Why Are Animals Humane Infliction Of Pain?

If the argument is that animals are being used for testing medicines because they are similar to human beings, shouldn’t the logic follow that because they are so similar to human beings and in need, we should care for them as well. Although, this is generally not the case. Researchers justify their experiments using the Animal Welfare Act or AWA saying that because of this act there are laws in place to stop the mistreatment of animals. Unfortunately, for some animals used in experimentation such as rats, mice, fish, and birds which make up roughly ninety-five percent of all animals used, they are not protected under this act. According to the Animal Welfare Act in 2016 they covered 820,812 animals (APHIS), which means there were about twenty-five million animals that were not covered by the AWA. Because of this lack of coverage, these animals are more likely to be abused and mistreated since they lack basic protection. Due to the new guidelines in the UK researchers like Thomas Genarelli won’t be able to continue their abuse.

To begin, the experimental use of animals in medical studies is unethical. These creatures are confined in isolated cages where they are deprived of necessary environmental elements. It is not uncommon that they undergo ghastly methods of experimentation; including the inhalation of toxic fumes, the burning of their skin, and the crushing of their spinal cords ("People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals"). This information sheds light on the grim realities of animal experimentation. These creatures are living, breathing beings that do not deserve to be treated as they are nothing more than lab objects. Not only are they ripped from their natural habitats, but are forced to endure an irreversible psychological trauma . To put it in perspective, imagine a six-month-old child being taken from their parents and sent to a lab to undergo scientific experiments that could ultimately result in

Animals endure so much pain and suffering when being tested on. In some cases, animal testing can be deadly or lead to serious side effects that will forever stick with the animal that was tested on. Animals hardly ever, to never benefit from testing. In research and testing, animals are subjected to experiments that can include everything from testing new drugs to infecting with diseases, poisoning for toxicity testing, burning skin, causing brain damage, implanting electrodes into the brain, maiming, blinding, and other painful and invasive procedures (NEAVS). It can include protocols that cause severe suffering. Also, can’t forget about the restricted living conditions where animals are forced to live in an unhealthy habitat out of their own element during the testing period. Animals in labs suffer not only pain from protocols, but also severe stress from day-to-day laboratory life. They spend their lives in barren cages, unable to make choices or express natural behaviors. Most never experience fresh air or sunshine, only bars and concrete. Although most think that the Animal Welfare Act protects animals from abuse, it is a common misconception that the AWA protects animals against abuse and harm in the laboratory or in other areas of commerce. This is not true. According to the National Anti-Vivisection Society the AWA regulates the use of animals in research and outlines standards for their care, it does not protect

Human’s have made innumerable advancements in the world we live in however in doing so, the progression of ethical and moral decisions made upon animal testing and vivisection have failed to strive simultaneously. In this paper I will affirm with the central claim that it is wrong to cause unnecessary suffering ought to be extended to the practice of vivisection. Innocent animals should not be put through these harsh environments of inflicted pain for the sake of a slight potential gain in human living. I believe this because these animals cannot represent themselves and vocalize their willful consent in the practice and will not be able to comprehend the pain and suffering caused during testing periods. The most common objection proposed to this claim however, would be the explained rationale behind why this form of testing occurs and the benefits it has shown in enhancing human and non-human existence. Although these considerations arise, it is still found to be unethical to cause unnecessary harm and suffering to any live animal in the name of science to supposedly gain a successful medical treatment or household product. Animal welfare representatives will continue to conclude that there is no valid justification for

A research was done and the results were, “ The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported in 2010 that 97,123 animals suffered pain during experiments while being given no anesthesia for relief, including 1,395 primates, 5,996 rabbits, 33,652 guinea pigs, and 48,015 hamsters.” (animal-testing) Animals get no say in what’s being done to them. The scientists can only observe results not ask questions so all animals being tested on are either being tortured or killed. A creatures life is being ruined and wasted just to improve the appearance of another. These animals could be loved in homes as pets or who knows maybe in the wild living their lives in a natural habitat but instead they are being force fed or water deprived or getting their fur disintegrated by harsh chemicals. Just because the animals can’t say stop or express in words

Do animals feel pain? Do they suffer when in distress? Almost all animal research is conducted for better understanding of human diseases and illnesses, rarely are animals used for the benefits of animals. Is the pain felt by animals worth the advances in human understandings? I will discuss what animals are used for, why they are used, the ethical dilemma of animal research, laws relevant to the study of animal experimentation and my personal stance on the matter.

