The Pros And Cons Of New Animal Testing Alternatives

It is not often that one sees the gruesome ways of animal experimentation in person. In short, it is the use of non-human animals in labs to find variables that affect the behavior of the human biological system (Google). Many people-like the PETA organization or the Humane Society-oppose these practices, but even this opposition is not enough to stop testing from happening for things such as cosmetics testing, chimpanzee experimentation, and genetically engineered farm animals. Although some of the testing produces positive results-such as a drug working-it is at the expense of millions of tortured animals; therefore, a simple solution would be to prohibit the use of animals in research.

To support or not support animal testing practices has been a long debated topic. Animals have been used in medical and cosmetic tests since the 1900s leading to numerous medical treatment breakthroughs and ensuring the safety of everyday products we use. Recently animal advocate groups have called for the abolishment of animal testing, causing a divide on whether or not to continue animal testing. In order to keep innovating new solutions for diseases that plague our communities and loved ones, allowing the use of animal testing to end preventable tragedies must occur.

There are over 26 million different types of animal being tested on for research each year in the United States. Animals are used for testing every year for human research. Different animals go through serious pain, in order for humans to facilitate growth in different fields of study. Many animals are used in order to study diseases and potential cures for the diseases. New research chemicals are tested on animals with similar structures to humans, to see if the medicine can help with certain diseases. Tons of scientific advancement has taken place because of animal testing. Without animal testing, many diseases would still exist, without a safe way to test for potential cures. The issue at hand is the type of treatment that animals have to endure because of the different testing methods. They are treated very poorly, go through intense suffering, and normally have very poor living conditions. A pro to animal testing is that many cures and different medicines have been developed through animal testing. Without animal testing, many diseases would still exist without cures. Secondly, animals have a much shorter life span than humans do, so scientists can study the results through the whole life span of the animal. With humans, it is hard to do a full test because we have such high lifespans, while animals tend to live a lot less longer. Thirdly, many animals have been saved because of animal testing. Many diseases animals deal with now have vaccines and cures, as a result of animal testing. Without it, many animals would have rabies or other types of virus that can be detrimental to the animal’s health. On the contrary, a con to animal testing would be the pain many animals go through as a result of the testing. The tests are experimental, so we don’t know exactly what the chemical drug will do to the animal. Many cases have turned bad and many animals have died as a result, or gone through extensive pain. Next, there are many alternative methods of experimental testing that doesn’t require animals. As a result, why are we still using animals for testing when there are other ways to do it. Finally, animals are different from humans, so they make poor testing subjects. We can’t know for sure how the research

“Animals undergoing testing can be subjected to torture and suffering” (Humanity, 2017, p. 1). Some animals may be cured of their ailments and diseases, but not all. In some cases, the animal dies do to the treatment. Humane treatment of the animals is a valid concern, so the use of them in experiments has been greatly regulated. “This has led to the 3Rs campaign, which advocates the search (1) for the replacement of animals with non-living models; (2) reduction in the use of animals; and (3) refinement of animal use products” (Hajar, 2011, p. 1). The Animal Welfare Act was signed to protect certain animals from cruel treatment, but the animals chosen for testing aren’t covered by this act. Many people believe that animal testing is unethical since animals are

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

Animal Testing has been a huge controversy in the past years. Some believe that testing is necessary in reaching medical breakthroughs to find cures for a majority of diseases. Unfortunately, animal testing leads to the suffering and death of millions of animals, and that's why most are against it. Many wonder, “How similar are our genes to an animal?” Luckily, not all products used today are tested on animals. Which comes to show that there are ways to avoid using animals for biomedical research and research for everyday products.

Although animal testing was a main component for the facilitation of medical research in the past, it is no longer necessary due to the option of alternate testing methods. Animals that fall victim to the mercy of animal research are subject to experimentation for the purpose of manufacturing harmless products (McKnight 2). Cell cultures, the MIMIC system, TraumaMan, in vitro, and human volunteers are substitutes for this inhumane procedure (Sullivan 4; “PCRM Scientists Educate” 10). Animal testing is a cruel, outmoded method that sacrifices the lives of innocent animals, despite the availability of humane alternatives.

Animal testing is a cheap way for companies to test products without harming humans. It may seem all fine and dandy, but many defenseless animals are dying for our selfish purposes. Many beloved companies hide the fact that they harm these innocent animals. A few of those companies are Avon, Bobbi Brown, Covergirl, Estée Lauder, L’Oréal, M.A.C. Cosmetics and Pantene. At first sight many may think “ a few animal lives are ok to spare”, but when they see how many mainstream colossal companies are practicing these methods, they will see just how many animals are impacted by these terrible ways.

