The Animal Welfare Act Is The United States

Approximately 225 million animals are used for testing every year. Billions have been killed in the process. ("Questions and Answers About Biomedical Research.”) How can this be allowed? Isn’t it cruel to use animals to test products for humans? Many animal rights activists say, “yes” to this question. However, scientists argue it is necessary and animal research can help save human lives. There are probable arguments for both sides. But the dangers of using animals to test products for human use weighs an even greater risk than not using the animals. Alternatives are much more ethical.

They experience ongoing mental and physical suffering from the endless boredom, confinement, fear, and emotional stress of daily laboratory life. Add to this the fear and agony of a procedure, and only then can we start to understand the desperation and pain in which they live, every day—and for most, for their entire lives. The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is the only federal law that provides even minimal protection for animals in laboratories. (The federal Public Health Service's (PHS) Policy on the Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals covers animals in NIH-funded research, but the PHS does not conduct inspections itself. Instead, it relies on institutions to inspect their own labs.) However, it specifically excludes rats, mice, and birds bred for research, who constitute 90-95 percent of animals in labs. For the approximately 10 percent of warm-blooded animals in labs who are covered under the AWA, the law covers husbandry only—meaning specific standards for their housing, feeding, and handling, including veterinary care. It does not prohibit any kind of experiment regardless of the amount of pain or distress it might cause. Instead, it requires oversight committees (called Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees, or IACUCs) to review and

Initially you might believe that animals have moral rights. Animals tested are don’t even have the mental capacity to comprehend different objects, let alone what they’re going through. They just have similar features of a human, which outside of this scenario would be completely useless. Another argument might be how testing doesn’t have guaranteed results, but hurts organisms in the process. While this is true, testing has an 83.7% success rate, while taking in consideration animals that were too weak to live past a few hours. Taking note of how only a few hundred animals are tested on a year, that 16.3% is a minimal amount. This is all for the better of humans, and even animals. After all, animal products are created off of these tests too. The death of a few animals, is better for us, and the rest of

Asking just about any animal rights activists on the thoughts of animal testing, it is reasonable to expect that the majority of them would address crucial flaws in many of the laws in regards to animals and how animals are supposedly “protected” by these laws. Trained scientists and researchers take on the key role of testing on animals in laboratories and facilities throughout the world, using the excuse that we are expanding knowledge and furthering medical research. In the United States alone, there are very few laws truly protecting animals from the unnecessary amounts of suffering the research forces upon them with many exceptions. Additionally, in reference to the scientists who perform these tests, the author of the article,

The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) is the only federal law that gives protection to warm -blooded animals in research laboratories. Under this law, it is the researchers’ job to make sure that they provide these animals pain relievers, provide them with the best veterinary care, housing, and food. This law only protects ten percent of the lab animals. The rest of the ninety percent of animals in labs aren’t protected: rats, mice and birds. This means legally the researchers do not have to provide these unprotected lab animals with decent care at all. Researchers can choose to treat these unprotected animals however they want and with as many rats, mice and birds as they please. Knowing how unfair the Welfare Act is towards the many lab animals it should be protecting, the voters should inform and show concern to their legislators in order to stop the mistreatment of these animals. The Animal Welfare Act should protect all animals being tested in research laboratories.

The testing of animals in scientific and commercial research has been debated for many years. Some people view animals as companions or part of the family, but others think of them as a way to advance medicine by providing researchers with a means to develop better medical techniques, discovering vaccines, and helping to find a cure for a disease. Regardless of how a person may view animals, they are worthy of better protection by our government and us as a society. Although some animal testing has been successful, there are research alternatives that could eliminate the pain, suffering, and deaths that animals endure in scientific research. Therefore, animals should not be used in scientific research

It is human nature to survive at any cost, even if it is at the expense of animals we may typically see in our everyday lives. The use of animals in pharmacological education and research is nothing new and dates way back to the ancient times. The amount of data that has been acquired from these animal testings has allowed for modern medicine to improve and opened new gateways for further development of newer medication, but at what cost?

