The Pros And Cons Of Animal Testing

Animal testing can go from good thing to a terrible thing in a matter of seconds. Animal testing dates to ancient Greece in 300 B.C. Greek philosophers and scientists practiced on animals to find scientific solutions and medical cures. The benefits of animal testing include pacemakers for heart disease, vaccines, and treating conditions such as a brain injury. However, the downside of animal testing is that it is cruel to the animals, can have misleading results, and ninety-five percent of animals are not protected by the Animal Welfare Act. Also, breakthrough results have been made without animals and alternative animal testing is cheaper than using animals for experimentation.

The opposition might claim that medical experimentation on artificial alternatives is more unreliable compared to animal testing. However, an article by George Dvorsky gives many examples of modes of medical experimentation which provide accurate results. Tests using human cells in vitro, lab-grown human liver, artificial human skin, and computer simulations have provided results leagues more accurate than animal experimentation. Since reliable technological alternatives exist, animal testing should be

In 2014 a group organization called People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) noted that more than 100 million animals are harmed or killed during animal testing. Animal testing is cruel and inhumane. Animals are being used for medical testing, but are not being cared for before, during, or after testing. Animals and humans are very similar, in that we have the same organ system which performs the same tasks in a similar fashion. Even though animals and humans share comparable DNA, we fail to see the similarities in physical and emotional pain that animals endure during testing. Subjecting even one animal to that type of cruelty, all in the name of science is one too many.

plays crucial role in acceptance of drugs. Scientists said that it is very necessary to

Animal testing, although extremely debated, is something that should no longer be practiced anywhere around the world. Let’s start by taking a look at just how much animal testing is practiced in the United States as well as in other countries. The article called, “Animal Use Statistics” from the Humane Society International, says, “Only a small proportion of countries collect and publish data concerning their use of animals for testing and research, but it is estimated that more than 115 million animals- including mice, rats, birds, fish, rabbits, guinea pigs, farm animals, dogs, cats, and non-human primates- are used and/or killed in laboratory experiments each year around the world.” I find this to be very absurd and so wrong that this

Animal rights are not as protective as they should be. The topic of animal testing probably evokes images of animals being viciously injected or force fed pills. This is because it is the reality of what animal testing has been for the previous decades. Testing on animals for the benefit of humans is cruel and hurtful to the animals being tested upon. Animals feel the same level of pain that a human does, so why does it make it okay to test unknown substances on a lab rat just because it is smaller and weaker?  In recent years potential animal testing alternatives have shown up, yet it is still highly underused. I agree wholeheartedly that testing products and chemicals on animals for human gain is simply wrong. In this essay I will argue to protect the lives of animals by expressing how cruel animal testing is and how it is the wrong method of testing.

Cell testing in a petri dish can produce more relevant results than animals because human cells can be used (Kara Rogers). There is also micro dosing, giving doses too small to cause adverse reactions, which can be used for humans, whose blood will then be analyzed. Humans’ experimenting on humans is nothing new to our world as we have been doing it since the dawn of time. We now have artificial human skin, made from reproducing sheets of human skin cells that are grown in test tubes. This skin can be used to provide more accurate results than using animal skin (Kara Rogers). Computer models that create virtual human molecular structures can predict the toxicity of a substance without experiments on animals. Supercomputers are improving every year and may soon have brains of their

Although animal testing helps with medical research. It is not right, since it is basically animal cruelty. Animal testing is wrong in many ways, since animals don’t know what’s going on. So the big question is, is animal testing really necessary? Animal testing happens every day in laboratories. Animals shouldn’t have to be harmed when being tested on, they have feelings just like humans do. There are many different kinds of animals that get tested on such as: rats, mice, rabbits, hamsters, and even dogs. Why put animal’s lives in harm’s way, when there are other resources out there to help with medical researching?

Animal testing is an extremely helpful act that can save thousands of lives every year, lives that could be allergic to different chemicals, medicines, and beauty products. Many believe that animal testing is the best way to go, it ensures the safety of not only adults but children and pets too. Animals are tested based on what they are, for example a rat is tested with beauty products that cause an allergic reaction on the rat causing fur to fall out and bleeding. A monkey could be submitted to more psychologic tests which result in the death of the animal since it was bred to be tested. This is where another area of the field comes in, animal cruelty. Many believe that there are alternatives to animal testing such as practicing on organs of animals, another way for humans to find out what is bad for them without causing harm to another animal. Animals other than rats and mice are tested on, such as monkeys, raccoons, rabbits, opossums, and other animals that can feel pain. Animals testing can be called a necessary evil, testing seems to do and equal amount of harm and good.

