The Use Of Animals For Research Developments Have Been A Part Of Scientific History

As we discover treatments for diseases such as rabies, feline leukemia, tetanus, anthrax, and much more, animals also bear the advantage of protection. In fact, humans share hundreds of diseases with animals. We also share similar organs allowing scientists to use animals as an essential model for the study of illnesses. Therefore, the work researchers perform sets a platform for an end result where both parties benefit. It can thus be concluded that those against animal research are covered by a counterintuitive notion because, without animal research, the animals whom they are fighting for would die due to a potentially curable disease. To deal with the ethical dilemma of animal research, countries like the United Kingdom have placed regulations that require the research scientists to show how and if they have considered alternative ways before they are given a license to continue with their research projects. Given these circumstances, we can conclude that the rise in animals used in research must mean that in the near future there may be major medical

“The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated” (Mahatma Gandhi). Scientists have been using animals for biomedical research for centuries. They provide a source to get information scientists can not get without harming humans. A lot of debate is spread about whether it is good or bad. Animal experimentation is a controversial topic because it is helpful to humans, but it is also cruel and inhumane.

Animals have successfully been used to understand biological processes, assess safety of different chemicals, develop vaccines and antibiotics, produce treatments for hepatitis C, rheumatoid arthritis, polio, diabetes and many more . However, it is impossible to know if the use of animals was required to acquire this research or if the amount of suffering and death could have been reduced or avoided in order to achieve the same results. It is well established that animals have been invaluable in the pursuit of biomedical research, and the benefits from using animals currently means that eliminating animal research is also immoral. This is because the benefits received from some research greatly outweigh the potential costs to the animals and it would be unjust not to perform such experiments. Consequently, animal research should not be fully banned due to the benefits it yields, but should be more heavily regulated to reduce the moral costs.

The essence of the issues is if animals are being subjected to medical research against their will; is liable to say that we don’t place a high value on living things that are outside our human race? Subjecting animals to experiments that we would not consider ethically feasible to apply to humans. There are limitations that are placed legally to protect humanity. When considering animals for experimentation, there are no legal guidelines that restrict scientists from harming them. Ascribing animals to a lower moral status because of their lack of intelligence, communication skills, and human relations; taking advantage of them are quite easy. “According to the “Moral Theory of Animals, “there are two types of approaches that support this idea. One approach starts from the position that the interests of animals, particularly in avoiding suffering, should be taken into account when judging whether it is acceptable to use them for medical purposes that benefit human beings. The second approach argues that animals, like human beings, have rights that must be respected when considering their use for such purposes.” (Stanford

Scientists use animals in order to make medical advancements to help humans however, it is often difficult to get the same results in both animals and humans. The biology of humans and animals is not the same, although there are some similarities. According to Akhtar, in an article titled “The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation”, “Annually, more than 115 million animals are used worldwide in experimentation or to supply the biomedical industry” (Akhtar). Millions of animals are used, against their will, to try to help humans. Although there are some instances in which the experiments have helped humans, is it really worth the pain and suffering that all of those animals have had to suffer. Akhtar also stated “Although it is widely accepted that medicine should be evidence based, animal experimentation as a means of informing human health has generally not been held, in practice, to this standard” (Akhtar). There has been some cases in which testing medicine on animals has benefitted humans, however this type of result is hard to duplicate. Often when a result is achieved in the lab, there are many influences that can cause these

Since Ancient Greece, humans have used animals as means of learning more about the world. The first known vivisection was done by a Greek philosopher, Alcmaeon, in 450 B. C. E (“Animal Testing” NP). Since then, animals have had invasives tests performed on them, been killed, and been experimented on in the name of science or for profit. Some experiments are in order to demonstrate already known facts to students, others are to further medical knowledge, and some are to test drugs and cosmetics (“Animal Testing” NP). Scientific testing on animals has led to many medical discoveries. Animals are used, and have been used for millennia, in order to make products, procedures, and life in general safer for humans - stemming from the belief that human lives are more important than animals’. In order to moralize animal experimentation, people tend to draw attention to the benefits of animal experimentation and draw attention away from the cruelties and injustice committed towards animals. To lessen the suffering and lack of fairness of animals, people should find and use alternatives to animal experimentation.

Animals have been treated immorally since the beginning of time, this is shown by hunting, farming, trapping, testing of products and biomedical research etc. As humans, majority of us claim animals as our resources as we use them for eating, making clothing, (leather and fur jackets, shoes) working animals, as a means of transport, animal testing etc. In this essay I will discuss the use of animals in biomedical research and state why some believe it is morally justified. I will then present an objection to argue why biomedical research is morally unjustified and why I believe this. I will write this essay using resources from Tom Regan 's, “The case for animal rights”, David DeGrazia’s, “The ethics of animal research: what are the prospects for agreement?’, Baruch A. Brody’s, “Defending animal research: An international perspective” and Peter Singer’s, “Animal Liberation at 30”. I will then come to my own conclusion based on the different perspectives from the above philosophers and by using my own knowledge on the issue.