The Animal Welfare Act (AWA) was established in 1966 in order to prevent mistreatment of certain animals. Establishment of the AWA was a large milestone in the fight towards stricter dog breeding regulation, as it is the first and only federal law that aims to protect animals that are commercially bred. One of the biggest breeding-related rules it enforces is that breeders who breed more than three dogs at a time for profit are required to have a license. According to the AWA, “Any person who maintains a total of three (3) or fewer breeding female dogs, cats, and/or small exotic or wild mammals…and who sells only the offspring of these dogs, cats, or small exotic or wild mammals, which were born and raised on his or her premises, for pets or

Unfortunately, animals being put through testing face conditions that are extremely unhealthy. Animals are kept in unsanitary areas with little to no space at all. According to the organization Humane Society International, “animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force feeding, forced inhalation, food and water deprivation…” (“Animal Testing - ProCon.org”). With no rights at all animals are being forced into harsh medical testings for diseases that can kill or severely injure the animal, such as polio. Through undercover investigation animals located in these labs are living “stressful, monotonous, and unnatural lives of daily confinement and deprivation” (“Animal Testing - ProCon.org”). Not only are these conditions being displayed in large laboratories, but also universities such as University of Oklahoma. During these experiments animals are being“fed chemicals, infected with diseases they would not naturally get, and are treated with no painkillers” (Animal Testing - ProCon.org”). As a result, medical testing facilities should be unable to be this inhumane to animals. Even though these tests may combat a widespread disease, animals should not have to endure this type of treatment at their own will.

In the article, “Experiment on Animals: Overview” the Peta organization says “Each year more than 100 million animals- including mice, rats, frogs, dogs, cats, rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs, monkeys, fish, and birds- are killed in U.S. laboratories for biology lessons, medical training..” This concludes to the death rate of these animals going absurdly high when it should not be happening in the first place. The Animal Welfare act has a regulation on how the animals that are used in research should have at least the minimum standard of care and treatment, but would one call being locked in a cage a form of care? Would being alone and only having a certain amount of human contact with when you’re being tested on is the fair treatment? Would you enjoy having your

One of the main reasons I am against animal testing is the fact that the animals don’t have a choice and are being forced to be tested, which can lead to them getting seriously ill or dying as a cause of the testing. Each year in the USA alone, an estimate of 70 million animals are taken away from their natural habitat, blinded, scalded, force-fed chemicals, genetically manipulated, and basically hurt and killed in the name of science, by private

The Animal Welfare Act was originally created on August 24, 1966 by president Lyndon B. Johnson, but has been edited and revised 7 times since the original act was passed. This act consists of regulations on the amount of testing, transport, research and exhibition that can be used on the animals. The dealers of these animals must also have a license to do so. The Animal Welfare Act states that they will be treated in “Transportation, sale, purchase, housing, care, and the people handling them for research.”

“Given the climate of poor regulatory oversight, many animals are also abused, neglected, and harmed in ways that violate the law”( “Animal Testing and the Law” ) , revealing the horrific underlying effect of animal testing that society does not want to display to the public. Not to mention, many animals are unprotected by the law and forced against their will to undergo a horrid experience—“legal tests include burning, poisoning, mutilating…, and dissecting without painkillers”( “Animal Testing and the Law” ). Many animals are caged behind closed doors that the public cannot see because scientists who use these techniques do not want to upset the public; however, the law is not forcefully used to protect animals in a harmful environment. Furthermore, animals have no voice to establish a strong faith for their future; humans determine the fate and well-being of the animals. Animal Welfare Act, a Federal law that addresses the standard of care animals receive at research facilities, excludes about 95 percent of animals used in research and has low protection for the rest ( “ Animal Testing and the Law” ). Precious animals used in experimental research should be protected fully, if animals are going to be used, otherwise animal testing should be banned if the laws cannot fulfill their duty of protection because of the horrible experiments that may take place. “M.A. Fox

Many animals are tested all over the world each day. “Many people ask,” is that right? The statement has been made over and over again that animals should have rights. Jeremy Bentham, the founder of the reforming utilitarian school of moral philosophy, stated that when deciding on a being’s rights, “The question is not ‘Can they talk?’ but “Can they suffer?” I would ask the question is it better for animals to suffer or for people to suffer? Is it right to make no advancements in research in order to save animals? People all over the world disagree with animal testing, but it is very important. Animal testing should be done because it saves lives, animals make very good test subjects, and although people may

Animal testing is a growing issue throughout the entire world and the main issue is animals do not have a voice to speak their rights. We currently do have the technology to test products on them without harming anyone or anything. The Humane Society points out that animals are, “ Force feeding, forced inhalation” they have their necks broken and more, the list is endless. Their rights need to be protected and our voice is theirs. “only certain animals are protected by the AWA (Animal welfare Act)” meaning some animals lives are