Animal rights argue that researches on animal is an unethical or a cruel way of obtaining cures for humans. During examination more than 10 billion animals die due to the wrong administration of injections. Many animals are subjected to forced inhalation, feeding, dehydration and burns. During assessment animals are put through severe sufferings such as electric shocks, brain damage, blinding, withholding of food and water, immobilization of entire body and other painful procedures. Many of the animals die before or sometimes after the experiment. Some of the lab experiments which cause extreme discomfort and sufferings are anesthetization, intubations and euthanasia, when performed improperly. Unfortunately, the lack of experience and

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.

Although there have been some benefits to animal testing, the painful experimentations that these animals go through must come to an end. It is estimated that twenty million animals are experimented on each year (Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez). Roughly eight million of these experiments are very painful to the animals being tested on (Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez). This being said, ten percent of these animals do not receive any type of pain medication (Andre, Claire, and Manuel Velasquez). How could one sit back and watch these animals suffer?

Over one hundred million animals – including mice, rats, monkeys, fish, birds, and more — are injured and killed in U.S. research laboratories annually due to immoral experimenting and inefficient chemical testing. Prior to their deaths, most animals would be forced to breathe in toxic gases, while others are restrained in certain restraint devices for hours. In some cases, holes are penetrated into their skulls, whereas others have their skin scorched off or spinal cords crushed to pieces. Not only are these vulnerable subjects harmed constantly, but also treated carelessly by depriving them of everything that is vital to their well-being. For instance, they are isolated in cages and disturbed psychologically. These living, thinking, and feeling beings are treated like ordinary, meaningless laboratory equipment.

According to The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique, published by William Russell and Rex Burch in 1959, there are 3 important principles when it comes to animal testing and research. These principles: reduction, refinement, and replacement are typically known as the “3 R’s.” Reduction is meant to minimize the number of animal used in experimental procedures, refinement aims to limit the animal’s exposure to pain, and replacement is designed to use non-animal options whenever possible. While the problem with animal testing is constantly brought to people’s attention, the number of animals used for research is still increasing to this day. It is questionable whether these principles sufficiently reflect the development in our knowledge about animals and their emotional capabilities, the interest of these animals, or the harm that corresponds. It also raises serious questions about the success rate of the predicted outcomes of animal testing.

Every year, millions of animals suffer through painful and unnecessary tests. Animals in laboratories all over the world live lives of deprivation, pain, isolation, and torture. Even though vast studies show that animal experimentation often lacks validity, leading to harmful human reactions, we still continue to use this method of experimentation, while many other less-expensive and more beneficial alternatives exist. Going beyond the issue of animal experimentation being morally wrong, this form of research is also hindering medical progress. Although the use of animals in laboratories is said to be necessary for the welfare and health of humans, people mistakenly believe that this immoral and unscientific method of experimentation is

Operations performed may include drugging, infecting, addicting, freezing and burning, radiating, shooting, and surgical mutilation of living, healthy animals (Carryer). From 1985 to 1987, Mary Phillips, a sociologist, studied twenty-seven researchers in twenty-three laboratories (Day 31). It was brought to Phillips’ attention that the scientists were not administering painkillers to the animals (Day 31). The researchers were describing the tests as painless even though they did not provide anesthesia (Day 31). The cages in which the animals are kept are occasionally insanitary, small, and crowded (Crupper). Some test animals do not experience the outdoors (Crupper). Their enclosures may be kept in rooms with bright lights, inadequate ventilation, and loud noises (Crupper). Every year, anywhere from 80,000 to 160,000 animals are put down or die from testing (“Transparency Needed” 13).

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.

The harsh reality of the pain caused during animal testing is quite hard for some people to bare. Animal testing’s barbaric methods lead to extreme pain for the animals, whether the pain is mental or physical. For example, a large majority of the intelligent animals subjected to animal testing display the same behavioral signs that a tortured human being exhibits (Goodman). These intelligent animals suffer from severe anxiety, depression, hair loss and other physical and mental illnesses and engage in self-destructive behavior such as biting themselves and pulling out their own hair (Goodman). This is due to the emotional and physical trauma that is induced. Martin Wasserman, former Maryland secretary of Health and Hygiene wrote, “Animals used in chemical testing- always alive and fully conscious- are never given pain relief. They’re scalded by chemicals on their skin and eyes,