Did you know animal testing is cruel?, it puts animals lives in jeopardy and the tests are not always accurate, it needs to be stopped. Abraham once said “I am in favor of animal rights as well as human rights. That is the way of a whole human being” (https://www.consumerfreedom.com/2008/10/3754-abraham-lincoln-was-not-an-animal-rights-activist/). I do not believe animal testing is right, it hurts the animal and the experiments are not accurate, we should try to make this process more safe and calm for the animals as possible, alternatives should be discovered Although some people feel animals should be used for testing cosmetics and healthcare products because they open door to many new medical researches. Animals should not be used for

In regards to animal research, my opinion is that it is extremely beneficial to medical and cosmetic research, but there should be regulations in order to ensure that these subjects are treated as humanely as possible. Cosmetic testing is a type of animal testing in which cosmetic companies will test the safety of their products for human use. This will allow the cosmetic company to determine if a certain product causes any rashes, reactions, etc. Animal testing for medical research is the use of non-human test subjects in order to observe how certain variables will affect the subject. For example, a researcher would give an experimental medication to mice in order to observe the effects of that medication on their behavior, biological system, offspring, etc. Overall, there are several pros and cons to animal testing for cosmetic and medical research, but the pros outweigh the cons. Regardless of one’s opinion on animal testing, the pros/benefits obtained from this type of testing are extremely hard to refute (Tappenden 1). Animal testing has contributed to countless cures and treatments that have saved thousands, if not millions, of human lives. For example, insulin was discovered through an experiment conducted on dogs that had their pancreases removed. Without this experiment, millions of diabetic patients would have been negatively affected or died. In addition, animal testing is a viable option because it provides researchers with a living test subject that is genetically and biologically similar to humans and it allows researchers to study a test subject throughout their entire lifespan as well as their offspring. The benefit of using animals that are genetically and biological similar to humans is that they are affected by many of the same diseases, conditions, and disorders. In regards to studying these subject’s entire lifespan, it is extremely beneficial that researchers are able to see the effects over an entire lifespan and their offspring’s lifespan because it gives us a glimpse into an area we wouldn’t have been able to observe prior to animal testing. If we were to complete testing on humans, who live about 70-80 years on average, this would not allow researchers and scientists to see the

There are better alternatives to animal testing such as vitro testing and computer models. In vitro testing, people use test mean gods with models based on human cell and tissue cultures. Havard's Wyss Institute has created human cells that grow in a state-of-the-art system. They are called "organs on chips" that can be used instead of animals in disease research, drug testing, and toxicity testing. There are also varieties of cell-based tests and tissue models that include products such as Cee Tox and EpiDerm. These are used to asses the safety of drugs, chemicals, cosmetics, and consumer products. Another better alternative to animal testing is using computer models. A wide range of computer models have been developed by researchers that

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?

Anti-testing activists deem these unnecessary and consider them to be cruel. “Fourteen million animals are used currently in the U.S. to test toxicity and irritancy of cosmetics and household products” (Hannah). Many new forms of safety tests are being developed by companies to save money along with the lives of innocent animals.

There are countless diseases and conditions that were once prevalent in society but thanks to modern medicine many are now either eradicated or minimized to reasonable living with. A multitude of these leaps and bounds in the bio-medical field are actually made possible from animal experimentation. Smallpox, polio, anthrax, and tetanus are just a few of the many examples of conditions that society has been able to mitigate due to the research that was done with animals. Although these experiments on animals have been given a handful of negative rapport from many and have created an ethical dilemma, they are absolutely necessary for modern medical advancements, safety, and economics.

The efficacy and ethical issues of animal experiments on cosmetics are constantly controversial. Today, the rights of animals and the cruelty of animal experiments are on the global scene, and there are more and more organizations supporting the movement against animal experiments. Every year, millions of animals are suffering and dying from painful tests to determine the safety of cosmetics. Materials such as eye shadow and soap have been tested in rabbits, rats, guinea pigs, dogs, and other animals despite the fact that the test results do not prevent or treat human illness or injury. Cosmetics do not need to be tested on animals and there are alternatives that are not animals. It is difficult to understand why some companies are still continuing these cruel and inhumane tests. Like cosmetics, many animals are dying to use animals safely in the laboratory. In recent years there have been various alternatives to using computer simulation, bacterial studies and biochemical analysis, but animal experiments still do not show signs of decline. Do they have to continue animal testing for humans?