Animal testing, also known as Animal Experimentation, is using non-human primates to test human products on. The discipline of science impacted is biology. Majority of Animal Testing is done in Universities, medical schools, and pharmaceutical companies. The controversy of Animal Testing is deciding whether to continue or ban it. Both would affect the world, or society as whole, since animal testing does decide what is the right doses, vaccinations/medicines, what will affect the human body and what will not. There are many positive benefits to Animal Experimentation. It has been said that “not testing new pharmaceutical products on animals is highly dangerous” (HIV and AIDS Information and Resources). Many tests that are done on Animals and then released for the general use are; “Acute toxicity tests consisting of the administration of a single dose of a chemical at a concentration great enough to produce toxic effects and death. An example of such a test is the Lethal Dose 50 (LD50) test in which 50 per cent of the subjects in an experimental sample are expected to die. Biological screening tests designed to determine the biological activity of organic compounds in experimental animals. Carcinogenicity tests where animals, usually rodents, are exposed repeatedly during their life to potential carcinogens (cancer-causing agents). Developmental and reproductive toxicity tests consisting of several procedures designed to assess the potential of chemicals to induce miscarriages or to cause infertility or birth defects, usually in rodents and rabbits. Eye and skin irritation tests are designed to determine whether a particular chemical or product will cause irritation on handling or exposure. The notorious Draize test, in which ra... ... middle of paper ... ...f the product is given to a human through the skin. It is said that this could be a new and very effective alternative to Animal Experiments. Scientist have grown a small piece of human liver tissue from stem cells which might one may be possible to perform initial ‘human’ safety trails in a lab. I suppose that if the laws on the necessity for animal testing were relaxed, it would encourage the scientist to develop other methods of testing toxicity that were equally effective. There are alternatives, it is just whether or not the scientist will peruse them. Works Cited "HIV & Animal Testing." HIV and AIDS Information and Resources. N.p., n.d. Web. 14 Mar. 2014. "Animal Testing and Ethics." Animal Testing and Ethics. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. Rep. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Web. Elizabeth Close .
This theme song to a popular cartoon is a farce dealing with experiments carried out on animals. In the cartoon one mouse is made very smart and wants to take over the world while the other is clearly not as smart. While the cartoon makes jokes, the reality is that mice and other animals re being used for medical tests every day. For some people this testing brings up ethical questions. One of the biggest questions: is it really necessary to take the lives of animals in the name of science and for the betterment of humanity? For animal rights activists, like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), the answer is no. PETA pressures labs into halting experiments because they believe that animals are not to be used by humans for "food, clothing, entertainment, or to experiment on" (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals 1). Its stance is that any testing is painful, inhumane, and unnecessary when alternatives are available. The PETA website says that "animals, like humans, have interests that cannot be sacrificed or traded away simply because it might benefit others." (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals 2-3). Essentially, PETA is of the opinion that animals and humans should have identical rights. In their press releases PETA puts out pictures of rabbits with open flesh wounds and dogs with rashes on their skins--all in an attempt to disgust people into sympathy for their cause. In actuality the number of lab animals used has been cut in half in the last 25 years (James-Enger 254). Of the animals used, 90 percent are rats and mice (James-Enger 1). Moreover, 11 million animals die each year in animal shelters (Americans for Medical Progress 2) and an astounding 95 percent ...
One word comes to mind when I think of animal testing: cruel. Animal testing has been a subject of debate for many years. While most people think that using animals to test products is a reasonable approach, in reality the outcome does not always show how the products will react on humans, and the animals suffer unnecessarily. The United States needs to ban all animal testing like the European Union did because testing on animals is cruel and animals should not be dying from it.
For centuries scientists have used animals to study the causes of diseases; to test drugs, vaccines and surgical techniques; and to evaluate the safety of chemicals used in pesticides, cosmetics and other products. However, many scientists amongst animal- right activists forbid the use of animals in scientific research regardless how many illnesses are eliminated through the use of animals in scientific research. Amongst animal right activists, David Suzuki also raises concerns towards animal experimentation. In his article, The Pain of Animals, Suzuki argues that humans have no right to exploit animals because--much like humans--animals also experience pain. In contrast to Suzuki, Haldane, in his article, Some Enemies of Science, argues because animals are very similar to humans, scientists have no choice but to use animals in scientific experiments. Both authors greatly contrast their opinions towards animal experimentation; however Haldane has a more explanatory approach towards animal experimentation. He argues animal experimentation should be acceptable because other forms of animal exploitation are acceptable in society. Secondly, unlike other forms of exploitation which seek pleasure in killing animals such as leisure sport, scientists, most likely do not harm animals; if pain is intended on an animal it is strictly for the purpose of scientific advancement. Thirdly, although, animal experimentation may cause some extinction, it is only one of many other causes of extinction, if other causes are not condemned; then neither should animal experiment...
