Pros And Cons Of Animal Biobanking

While the pros to animal research are positives on humans, it is negatively affecting the animals themselves. Using animals for medical research is inhumane because they are left in these awful conditions. These animals are being mistreated in captivity because humans need them for their own research. The animals used in these experiments are treated very poorly because, they are subjected to force feeding, forced inhalation, deprived of food and water, excessive physical restraint, and may acquire infections and other wounds while in captivity (“Animal Testing”, 2017). Animals like these are burned, choked by CO2 and even left days without food or water. Sometimes we just test to see what the LD50 is for these animals, over 97,000 animals were killed just testing to find the LD50 from these animals. The LD50 is just a test to find out how much of one substance will kill 50% of the population. These animals are harmed for no reason because, most of the time it does not even help humans.

Why did scientists keep animal cloning a secret for so long? Did the scientists know that animal cloning would cause controversies? Do the bans on animal cloning actually prevent scientists from advancing cloning technology? Did scientists think that their discovery would help or even hurt the food industry? Animal cloning could help the food industry as long as its negatives do not outweigh the positives.

A genetically engineered animal is one that contains altered genetic material to give the animal new traits or characteristics. There are many animals that have been genetically modified for example, mice, pigs, cows and sheep are just a few of the animals they experiment on. Most genetic engineering is directed toward providing more benefits to our society which can be ethically contentious. In reproductive cloning (animal cloning) researchers remove a mature skin cell from the animal that they want to copy then, they transfer it into a egg that has removed its DNA-containing nucleus. The clones are superior breeding animals that will produce healthier offspring. There is both upsides and downsides to genetic engineering and animal cloning. In the United States animal cloning is regulated by the FDA or, Food and Drug Administration and for the most part is not considered to be illegal. There are also close to no laws regulating genetic engineering in animals in the United States.

Genetic engineering is a very controversial topic. People either agree with genetic modification, or they don’t. According to dictionary.com, genetic engineering is the development and application of scientific methods, procedures, and technologies that permit direct manipulation of genetic material in order to alter the hereditary traits of a cell, organism, or population. While researching this topic, I learned many interesting facts. I found out that genetic engineering first started in 1973, I did not know it had been around for so long. I learned that two men, Herbert Boyer and Stanley Cohen, were the first people to genetically modify an organism, which was bacteria. Yourgenome.org states that, “Genetic engineering can be applied to

“We can change animals faster and in more profound ways than nature does on its own, but the point is that there’s inherently sacred about a species genome- it’s an amorphous, ever changing thing.”(Anthes, 48) One of the biggest controversies of biotechnology is that people are getting God-like powers seems how now scientists are able to engineer new traits into animals. Is that wrong? Morally, maybe. The fact of the matter is whether it’s immoral or not, we’ve been doing it for thousands of years, but now just faster and actually more efficiently. Scientists don’t plan on worsening animals or abusing them. “If you’re going to modify a line of animals, the resultant animals should be no worse off from a welfare point of view – and preferably better.”(Bernard Rollin) If nations eventually accept biotechnology more openly, and simply apply regulations stating that one cannot produce an organism that is not better off than it was before. That would ensure the protection of animals from unnecessary handicapped lives, and then the FDA would be more comfortable with allowing these biotechnological advances to be released to the

We have technology everywhere in all aspects from organ transplants to digital and social media, the internet and cell phones and so much more. All of these technologies have helped us improve as a species and evolve at a rapid pace over the last few decades. We can quickly connect, get information and decide on which choices to make. More and more we realize the importance of personal health, healthy food, and the health of the planet. Technology in Genetics is moving front and center, gaining a higher profile than it has ever previously had. The GMO has brought about changes in resources for food and medicine and even animals. The controversy both for and against combined with mixed unclear information make it a bit of a double edge sword

Since the inception of domestication approximately 10000 years ago, humans have been selectively breeding animals so that only their desirable traits remain, a process called artificial selection. Through artificial selection we have been creating species that perform tasks more efficiently and effectively, and serve our needs in a multitude of ways. Furthermore, the benefits of artificial selection are remarkably similar to genetically modified animals in many key ways. The increase in resilience, pharmaceutical benefits, and productivity are just a few of the many significant reasons why genetically modified animals should be supported and accepted in our world today.

