Imagine a life locked away in a cage with no form of control on your existence. It’s cold, dark, and you are scared. You don’t have a choice of what you eat, where you live, or how you are treated. You are unsure if it is day or night or what will happen to you next. You are locked away in a prison cell and you committed no crime. This is the life of a laboratory animal. Animal testing is the use of animals for scientific research purposes and experiments. It can be used for the findings of cures and medicines to testing new drugs, to understanding the behavioral psychology of the animals themselves. “Around fifty to one hundred million vertebrate animals, ranging from fish to primates, are used in experiments each year” (Lloyd). There are many different terms used to describe the research on animals but two main ideas. In vivo research is where the experiment is conducted on a live organism. In this case the animal is not operated on but rather tested in a natural living state such as exposing the animal to a toxin or chemical and documenting the side effects. The other is vivisection and can be closely related to dissection or surgical experiments on the living. It is an operation on a living animal for testing rather than healing purposes. This word is usually associated with negative perceptions such as torture, pain, suffering and death. Animal testing is performed in a wide arena of areas such as colleges and universities, laboratories, and within pharmaceutical companies. The main uses for the need of animal experimentation are genetic development, biomedical and biochemical research, toxicology, cosmetic testing and more. The use of animals for scientific research has constantly been a topic of ethical debate. Some major ... ... middle of paper ... ...nt/Actions-Israel/UndercoverInvestigation.htm>. www.timetoast.com/timelines/38507 Lloyd, Emma. "Alternatives to the Use of Animals in Research." Animal Experimentation (2008): n. pag. Web. 27 Feb 2011. Animal Welfare Information Center. United States. Animal Welfare Act as Amended (7 USC, 2131-2159). , 1966. Web. 1 Mar 2011. . Biever, Celeste. “Can computer models replace animal testing?.” New Scientist 190.2551 (2006): 7. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 4 Mar. 2011. Barnard, Neal D 1997: Animal research is wasteful and misleading. Scientific American 276: 80-85. European Commission. Joint Research Centre. Ispra: ECVAM, 1992. Web. 26 Feb 2011. .
The roots of animal experimentation began in the early 1600s when the world expressed in interests on the functions of animals and their uses in human life. However, it wasn’t until the incident regarding the drug thalidomide in 1960 did the government make it a requirement for drugs be tested on animals. During the incident, millions of women took the medication believing that it would be a source of relieve from morning sickness, not knowing however that it would cause irrevocable effects on their unborn children (Watson 4). Although the ruling seemed to provide a sigh of relief to some, the very idea of placing animals in strange uncomfortable environments and experiencing pain and euthanasia angered many. According to the American Anti-Vivisection Society, commonly known as AAVS, It is wrong to treat animals as objects for the purpose of scientific research, and to cause them pain and suffering (“Animal Research Is Unethical and Scientifically Unnecessary”). Although the arguments against animal experimentation seem credible, animal testing on medicines and products are necessary in order to insure the safety of human beings.
The information that animals have provided scientists over the past decades has changed society, and is still changing society for the better. Millions of lives have been saved with the use of animal testing and many more will be saved with continued research. However, there are many who dismiss this monumental achievement completely and oppose the use of animals in laboratory research. Though many find this practice to be
There is a wealth of evidence showing that animal “models” are not accurate and cannot be relied upon for safety testing and disease research. Scientists and doctors recognize that while animals are biologically very similar to human beings, they are not identical.
Sophisticated methods of testing are now being applied to human cells in petri dishes. Human volunteers are also being used and micro dosed with samples so small that they do not cause adverse reactions. The argument exists that these alternative testing methods are not only more cost effective but also more relevant because they are conducted using human cells and specimens; a method that isn’t hindered by species differences. In addition, computer generated models are being used to produce virtual reconstructions in order to test toxicity. Computer generated models cannot suffer the abuse nor can they that animals can. It is unfortunate that the law doesn’t require the use of valid alternatives, even if they are
Matthews, R.A.J. "Medical Progress Depends on Animal Models - Doesn't It?" Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 101.2 (2008): 95-98. Print.
