply

Animal testing is an old fashioned way of testing medications and products to ensure that they are safe for humans. It is a way to further our society, without inflicting any harm to our race, but in today's society, it is no longer a required option for testing. For one, it is very cruel to animals. We should not be self involved and only think about ourselves. The world cannot survive that way. We need animals in the world, and if we continue treating them in this harmful manner they will no longer be able to provide for the world’s environment. Also, animal testing has been proven to not be as effective as people may think. In the Baltimore Sun writer Kelly Overton claims that “90 percent of medications approved for human use after animal testing later proved ineffective or harmful to humans in clinical trials.” This demonstrates that animal testing is no longer required in today’s society. We have better ways to test with new technology, instead of with animal testing that has been proven to be highly ineffective. Overall, in the past animal testing may have been needed to save

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.

Yet many people still are of the belief that research on animals is justified because of the following reasons: To advance scientific understanding, to consider animals as models to study disease, to develop and test potential forms of treatment before implementing on humans, and to protect the safety of people, animals, and the environment. They may also show the facts that: animal research has played a vital part in nearly every medical breakthrough over the last decade, humans share 95% of our genes with a mouse, making them an effective model for the human body, have similar organ systems, suffer from similar diseases, cancer survival rates have continued to rise, idea of vaccines was started by

Now it is not hard to at least understand why some people might be pro-animal testing when it comes to medical reasons. It could save human lives. But is that really true? There are a huge differences between humans and the animals that the products are tested on. For example, animals don’t develop the human AIDS syndrome. So, the use of animals for AIDS medications has been useless. Even though these differences do exist, there have been significant research benefits from using animal testing.

There are now alternative testing methods that exist that animals are no longer needed . In glass testing is when cells are put into a petri dish and are studied. This is more effective then animal testing because human

A computer or cells grown in labs will most likely not have the same effects as a living, breathing animal. The article “Myths and Facts” states that problems with the medicine will often show up in animal tests. A medicine given by mouth could be altered by digestion, changing the effects and may becoming less effective or toxic. It is important, and is required by law, to find out about potential problems before medicines are given to humans. And it is also a law that if other techniques are possible to use then the should be used rather than animal testing.(Myths and Facts). If there is a law that says that if there is another way to test, use it, and animal testing is still used to this day, then that must mean that animal testing is the best way to test in most cases. Sean O’Neil says that humans are biologically very similar to other mammals. All mammals used for testing have the same organs, a bloodstream and a nervous system. So animals are an essential part of many of the medicines we have. In fact, some fear that if animal testing was not allowed, the medical research may stop altogether (O’Neil). As you can see, animal testing is the best way to test

There are millions of companies and research institutions that use animal testing. They believe that the research and information gained from animal testing outweighs the harmful effects. Scientists believe that they are making an impact on the world and that they are providing good outcomes. One possible positive outcome of animal testing is that it is almost guaranteed that humans will have no serious side effects and that the products are safe for use. However, to

Did you know that 90% of animal testing fails? We are killing more than 100 million animals each year.When the percentage this low why are we still doing animal testing.That’s why animal testing should be banned from around the world.

. According to the former scientific executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences, Animal tests and human results agree “5%-25% of the time.” There is already technologe to stop animal testing.Wyss institute is developing chips to repalce animale testing these chips mimmic human body fuctions .They said them selves that animale testing is realy expesnive, time consuming, and low success rate. In addition using these new testing chips allowes scientists to have better success on finding results with human realated tests.

The proponents of animal testing reiterate that it has played a very crucial role in developing numerous medications and treating various medical conditions. On the other hand, those against animal testing posit that it is extremely cruel because it subjects animals to a lot of pain and ends up killing not only animals but humans as well, especially when the experiments do not work as intended. Animal testing also cost a huge amount of resources and money considering that the animals must be fed, treated, housed etc for a certain period, which is relatively long. We should not forget that in most cases this drugs may react differently in humans and animals body hence rendering animal testing unreliable. Animals used for experimentation purposes are often caged or kept in enclosed surroundings and this automatically generate stress for the animals thus their reaction to the medicine cannot be compared to the reaction they could have in their natural environment. While I have mentioned a number of cons and pros to animal testing, I strongly believe that the results and solutions found through animal testing will never be precise. There is completely no relation between human physical conditions and those of animals. Besides, we have alternative methods to substitute the procedure of animal

Animal testing has been dated all the way back to ancient times (Skutti). Out of curiosity, Greek, Roman, and Arab scientists all implemented experiments on animals (Skutti). In fact, “An Arab physician of the 12th Century, Ibn Zuhr (or Avenzoar) tested surgical procedures on animals before applying them to human patients (Skutti).” Now, in the 21st century, most animal testing is used for medicines. Medicine should not be tested on animals because many people have died due to the fact that the person taking an antibiotic or

Animals are used in testing for many different things. These things include, but are not limited to, developing medical treatments, determining medicinal toxicity, checking safety of products that are designed for human use, and other uses, involving both biomedical and health care. The agencies and institutions use animals that are not capable of opposing the testing that they are subjected to in any way whatsoever. It is estimated that around 26 million animals are used every year in the United States for scientific and commercial testing (“Background”).

Every day people use products that have been tested on animals without even realizing it. This includes medication, beauty products, and even food. Despite it being a common method of research, there are many instances where it is not necessary to test on animals. Existing methods may be used to replace this cruel practice and can even produce more accurate results. Animal research is not always necessary to advance in science, nor determine product safety.