Over 100 million animals are killed in experiments in the U.S. alone each year, according Laboratory Animal Resource Center at UC San Francisco. At the University of Missouri a study was done were they intentionally damaged the corneas of the dogs and given a topical acid treatment that was supposed to heal the eye, it did not, and the beagles were eventually put to death. Because of the cruel nature of animal testing, there should be an alternative.

Products that fill the shelves of supermarkets have a more complicated background than many believe. Behind every ingredient that companies list on packaging of cosmetics and medicine, both prescription and over the counter, is a choice that corporations must make regarding the treatment of animals. Laboratories harm animals and even kill them when conducting laboratory tests for new products. Numerous tests have been created since the wide use of animals, such as artificial skin tests that have no negative consequence for them. Global governments have differing laws dealing with these harmful means of production, but many allow this to take place, while even protecting household pets. Many people do not think of the process that precedes products on store shelves. Deadly animal testing with questionable ingredients is constantly being proven to be outdated by new types of tests for both cosmetic and medical uses.

It is estimated by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) that over one hundred million animals are killed each year by animal testing. The term “animal testing” refers to experimentation that takes place before human clinical trials to determine the dosing, toxicity, and efficiency of products for humans. This includes animals being tested for medical research, cosmetic products, and curiosity-driven experimentation. Many times this leads to animals being treated inhumanely and has led to serious controversy over whether animal testing is actually effective. In fact, animal testing is frowned upon because studies show that testing animals are not a direct analogy to impacting humans, animal testing also kills an unprecedented number of animals, and throughout the year’s scientists have found alternative methods for creating beneficial products for humans.

Animals have had a role in scientific research since the advent of modern medicine in early Greece around the year 300 BC (Hajar, M.D.). However, in recent years, a growth in attention and funding has led to an increase in the number of animals bred and raised for the sole purpose of use in testing. With this increase has come the division in opinion of whether or not scientists should continue their use of mammals and amphibians in their research or abandon such a practice for newer, potentially more accurate methods, such as free-standing human tissue cells (Ferdowsian). Regardless of one’s personal stance, it is hard to ignore the benefits animal testing has had on humanity. Testing cosmetics and medicine on mammals, for example, can filter out products which might yield a harmful result in humans. The utilitarian viewpoint cites benefits such as this. Animal Ethics, a nonprofit seeking to evaluate both sides of the ethics argument surrounding a host of animal issues justifies the utilitarian idea that “...the use of nonhuman animals can be acceptable only if the happiness their exploitation causes is greater than the harm it causes” (Animal Ethics). The opposing side, those who believe in inherent value, claim that animals should be given equal moral consideration as humans would, based on their capacity to suffer (Foëx). Both views hold merit, though as the cosmetic and medical technology industries grow, we as a nation must confront the issue of whether or not animals

It shows clearly that animal testing is very cruel and inhumane, because scientist force them to eat and drink just for experiment. “For example: forcing dogs to inhale cigarette smoke did not show a link to lung cancer; Flossing, an arthritis medication, tested safe in monkeys but caused deaths in humans; and the recalled diet drug fen-phen caused no heart damage in animals, while it did in humans--just a small sampling of volumes of examples.” (NEAVS-- New England anti-vivisection society)

It is estimated that at least 100 million animals are used across the world for experimentation purposes (Ferdowsian & Nancy 3). This is evidently an underestimation considering the fact that it is impossible to quantify the exact number accurately. Animal experimentation is carried out for commercial purposes and scientific development such as the verification of the safety of new medicines and determination of their toxicity in ascertaining their effectiveness if used by human beings. In America, animal experimentation is rampant in medical centers, educational institutions, government agencies, cosmetic companies and private research institutions. Since the first attempt to explore the impacts of animal testing by Russell and Rex Burch in 1959, many stakeholders including human right activists have condemned the practice, but little has been accomplished in combating the same (Ferdowsian & Nancy 3). This paper discusses animal experimentation and an unethical and an unjustifiable practice which should be banned in every institution.