Why Is Animal Testing Dangerous

“Each year, more than 100 million animals—including mice, rats, frogs, dogs, cats, rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs, monkeys, fish, and birds—are killed in U.S. laboratories for biology lessons, medical training, curiosity-driven experimentation, and chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics testing” says Peta.org. Animal testing can injure or sometimes even kill animals, some animals don’t even have any protection to help them through the process of testing, and if you think about it animals have many differences from humans, so whatever your testing on animals could work for them but not work for people and vice versa. Animals shouldn’t be used for any type of testing, whether it be medical or cosmetic.

There are so many products being tested on animals , from being lipsticks, shampoos, makeup, skin care etc. But have you ever wondered the side effects these animals experience while using these products? They will experience Burning, torturing, pain, hunger, thirst etc. How is living in a cage living? It's not it is just surviving.

To begin with, navs.org tells us that humans differ from animals in various ways, animal models will never be able to accurately recapitulate what happens in the human condition. Due to humans differing animals in various ways, the results aren't always effective. Animals being tested on things that humans and animals differ from in basically just killing animals for no reason. Besides, articles.baltimoresun.com states that 90 percent of medications approved for human use after animal testing were later proved ineffective or harmful to humans in clinical trials. As a result, 90 percent of the tests done are ineffective and harmful to humans so there’s no point of doing animal tests. You could save thousands of animals by not doing tests on them. Since animal tests aren’t always effective, people should stop doing them and save the

Animal tests do not reliably predict results in human beings. A study from ProCon.org stated that, “94% of drugs that pass animal tests fail in human clinical trials.” This shows that testing on animals may not be as helpful as it may seem. It is not useful to test on animals when there still must be even more tests to make sure that the medical treatments are safe since the animal tests are not accurate. The tests need to be accurate to know that the medical treatment works well

Although large companies and those for animal testing might think that animal testing is essential for products to be declared safe for human use, that is entirely untrue. Animals are not humans, so testing is not accurate. They are also genetically modified and subjected to abnormal stress. According to the FDA, only 5-25% of animal tests and human tests agree, so there is little relevance to humans. Furthermore, only 9% of products tested on animals make it to market. This questions how safe the products really are. What is effective in animals isn’t effective for humans. For example, drugs such as Vioxx, Phenactin, and E-Ferol were not effective in 92% of humans. That is

Also animal testing normally will not yield the same results it would on humans. (Zurolo 3) Not only that, animal based tests take too long & are expensive on average. One such case where a drug was safe for animals but not for humans was a drug called Vioxx. In 2005 ,researchers found the drug had a heart protective effect in mice & other animals but the exact opposite in humans and caused heart problems. Once they found out that it caused heart problems in humans they ignored this very fact and instead pointed to the animal tests insisting it was “safe” and the evidence is there. (news -

A quote from an experimenter showed his view on animal testing “Because the animals are like us.” Experimenters were asked why it is ok to test animals the answer would be “Because the animals are not like us.”

Many argue that animal testing is misleading or unsafe and some even believe there are alternatives for all animal research. However, where there are reliable alternatives, most certainly, scientists and many other professionals have used them, that's what the law demands. Advanced computer systems, mathematical models, human tissue and cell cultures can be helpful; but they cannot provide the answers that animal research can (Blakemore, 2008). Moreover, no researcher chooses to use and test on animals where there is no need. Animal research is time consuming and expensive, therefore no scientist gains pleasure from causing an animal suffering and wasting his/her time while doing so. Secondly, critics argue that using animals in the lab to

Firstly, I strongly disagree that animals should be tested upon by scientists, it's a cruel and selfish action taken by humans. The reason why I disagree, is that animals have different bodies than us. So the chemical might affect them differently: for example, if the product has no effect on the animal, it doesn't mean that it won't affect us humans the same. Think about it, what if it gives unwanted effects to the users? Some may have expected test results, but this doesn't count for ALL animals.

These tests can pass on animals, but when tested with humans can be highly dangerous. “95% of drugs fail in human trials despite promising results in animal tests- whether on safety grounds or because they do not work” (Arguments against animal testing). This data shows that there are differences between animals and humans and is otherwise pointless to compare the two. Sometimes these tests are well thought out and have expectations for the results, but can fail in the end. “The situation is much worse when an animal is harmed or even killed to test out a product that never contributed anything positive to mankind, and unfortunately this does happen” (Animal Testing Cons). Often there are experiments conducted with the idea that it will help something, however some trials fail and the animals involved in the experiment are just wasted away. Due to the major differences between humans and animals, some cases in the past had to be stopped. “A clinical trial of Hepatitis B drug fialuridine had to be stopped because it caused severe liver damage in seven patients, five of whom died. It had been tested on animals first” (Arguments against animal testing). These tests have caused a lot of damage to animals, humans , and families involved and should be replaced with safer

There have been products found to be harmful against animals but life saving to humans and vice versa; these tests are inaccurate. The drugs tested on these creatures would and do act differently on that specific animal than to humans. Drug testing on rats to determine whether it is safe on humans is not accurate because rats are a totally different genotype than humans their reactions to the drugs are different (Hussein EM et al 2008). Also scientists have found a cure to cancer in mice but this cure is incompatible with humans (BUAV n.d). Furthermore, eye irritability tests that are conducted on rabbits are not precise because rabbits

Members of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) suggested that animals are not the same as humans so there is no logical reason to why they should test products on animals. Obviously there are differences between animals and people. Under

Animal testing is a cruel way to try and develop new products. There are several other and much safer options that will get better results and potentially save up to two million animals every single year. The Animal Welfare Act is in place but only minimally protects certain animals and leaves many others, up to 95%, vulnerable to atrocious fates. The animals not protected by this act (mostly small or considered house pets) are most widely used and not related closely to humans. There are several alternative methods but they are being neglected since they are new and not being enforced because of it. A few countries and states have banned certain aspect of animal testing but others are encouraging this cruelty.