("Americans are living longer, healthier, lives and we owe much of that success to biomedical research.") Dr. Robert Palazzo

Animal testing has played a vital role in nearly every major medical advance over the last decade. Animal testing was accountable for the development of asthma inhalers the reason why smallpox has been eliminated from Earth. But there are also nearly over 100 alternative methods that are already proven to be highly effective. Human cells, for example have been used to create devices called ‘organs-on-chips’ that can be used instead of animals to study biological and disease processes, as well as drug metabolism since this device can accurately mimic the lung, heart, kidney and gut. Those in favor of animal testing claim that testing on animals is an essential to development more effective methods for diagnosing and treating diseases that affect

Many do not like the fact that people test on animals but, it needs to be done. Animal research has played a vital role in almost every medical advancement in the last 100 years. A survey given by the American Medical Association found that 99% of physicians believe that animal research leads to medical advancements. Testing on animals has helped develop vaccines for many serious diseases such as herpes Simplex, hepatitis B, polio, rabies, malaria, mumps, virus-related conditions, and organ transplantation rejection (The surprising Pros of Animal Testing). Another advancement in medical treatment is heartworm medication. This discovery has saved millions of dogs across the globe. There are many more medications for animals that are used

The article Nine Out of Ten describes about how research contradictory results with animal researchers failing the tests. The articles claims that the animals tests do not work and that “92% percent of animal trials do not work”(Tom, 2008) the FDA as trouble with the test actually working on a human being. The article wants to explain that animal research does not work and that it proofs that animals are not a accurate models for humans do too the different genetics. The statistic according to the article is misleading most of the drugs are being misunderstood and most tests are being taken out of context. The article also suggested that “92% percent of

Imagine having a herd of cattle, hogs, sheep or goats and every single animal in the herd is the exact same, not only looks but their genes too. Well, in the future that may be the case in a lot of larger farm production lots through animal cloning. While there are many people against animal cloning, there is actually no harm done to the animals involved in the clone. (FDA US food and drug administration) Cloning in agriculture should be allowed because it would improve the farmers herds.

Skeptics of animal biotechnology claim that no benefits have been found in regards to the animals from the new technologies emerging and that there is evidence of actual harm being cause. An early example of such harm which is often quoted was provided by the “Beltsville” pigs (named after the US Department of Agriculture research station where they were born). Growth genes were inserted into these animals to produce faster growth and leaner meat, but the animals also suffered from a number of serious and disabling disabilities (Houdebine, 2000). The unpredictable nature of such research clearly displays great potential to cause animal suffering, mainly in the early stages of a new technology. On the other hand it can be argued that animals

     There isn’t any background information of human genetic engineering because it is perceived as unmoral, but there are many comparable instances of altering genes. Genetic engineering is the largest food experiment in the history of the world. “More than 100 million acres of the world's most fertile farmland were planted with genetically modified crops last year, about 25 times as much as just four years earlier”(King,1999). There is a series on genetic engineering of food crops, genetic engineers are now moving genes around among plants and animals. The attempt to improve the human race genetically relates to someone creating a specialized breed of horses or dogs. “In the early decades of the 20th century, eugenics projects in the U.S. led to forced sterilization of some people who were considered to have undesirable

For thousands of years, humanity has selectively bred plants and animals to produce the most favourable results from the fruitful species around us. It has only been a very recent event in our history, however, that we have invented a systematic procedure to ensure the best results in these species. This procedure is called genetic engineering, and has sparked multiple debates among both academics and the public about the ethics behind controlling the outcome of a species. Among all the altercation regarding this relatively new technology, no other topic has brought about more controversy than the use of genetic engineering in humans. Proponents of genetic engineering envision a future where disease, crime, suffering, and infertility have been eliminated - replaced by an enhanced human race better suited to our environment. Opponents fear a nightmarish world where biodiversity and the human genome have been corrupted through