The Morality Of Animal Testing In Today's Society

In the history of mankind, human used numerous animals to sustain their life and to keep their species. They used animals to hunt other animals or they use them to protect themselves. Sometimes they eat the hunting animals if they fail to hunt other animal. They also used animals to acquire knowledge. They learned biology through dissect animals and they also learned pharmacology through test medicines on animals. However present day, people start to ask question about ethics of animal testing. Some groups of people say that animal testing has no problem with ethics. Most of people in this groups does not want to think of animals as on the same level of themselves. On the other hand, other groups of people think that because animals cannot

Imagine being held captive in an unnatural environment, alone and frightened, with burns and open wounds covering any and all exposed skin. On top of this, picture living in inadequate housing, being handled improperly which leads to serious injury, not knowing if and when the next meal is coming, and finally, not having access to proper medical treatment when required. Unfortunately, this is not an imaginary scenario for many species of animals worldwide today but a harsh reality. Animal experimentation is still a common practice among medical laboratories and cosmetic industries. These animals have no choice in the matter and, more commonly than not, are not treated properly in accordance with the standards provided by the Animal Welfare Act. Animal experimentation results in animals being hurt physically and emotionally, there is a lack of regulation, results found in animal trials are not always compatible with results found in humans, and finally, it’s an outdated practice as there are other viable technological alternatives. Animal experimentation should be outlawed due to sufficient harm done to animals, incompatible results, and alternate options being available.

Repeatedly throughout history animals have been used for biomedical research. Animal protection and animal rights groups have severely criticized the practice of using animals for biomedical research in its recent years. To make the practice of animal testing more ‘humane’, laws have been passed in several countries

“Lots of people talk to animals…Not very many listen, though…That’s the problem”(Ben Hoffman). The controversy of animal testing is phenomenal; it always has been. I remember dissecting animals throughout my years of school in the "name of science". It was only until recently that I started questioning the government 's methods to teach us. We dissected a dog shark in my oceanography class last year. There had to been at least 80 dead sharks in about four different buckets; that was when it crossed the line. I understood a lamb eye or something, but breeding sharks in captivity just so they can be killed? Animal testing is wrong in every way to me.

The harmful use of animals in experiments is not only cruel and inhumane but also often ineffective. Animals do not get many of the human diseases that people do, such as major types of heart disease, many types of cancer, HIV, Parkinson’s disease, or schizophrenia. There have been past occasions where drugs passed on animals weren’t even safe. There is no excuse for animal testing in today’s techy world, there are now many alternatives for animal testing that would put an end to the pain and suffering endured by these innocent animals during human testing.

are not able to give consent for this as would be required of a human. Other

Animal testing has been bad of the years and it can even be dated back to the ancient times of the greek. Physicians would dissect animals with the pure interest to obtain knowledge. But even then, one such physician stated that he would rather use a pig as his subject because he wanted to.The ethics of animal testing has always been questioned. Humans do not want to think of animals as on the same level of us. The similarity is terrifying and makes the cruelness obvious. In the 16 century it has been recorded that early vivisectionists, scientists who perform experiments and operations on live animals, did not consider animals to be of the same lineage of us and barely cared for them.The remaining are used as test dummies for products.

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

The issue, which is also a prominent controversial issue in the country, is animal testing.

The controversy behind animals as research subjects is mainly one of morals and the ethical treatment of said animals. Many people believe we should use them in this way, so we aren 't actually harming people in the pursuit for better things for humans. Though animal testing was a viable resource for many years, it has proven to be extremely controversial and unethical, therefor the use of animals as research subjects should be outlawed.

Cohen argues that humans may morally use animals for biomedical research, the study of biological processes and disease, because animals lack rights. He defines rights as moral claims that one human can hold against another, which are bound in both law as well as in comprehension of right and wrong. As animals lack self-conscious placement in a higher ethical order with the ability to weigh needs of self against the needs of others, they therefore lack the ability to have rights. (Cohen 1986: p. 215) To support the morality of animal research, I will show how it has led to many successful treatments of disease in humans, due to the common physiology that we share with other animals. Furthermore, I will argue that the pain caused on research

Long term thinking and the invention of new technologies and cures as result of animal testing could possibly be more beneficial for the world as a whole, while short term thinking that views hurting animals for possibly no beneficial outcome would benefit the individual animals that are being tested

The development of new treatments including medicines are distinguished for being time consuming, costly and complex. However, this timely manner is beneficial for society as it meant to provide an efficient and safe medication. Concerns regarding when animal studies are necessary compared to clinical trials has been a debatable topic among society. For over a decade, animal research has served as a fundamental component in many medical findings. Mousses are commonly used in laboratories, as we as humans share nearly 95% of our genes, making them a useful and efficient model for the assistance of discovering medications used today (Grant, 2017). Bench studies should continue to be practiced by researchers as

Today, Millions of animals across the globe are being used in labs as a way to experiment and test things such as cosmetics and drugs while also being used for biology lessons, medical training and sometimes just curiosity-driven experimentations. Many would say these test are infringing on the “animal 's right”.we will look at immanuel kant with his theory of the categorical imperative and other philosophers such as aristotle and will demonstrate how they have had a large impact on how we see these animals rights today and how they play a role in whether or not animal testing is morally the right thing to do.experimentations on animals has been done throughout almost all of in history and in some way or another contributed to most nearly every medical breakthrough. however , where do we draw the line between testing to further progress knowledge and scientific studies and infringing on the animals rights? In addition how far are we willing to go with “animal rights”? In order to truly get get a better understanding to answer these questions, i 'm going to dive deeper into both the pros and cons of the use of animals in scientific experiments and see if there are any proven alternatives that could be used to better science and the rights of all animals.

Imagine a life locked away in a cage with no form of control on your existence. It’s cold, dark, and you are scared. You don’t have a choice of what you eat, where you live, or how you are treated. You are unsure if it is day or night or what will happen to you next. You are locked away in a prison cell and you committed no crime. This is the life of a laboratory animal. Animal testing is the use of animals for scientific research purposes and experiments. It can be used for the findings of cures and medicines to testing new drugs, to understanding the behavioral psychology of the animals themselves. “Around fifty to one hundred million vertebrate animals, ranging from fish to primates, are used in experiments each year” (Lloyd). There are