and Europe, which include reduction of animal use, refine animal study techniques, and animal testing replacement. According to Dana ,Bidnall, “Animals are also used, and subsequently killed, every year in many other types of laboratory experiments, from military testing to simulated car crashes to deliberately introduced diseases such as AIDS and Alzheimer 's”(49). Bidnal also states that, “These experiments take place in labs at universities, pharmaceutical companies, and testing agencies, and on farms and military bases around the world”(49). The author suggest,”Researchers who conduct experiments on animals argue that it would be unethical to test substances with potentially adverse side effects on humans; animals are good surrogates because their responses are similar to humans”(49).Bidnal contends with ,”However, some animals are chosen for other reasons”(49). According to Bindal, “Animal testing is not the only option in toxicity testing”(50). Bidnal states, “Alternatives are widely available and include human clinical and epidemiological studies; experiments with cadavers, volunteers,and patients; computer simulation and mathematical models; and in vitro (test tube) tissue culture techniques, to name just a
Current animal testing has been a contentious subject ever since it started off 150 years back. Although a lot of people discover animal testing inhumane and egoistic, it is a important factor to boost our understanding of medication and to improve our understanding of science. Animal testing, to some, is the way to ameliorating our level of living and preserving many lives, and therefore has many benefits. On the other hand, the negatives may not be passed, and scientists are constantly trying to decrease the damages with some methods they create in the process. Even so, to the dismay of numerous animal lovers in addition to those who are endeavoring for animal rights, animal testing will not be stopped every time soon because, for now, it is the most trustworthy form of testing that includes the safety of daily products we use more carefully than any other procedure.
“Companies That do Test on Animals //A-Z” Caring Consumer// search for cruelty free companies and products. Web. 05 May 2010.
Evidence of animal testing can be found in greek writing as early as 500 B.C. Clearly showing that animal testing has been around for a long time, but only recently has it become a topic of real concern. Used for the purpose of developing medical treatments that could one day benefit humankind, determine the toxicity of medications (usually in at least two animal species), and to check the safety of products that are destined for human use. http://animal-testing.procon.org/ Animal testing has sprouted debate among the human population. Proponents of animal testing argue that animal testing is necessary to achieve medical breakthroughs, without animal testing who would they use for experiments, and that animal testing is important for learning. Arguments for those against animal testing include the fact that animals are biologically different than humans, they are caged in inhumane living conditions, must undergo painful experiments, and it is extremely costly.
Because of animal experimentation, scientists are able to advance in medicine and find cures and treatments, but all this must pay a prize. Animals in these experiments suffer and even die for the cause. Many argue that it is inhumane and cruel. Others would argue that animal experimentation is beneficial and necessary. The viewpoints between Jane Goodall and Dario Ringach are different when it comes to animal testing, but they’re after the same goal: caring for the animals and wanting to look for cures and treatments.
For years now people have been using animal experimentation to create new ways to help save the human race. There are people who believe that it does help, and that it is necessary to continue, while others oppose and want to fight for the elimination of animal experimentation. Scientists fight for the cures needed to help man kind, but struggle to do so as people fight against their work in progress. But as Jennifer A. Hurley stated, “History has already shown that animal experimentation is not essential to medical progress.” Stuart W.G. Derbyshire believes “The best hopes to treat or cure any number of diseases all rely in the current animal experiments.” Both sides have evidence that can allow both to be proven correct. But there are negative arguments that can prove the other wise. The real question to ask is, Does animal experimentation really help advance medical research?
Scutti, Susan. "Animal Testing: A Long, Unpretty History."Medical Daily. June-July 2013. 09 Apr. 2014 .
At first glance, animal testing may seem innocent enough, but a glance under the surface shows the real horror behind it. Animals everyday are subjected to cruel and unusual torture, things that we would never allow humans to be subjected to. Many ask why this has been societies modus operandi for so long, having been made unaware to the general public. Supporters of this testing say they are protecting humans from what the drug might contain if not first tested on animals. So why would we make these poor animals get the side effects of these products. Animal testing for products is not only cruel, but inhumane and very ineffective.
Animal testing is the running of tests and the research done in a laboratory on animals. Some of the tests are done to benefit human lives and other tests are done to determine side effects of a certain household or cosmetic products. It is a topic that has been up for debate for many years not only in the United States, but all around the world. While some support the advances that come from the research others oppose the cruelty that the media projects to society. No matter what one’s opinion of the subject is, it is still something that our society and culture deals with.
For decades, using animals in research to examine the safety of products has been a controversial problem. Some people say that testing on animals has brought benefits to human welfare in many ways. Others disagree, believing testing on animals is cruel and inhumane. Both sides have their own opinions, and neither of them is wrong. By doing research on the Internet and in books, I have decided to support testing on animals. Animal testing is more efficient to advance human and animal welfare and has contributed to many cures and treatments for illnesses that could harm both mankind and also animals.
Animal experimentation can be very useful for testing new products and finding new medical treatment’s to save people’s lives. Many people’s lives depend on the research done on the animals. If scientist did not experiment with animals many more people would lose their life (Derbyshire). Animals are used to test new medical treatments to see if they will be effective on humans. Animal experimentation has been very helpful in the medical field; it has been used to discover antibiotics, vaccines, blood transfusions, insulin, and anesthetics. Animals are a very vital part of medical research; without them is would be very difficult to discover new treatments (Franklin). Animals are also used to test new cosmetic products before they are used on humans. The last way animals are used for is genetic experiments to help scientist figure out how different genes work (“Animal Research”). Humans benefit a lot by using animals for experimentation. Without the animals it would be very difficult to find new medical and to save a lot of people’s lives.
This allows for scientists to have a better understanding of the way the human body functions and the effects drugs may have on humans. Animal testing broadens possibilities of finding cures for illnesses and diseases.