The first cases of animal testing happened in the ancient times to satisfy a curiosity for anatomy and to obtain knowledge. Back in these days a researcher would cut open an awake animal before a crowd. Belgian Andreas Vesalius and his students in Padua, Italy demonstrated public lectures on anatomy. “An animal, usually a dog, would be cut open while still alive and the function of each organ would be speculated upon as it was located” (Monamy 9). Today animals are used as a way to test new and unknown medications on a living organism. But even then, one such physician stated that he would rather use a pig as his subject because he wanted to, “avoid seeing the unpleasant expression of an ape” (Monamy 9). The ethics of animal testing has always been questioned. Humans do not want to think of animals as on the same level of us. Animal testing is helping save people’s lives, but what about the animals lives that are taken to achieve success. The similarity between humans and animals is terrifying and makes the cruelty obvious. In the 16 century it was recorded that early scientists who performed experiments and operations on live animals, did not consider animals to be equal to humans and barely cared for them. Relado Colombo is a good example of this kind of scientist. He was known for performing live lectures on pregnant dogs. “Maehle and Trohler said that he would take the young fetuses from the mother and harm them in front of her. Being a mother, she would bark furiously

Why should animals be used for medical research? Is it because some animals are similar to humans probably. Even though animals have rights they should still be used for experiments because if scientist experiment on humans and something go wrong they could kill that human being. That is why animals should be used for medical research because they have different blood type and cells from us. Something that can easily kill us might not kill an animal, so with that they can find a way to cure the disease. In this paper I will represent alternative positions on the topic of testing, teaching and experimenting on different types of animals. I feel when testing things on different animals you get different results. When testing different animals you would get different results because some animals are provided with the help of the law to be giving pain relief. Some species are categorized based on the law. Animals that were funded by the law were the ones to get tested on.

For centuries, the ethics of animal experimentation in the biomedical field have been questioned. Do the benefits of animals used in research outweigh the pain the animals endure? Animal rights activists will argue there are new alternatives that there are more accurate than animal testing. The success of trials on animals, has led to the continued use by scientists within the medical field. Additionally, testing on animals instead of humans puts humans out of harms way. The first Animal Cruelty Act was created in 1835 to regulate the use of animals for scientific purposes. According to Franco (2013), the “Enactment of the 1986 Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act, remains the only known legislation to regulate animal experiments for nearly 50 years.” Even so, there will continue to be two sides of animal research, one side believes, without animal research there would not be the medical advancements present to this day. On the other hand, the use of animal research is unethical and the finding of new alternatives may also be even more beneficial than animal testing. Therefore, the medical field should either seek alternatives to animal research or the methods are refined to reduce the unethical treatment towards the animals as subjects.

Going over many articles and sources, I have conducted an understanding research to help people realize the beneficially side for medical research performed on animals. Using Animals for Testing: Pro Versus Cons and Benefits of Biomedical Research are two of the several sources I used to conclude my investigation to inform people about medical research among animals. With numerous data and results, I will provide an attempt to prove why medical research should be conducted on animals.

Medicine veterinarian, Larry Carbone, in the article, The Utility of Basic Animal Research, published in 2012, addresses the topic of animal research/testing and asserts that there are benefits to this testing but there could also be exploitation of the animals, thus a new method or model should be developed in order to continue this research without harming the animals. In this article, Carbone states that he does not defend the morality of using animals in experiments nor does he defend not using the animals at all, but solely focuses on the justification of their utility. He talks about the benefits that come with animal research such as that it aids in making medical advances. Carbone gives various examples in history in which animal research

In present-day society, the ongoing intention about the importance of animals testing has been in discussion among humans and animals. There are advocates who support the cruel role of this act whilst the opponents are not favored using animals for research. In my opinion, although I believe that animals testing reserves a vital part in medical developments, people should have animal rights.

For the past 20 years, there has a been an on going heated debate on whether experiments on animals for the benefit of medical and scientific research is ethical. Whether it is or isn't, most people believe that some form of cost-benefit test should be performed to determine if the action is right. The costs include: animal pain, distress and death where the benefits include the collection of new knowledge or the development of new medical therapies for humans. Looking into these different aspects of the experimentation, there is a large gap for argument between the different scientists' views. In the next few paragraphs, both sides of the argument will be expressed by the supporters.

World is ruthless, there are countless animals disappearing around us every day which means they can’t enjoy the sunshine tomorrow. These animals are unlucky that they don’t have control over their own lives. Nowadays, at different corners of the world, various chemicals with hidden danger are being injected into the animals’ body. They are being tested in lots of areas. Mostly being tested for whether a new drug is effective or not. We human call this phenomenon as medical research with animals and it is expressed as a medical research involving animals like mice, pigs, frogs, rabbits and so on. According to the website, there are over 100 million animals are killed in US laboratory for different reasons. This number is very big but it only applies to US, we can’t say how many animals around the world that also cannot escape the same horrible fate. Based on that, it then becomes obvious that people have been debating about whether we should continue using animals in medical research over the recent centuries. Some people who support medical research on animals argue that we couldn’t have made so much progress in different aspects of life if we didn’t have animals in laboratory; while others who are against this approach say that animals should have equals rights as humans. So in my paper, I will present two different positions about this issue and then decide which position I will take and why I do so.