Pros And Cons Of Animal Testing

Although animals are so different from humans that the results are often useless (Animal testing,Newsela) ,The products being tested on animals are good for us and for our health. One study found that it is only reliable 70 percent of the time(one benefit of using organ on a chip technology,Newsela). This shows that harming animals for the use of people won’t necessarily work all the time. This is important because animals were not made to be used in labs,they were made to be pets or be free in the wild.

Thalidomide is a medicine that is used for nausea. Many women who used it did not know that they were pregnant. Once they gave birth, they realized their child was severely deformed and ask how that could be? Scientists gave Thalidomide to pregnant rabbits and also gave birth

The use of animal testing to conduct research on medical and pharmaceutical products is a divisive and controversial subject. The main arguments against animal testing are the inhume conditions in which animals are kept, and the suffering inflicted upon test subjects (Van der Zee; July 18, 2013). Despite the ethical issues with animal testing, an equally compelling argument can be made about the need for this practice to minimize risks to human test subjects. Throughout the years, animal research has been essential to the development of ground breaking medical discoveries such as penicillin even if such discoveries came at the expense of millions of animals that may have suffered or died during or because of these experiments (Lobanovska & Pilla, 2017). This paper intends to establish that despite its drawbacks, animal testing is a necessary evil for the sake of scientific progress.

In the United States alone, notably around 100 million animals die every year from lab testing, including the larger animals like dogs and cats, along with rodents. With animal testing being on the rise, it is called out for being an unethical form of science. There are scientists and pro animal rights activists constantly on the search to reduce the number of animals involved in animal testing. They are trying to find alternatives to help layout a better blueprint for the science world, even if some alternatives are more profound than others. However, with their search, there are different types of lab testing that are used in an attempt to make animal testing more humane, and trying to pass laws that limit the use of animals in testing,

This book was a really good source for two reasons. I used this source a lot in my paper not just quoting what the author said, but also using the case studies. The case studies helped me a lot because they usually worked as examples of abuse and neglect..The case studies helped me a out because, there was a lot of good ones that talked a lot about what exactly is happening in labs. They talk about a lot of stuff that people don't really know what's going on in the labs. This book also had a few really good quotes that I used. That is why this book was a really good source to use.

Around the world, there has been an enduring controversial issue and that is animal testing and research. Since the beginning of medicine, animals were used in the testing of drugs, vaccines, and medical devices to determine the safety of a product due to their similarities in diseases with humans. However this is considered unnecessary due to the creation of alternatives for animal testing. Despite these alternatives the majority of animal testing still has not come to halt. This issue deserves to be attentive to instead of turning a blind eye as we consumers have always done dragging the issue and understand how our products are developed. The audience for this topic is generally people who are consumers of products and UTA students. In

Europe, the world’s largest cosmetic market, Israel, and India have already banned animal testing for cosmetics, and the sale or import of newly animal-tested beauty products. Major companies have turned their backs completely on animal testing and no longer use ingredients that were tested on animals – and a number of animal tests have been completely replaced with superior, cheaper and more effective non-animal methods. Proponents of animal testing say that it has enabled the development of many life-saving treatments for both humans and animals, that there is no alternative method for researching a complete living organism, and that strict regulations prevent the mistreatment of animals in laboratories. Opponents of animal testing say

On the opposite side of the spectrum, supporters strongly argue a multitude of reasons why animal testing has been and will continue to be the best form of experimentation for upcoming products in the market. The first and most prominent reason is that testing on animals “has contributed to many life-saving cures and treatments,” including medication for cancer, severe injuries, leukemia, and more (“Should Animals Be Used”). Not only do these medical advancements bring significant progress into the scientific field, but they are also the only adequate form of testing which fully reveals all the responses that would be mirrored in human beings. The pro side, as established by ProCon.org, commonly articulates that:

It is widely known animal testing injures and kills many animals each year for the sake of product development and scientific research. According to preventative medicine/public health specialist Aysha Akhtar, worldwide over 15 million animals are used in experimentation for medicine to be used on humans, and often suffer, even though alternatives to animal testing exist. Animal testing should no longer be practiced because it is unethical, the results can be misleading, and alternatives are available.

Needles, knives, burns, hives, rashes, and scratches; what does this sound like to you? To me it sounds like horror movie full of torture and pain. In reality, that is what animals have to endure on a daily basis. In North America, there are no bans on animal testing for cosmetic purposes. Which means, animals have to be poked, scratched, burned and tortured so that we can benefit from the products it produces. As stated by Suzi who runs a blog based on cruelty free cosmetics, in all of the makeup companies in the world, a total of 87 companies are cruelty free (2016). This is quite a large number, but it is definitely not large enough. Most of the makeup brands that are sold in Shoppers Drug Mart, a very common pharmacy across Canada, are

There are many reasons as to why animal testing is an unethical and outdated practice, yet it is still being carried out in this day and age. Thanks to advances in scientific research, animal testing is no longer a necessary evil, so its use is more of an inconvenience than an advantage. And although there are many reasons as to why animal testing should be discontinued, costs, alternative testing, and its psychological effects on animals are the strongest arguments as to why it should be banned.

People have been debating about who are more important, humans or animals and should animal testing be ban and become human testing?

The last issue about animal testing is that it is wasteful. 115 million animals are tested on globally, every single year (Cruelty Free International). Many of these animals lives are wasted because there are other more efficient alternative ways of testing, that don’t involve the animal’s lives. These ways of testing include; computer models, synthetic membranes, statistics, scanning technologies, human volunteers, and cell and tissue cultures (Earth, Down to). If scientists used these alternative kinds of testing before testing on animals, many lives would be saved. Also, there would be no need to breed all of these animals in the first place. Scientist are also wasting money. Buying the animals and their food is very expensive. If the

This paper explores four articles relating to experimenting on laboratory animals in order to answer two questions: should we continue to use of animals for testing and what are the alternatives of animal testing.

Animal testing; appealing or atrocious? Each year, more than 100 million animals are experimented on and killed in laboratories for medicinal training, classroom lessons, and chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics testing. Animals are not objects. Many Americans fight over the pros and cons of this two-sided argument. Although animal testing may further advance the medical field, scientific experimentation on animals is unfavorable among a large portion of the American population because these creatures are imperfect analogs for the human body, the process is wasteful in terms of money and the lives of the creatures, and the testing of innocent, guileless animals is now considered archaic by most.