Stop Using Products That Have Been Tested On Animals And Show Them The Other Choices That They Have Out Essay

This is an annotated bibliography of animal testing and if it’s morally justified. There are many opinions on the results and the entire process that it takes to test a cosmetic product or a medicine on an animal. There are many alternatives and benefits to animal testing but is it really justified? Or are animals in potential danger.

Millions of animals every year are being used in labs to test cosmetics. This problem has become a worldwide issue and the U.S. needs to make a change by prohibiting the use of animals in testing cosmetics for safe use.

This is an annotated bibliography of animal testing and research to see if it’s morally justified. There are many opinions on the results and the entire process that it takes to test or experiment a cosmetic product or a medicine on an animal. There are many alternatives and benefits to animal testing but is it really justified? Or could animals be in potential danger.

Approximately 26 million animals are used every year in the United States alone for research and commercial testing (“Background of the Issue” 1). For years, legislators have debated the pros and cons of animal testing, and laws were passed to attempt to fix the inhumane treatment of the cute, innocent testing subjects, the animals. Although the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) was revised numerous times, “the species most commonly used in experiments (mice, rats, birds, fish, reptiles, and amphibians) comprise 99% of all animals in laboratories” and are the animals that are specifically exempted from protection under the act (“Experiments on Animals” 2). A simple fix to animal cruelty during testing is to use alternative methods since human and animal bodies already vary greatly. For years, animal testing was the best option because there was no alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system; however, in the age of technology, there is no reason for millions of animals to be killed due to the severity of the testing. Therefore, animal testing should be banned because alternative methods provide more accurate results since human bodies are very different than animal bodies; furthermore, animal advocacy organizations should promote cruelty-free products more so customers know what to purchase and use.

Many people often oversee the effects of animal testing. This has been going on for decades and many are unaware of the results and the damages animal testing can cause. Animals undergo a lot of stress and pain when they are put through experimentations. Many have debated that it is unethical to test on animals while others say it helps to protect the safety of humans. In my opinion, animal testing is cruel and should be made illegal. Their lives are just as important as human lives and should not be treated as experimental animals. The system of an animal differs from the human system, therefore even if a tested product did not harm the animal, it may or may not be harmful to humans. Hence, our body system reactions differ from the bodies of an animal. It has been scientifically proven that 90% of the animals being tested in labs results in death while only a handful of animal experiments are successful. There are multiple alternative methods rather than forcefully harming innocent animals. I will explore how animal testing can affect the health of the animals and if there is possibly a better alternative rather than testing on animals.

Thesis: Animal testing is a heavy topic that usually goes unnoticed. To many scientists, animal testing is beneficial and to society it is morally wrong.

Relevance: animals are people too and no one wants an animal to suffer for the wrong reasons

Specific Purpose – To persuade my audience that animal testing is wrong and how other safer alternatives should be taken.

Introduction, animals that are being tested safety of their products that’s been a subject of an intense debate for over 10 years. While, a lot of people that alleged animals, the remained animals are being subjugated by the research cosmetics companies all over the country/all over the world. Even though, the scientists frequently profit from animal research, I don’t think all the suffering, the pain, and the animals dying are worth just trying find out the human benefits from the products.

Everyday cosmetic products that many people use, such as lipsticks, shampoo, face wash, etcetera, are verified to be safe using animal testing. Chemical burns and other short term ailments are very serious concerns that plague Americans and the knowledge that the products they use will not harm them and their families is possible because of animal testing. Also long term effects, such as cancer, have been discovered through animal product testing and promptly stopped saving countless lives. “NOT TESTED ON ANIMALS YOU’RE THE GUINEA PIG” (Source C). Living day to day with the risk that the products trusted to use on your children and yourself is enough to validate

Every year, more than 100 million animals are poisoned, crippled, burned, or abused in United States labs alone. The Animal Welfare Act, or AWA, was passed in 1966 and is the only federal law in the U.S. today that regulates animal treatment in research. That being said, the AWA is not heavily enforced. Additional, the regulations it includes are extremely minimal and do not protect any type of reptiles, amphibians, rats, mice, or birds, meaning that more than ninety percent of the animals being tested on are still submitted to painful and torturous tests. These tests often result in a lifetime of pain and damage because after the tests, the animals are placed back in their cages without any medical treatment and are often used in further

According to PETA, every year, millions of animals are poisoned and killed in barbaric tests that were crudely developed as long ago as the 1920s to evaluate the toxicity of consumer products and their ingredients. Rats, mice, guinea pigs, rabbits, and other animals are forced to swallow or inhale massive quantities of a test substance or endure the pain of a chemical eating away at their sensitive eyes and

The creation of a new product, should not cause animals to suffer and die. Because humans want a new lip color or a new type of eyeliner, does not mean that numerous animals should be immensely tortured and at times to death. Many argue that in order to ensure the safety of a product, animal testing is necessary. However, in today’s scientific world, this is not true. Many people argue that animal testing is cheaper, but according to Consumers ' Research Magazine writer Beatrice Hunter, it costs 500,000 dollars per product to test something using animals, as opposed to alternatives, which cost on average 50 dollars per product.

From the moment that the research project was assigned to me, I had a pretty good idea on the topic that I wanted to write about for the semester. Animal testing is a broad and controversial topic to many people because scientist and doctors are testing products on animals. Instead of testing on animals there are other ways to test products on. To prevent animal testing, one can buy cruelty-free products, educate others, help stop cosmetic testing or make donations to organizations that are against testing on animals. For my topic, I choose to research whether animals should be used for scientific or commercial testing.

Animal testing, although a controversial topic, affects a great deal of scientists and the work force in the agriculture field. This topic has proven difficult to communicate to one another about because there are individuals that believe animals should have certain rights and others believe that animals have no rights. Our group wanted to research this topic because we want to gain knowledge and become more understanding toward the people on both sides of the spectrum. Digging more into the research we found that cosmetics, medical use, and food are the most widely used methods for experimentation. With these research fields, people are finding ways to appeal to the ethics of the modern-day consumer.