What Are The Arguments Against Animal Testing

Animals, whether cats in the house or lions on the savannah, reserve the right to life. The disregard for animal life has been equated to racism or sexism; acting on principles of disrespect for life and thoughts of discrimination (Animal Testing and Ethics). The continuation of animal testing and experimentation take an enormous psychological toll on humanity, leading to rationalization and flawed justification. To carry on this path would darken the mark this animal abuse is currently leaving on our humanity, one step towards yet another fault in human nature.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) statistics records the use of roughly 26 million animals per year for animal testing. These test reports in many cases are poor. Although animals were greatly used in the past the effects of treatments on animals and humans can’t be compared. The human body, reactions to toxins, and usefulness of treatments is different because we are different, “While animal’s maybe ‘whole models,’ states Dr. Aysha Akhtar, MD,” they are the wrong whole model because of interspecies differences.” Testing animals for human treatments should not continue to be practiced.

Each year more than 100 million animals die due to animal testing. Animal testing is the use of procedures used on animals for medicinal use, diseases, cosmetic products, etc (“ About Animal Testing”).The anti animal testing movement does not only try and prevent the deaths of animals we consider pets but they show how inhuman and cruel animal testing really is. You should support organizations like PETA that prevent animal testing.

Animal Testing Should people hurt animals? Should people kill animals for human gain? These are questions citizens need to ask themselves everyday. Many animals are being hurt or killed every year because scientists are testing on them. Animals do not deserve this abuse just for human gain.

Animal testing is cruel, unnecessary, and preventable. According to the article Argument against animal testing “The support for animal testing is based largely on anecdote and is not backed up, we believe, by the scientific evidence that is out there.” What is being said about animal testing is just based on a story and it is not being backed up with actual proof that we need. People believe whatever scientists are saying, but, how do we know what they are saying is true? Many people say animals do not get hurt during testing because they think that animals are protected under the Animal Welfare Act. But in reality is The Animal Welfare Act is not doing anything beneficial toward animals. Noah Berlatsky noted that “The Animal Welfare Act allows animals to be burned, shocked, poisoned, isolated, starved, forcibly restrained, addicted to drugs, and brain-damaged.” This is not protection. We need effective laws against

Finally, the products test on animals is completely pointless because feasible alternatives are available. Advances in technology have conveyed many other applicable alternatives to research on animals. Some of the alternatives are the use of new imaging technologies, using human cell and tissue cultures, post-mortem studies, laboratory results analysis and endoscopic analysis. Moreover, molecular epidemiology has also shown substantial potential in identifying the causes of human diseases. Currently, medical students are also taught using new and emerging technologies which are more effective and may not engage using animals for the research. Such technologies include clinical experience, interactive computer programs, human-patient simulators, studying case reports, didactic methods, and safe human-based teaching methods. The above-mentioned methods have proven to be more effective as the student is not distracted with the possibility of potentially maiming or killing an innocent animal. Therefore, when successful means of product testing are available without the use of animals, so testing potentially deadly substances on animals is

First and foremost, animal testing leads to unnecessary animal deaths. “Animal experimenters want us to believe that if they gave

Imagine you are an animal with no voice, and certainly no way to consent. You have been sent to a lab where a new over the counter drug will be tested. On you. But you do not know that. All you know is that you are in pain, and you want it to stop. As many as 100 million animals face that unknown fear of pain as well as suffering each year(PETA). Animal testing, in our modern world, is almost completely ineffective due to a multitude of alternative testing methods, false results, and expenses.

Thesis: The debate on whether using animals is the correct choice of method for testing out experiments and products, is still up for discussion, considering that animals have helped us in finding many treatments and cures in the past. Today, with new technology, we no longer need the use of animals, as there are now alternatives to this practice. Companies and labs that originally started out using animals as test subjects are starting to switch over to new alternatives, as they are more accurate compared to the old methods that was used in the past.

An estimated 26 million animals are used every year in the United States for scientific and commercial testing (PROCON.ORG, 2015) and More than 4 million animals are experimented on inside British laboratories in 2012 (ANIMAL AID, 2014). Killing animals by laboratory experiments generates a lot of anxiety about the future of wildlife, which led to the writing of this essay. In the beginning of this essay, It will discuss both Points of View against testing on animals. After that it will demonstrate review of cruelty and brutality suffered by the experimental animals. It will then focus on the alternative methods and finally It will be shown that testing on animals is out of date. In spite of the practice of experimenting on live animals gives

Jeremy Bentham, an 18th century English philosopher, once said, “The question is not, can they reason? Nor, can they talk? But, can they suffer?” Peter Singer’s 1975 book Animal Liberation: A New Ethics for Our Treatment of Animals, in which he discusses animal suffering, rights, and equality, prompted the discussion of animal cruelty and experimentation in the cosmetics and medical industry. Industries should not test their products on animals because it is unethical and there are alternative methods that prove to be more accurate. Technology permits researchers to create alternative tests that deliver more accurate results.

I doubt that anyone has ever heard of the dog named libby, who was rescued from a testing facility, run by the Professional laboratory and Research Services inc. This corporation ran test on a multitude of animals, no species was safe. All animals from dogs like libby, to cats , bunnies, rats and mice, and many others. Before libby was called libby, she was known by the number that was tattooed to her ear. She was sick with hook and tapeworms and had a multiple of infections. She was also locked in dark cages.And on top of all of that; Staff screamed obscenities and physically abused the animals in their care. This story is a fact of an animal testing facility, but it doesn’t necessarily have to be. I believe that animal testing should be allowed,

Another argument made by supporters of animal testing is that alternative methods are not adequate enough for companies to feel confident putting a product on the market. Cheryl Wischhover quotes the executive vice president of government affairs at the Personal Care Products Council in her article saying, “the FDA hasn’t approved many alternative testing methods that would satisfy their requirements on the safety of certain ingredients,” so this makes it harder for companies to trust in alternative methods (Wischhover). The FDA themselves state that though they do not require animal testing for safety, “the agency has consistently advised cosmetic manufacturers to employ whatever testing is appropriate and effective for substantiating the

When visiting an animal shelter, petting the beloved family dog, or seeing a funny cat video on Facebook, it’s hard not to melt at the sight. Who could ever harm such cute, innocent creatures? It may be hard to think of how that could be possible, yet many companies have no problem hurting animals for their own benefit. Medication brands spanning the U.S., China, Germany, Canada and more test their products on animals daily to approve them for human use. Cruelty Free International and the Dr. Hadwen Trust state that at least 115 million animals may be used in experiments worldwide each year. The experiments administered to the poor animals are cruel and unethical, ranging from breeding them with the purpose of inducing mental illnesses or skinning them raw and injecting them with electrodes and chemicals. Furthermore, research has proved that the results are so unreliable and faulty that the testing is not even necessary. Evidence has proven that animals are subjected to unimaginable horrors during animal testing for the purpose of advancing the modern medical world, yet the entire operation is unnecessary for several reasons.

Animal testing has been a major issue ever since it began. Many people over time began to realize that it is immoral and that animals deserve rights just as much as humans do. Although many people have realized that animal testing is wrong, there is still an abundance of others who believe that there is nothing wrong with animal testing. Imagine if someone had a pet that they love and someone performed harmful, painful, and fear inducing experiments on them, would the owner think it is okay? No. Then why do people think it is okay to conduct tests on other animals that will feel all the same emotions as someone's beloved pet? Animal testing is wrong and more efforts need to be put into place to stop this cruel act because it is not always accurate, there are alternatives to the practice, and it is not ethical.