PETA states that, since before the 1920’s there has been animal experimentation. Not until President Lyndon Johnson signed the Laboratory Animal Welfare Act (LAWA) in 1966, animals in the United States had no protection in laboratories, circuses, and zoos over breeding, transportation, housing, feeding, and veterinary care. The LAWA is now called the Animal Welfare Act (AWA). (Williams, and DeMello)
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
In modern society, animal experimentation has triggered a controversy; consequently, vast amount of protests have been initiated by the animal rights community. Although these organizations have successfully broadcasted their concerns toward animal experimentation, its application continues to survive. Sally Driscoll and Laura Finley inform that there remain fifty million to one-hundred million animals that experience testing or experimentation throughout the world on a yearly basis. But despite opposition, animal experimentation, the use of experiments on animals in order to observe the effects an unknown substance has on living creatures, serves multiple purposes. Those particular purposes are: research of the living body, the testing of
Sun, Shany. "The Truth Behind Animal Testing." Young Scientists Journal 5.12 (2012): 83-85. Academic Search Complete. Web. 19 Nov. 2013.
Throughout history, beginning as early as 500 BC, animals have been used to test products that will later be utilized by humans (“Animal Testing” 4), what isn’t publicly discussed is the way it will leave the animals after the process is done. Many innocent rabbits, monkeys, mice, and even popular pets such as dogs are harmed during the testing application of cosmetics, medicine, perfumes, and many other consumer products (Donaldson 2). Nevertheless, there are many people whom support the scandal because "it is a legal requirement to carry out animal testing to ensure they are safe and effective” for human benefit (Drayson). The overall question here is should it even be an authorized form of experimentation in the United States, or anywhere else? The fact of the matter is that there are alternatives to remove animals out of the equation for good (“Alternatives” 1). They are cheaper, and less invasive than the maltreatment of the 26 million innocent animals that are subjected to the heartlessness of testing each year (“Animal Testing” 4). All in all, due to the harsh effects of animal testing, it should be treated as animal cruelty in today’s society.
National Anti-Vivisection Society (2012). The failure of the animal model. Retrieved from http://www.navs.org/science/failure-of-the-animal-model. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (2013). Animal testing 101 -.
Hundreds of millions of animals die every year from animal testing in the United States. Innocent animals are used everyday in laboratories for biology advancements, medical training, curiosity-driven experimentation, and chemical, drug, food, and cosmetic testing. They are used to provide information to make better products that are safe for human use. Although animal experimentation has some benefits, the negatives outweigh the positives. Animal testing is killing off innocent beings for the possible human benefit, and with modern technology, there are alternative ways to test products that leave animals unharmed.
The Animal Welfare act was created in 1996 and it 's main purpose was to establish a licensing system for animal dealers and laboratories that use dogs, cats, hamsters, guinea pigs, rabbits, or non-human primates. This was also done in Great Britain in the 1960 's which was used to calm the debate of using animals in science. This act is the only federal law in the United States that is regulating the treatment of animals in research. Some say that this isn 't enough to protect the animals in testing labs. David Favre states that, "This is a federal law of limited purpose and scope." He goes on to say that, it does not deal with all species of animals, as do most state anti-cruelty laws. Instead, the law focuses upon several very specific activities that have been shown in the past to be potential areas of animal abuse and that have a nationwide aspect to them (Favre,
Every year, millions of animals experience painful, suffering and death due to results of scientific research as the effects of drugs, medical procedures, food additives, cosmetics and other chemical products. Basically, animal experimentation has played a dominant role in leading with new findings and human advantages. Animal research has had a main function in many scientific and medical advances in the past decade and is helping in the understanding of several diseases. While most people believe than animal testing is necessary, others are worried about the excessive suffering of this innocent’s creatures. The balance between the rights of animals and their use in medical research is a delicate issue with huge societal assumptions. Nowadays people are trying to understand and take in consideration these social implications based in animals rights. Even though, many people tend to disregard animals that have suffered permanent damage during experimentation time. Many people try to misunderstand the nature of life that animals just have, and are unable to consider the actual laboratory procedures and techniques that these creatures tend to be submitted. Animal experimentation must be excluded because it is an inhumane way of treat animals, it is unethical, and exist safer ways to test products without painful test.
When considering the advantages and disadvantages of animal research, it is important to take into account the successes that have emerged from animal research, like the development of psychotropic medications. The use of animal research has helped some way in the development of everything from the Tuberculosis cure, to the Polio vaccine, to the treatment of AIDS (Gluck, 2003).