Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Topics on why animals deserve rights
Animal testing should not be banned
Why animal testing banned
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Topics on why animals deserve rights
Anna Mari
Paper 3
The statistics about the number of animals that are affected are possibly countless because there are many animals being rescued everyday (Collins). In 1789, the animal protection movement was born. Jeremy Bentham saw a need for animal protection world-wide and thus created the movement. The rally’s call that Jeremy Bentham was involved in for animal protection was “The question is not can they [animals] reason nor can they talk, but can they suffer” Both the United States and Great Britain signed the first “anti-cruelty” laws in Britain (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health). For the last 50 years, new rules have been created regarding animal cruelty based on people’s newfound opinions for animals changing (Kilroy).
The leading cause of death and disability is diabetes in around 18.2 million people and diabetes also affect cats and dogs. So far incurable, there are medications and treatments to cope with diabetes (“Americans For Medical Progress”). Apparently some doctors disagree. According to UK professor Paul Furlong, animals are not human, so they are poor test subjects especially by cellular or metabolic means. It is difficult to create a similar model to people (“Pros and Cons”). Not only is animal testing time consuming, many animals are used and it is expensive, which is not worth it when 9/10 drugs fail clinical studies do not direct to people even though it helped cure an animal
Around 1975, more animal welfare groups appeared around the world and these programs challenge even using animals for horseback, testing, etc. Some other programs challenge the morality of animal use. (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health). Animal testing should be last resort if the product can be tested on using alternative testing (Collins). There are around 50 different alternative methods for testing products. When it comes to testing alternatives, there is a system called the 3 R’s. The first is replacing a testing that uses animals, the second is reducing the uses of animals, and the third is refining a procedure to minimize animal pain when testing. Using blood donations, scientists can be used to replace the traditional “pyrogen” tests, testing that involves potentially toxic drugs. Episkin is basically artificial human skin to save rabbits from skin corrosion and irritation tests. The fish threshold method reduces the use of fish when testing chemicals. Reduced local lymph node assay, a type of sensitization test or stimulation test, for skin allergy testing that reduces 75% mice testing. 3T3 neutral red uptake phototoxicity test reduces the uses for rats when testing sunlight sensitivity (Humane Society Of The United States). Another alternative is using computer models and virtual drug trials. Microdosing is when people are given little amounts of the drug
These animals used for testing products commonly include mice, rats, rabbits, monkeys, hamsters, guinea pigs, dogs and cats. These animals are forced to test new products before they are sold to humans, and even though there are numerous valid substitutes for us to test products on, the law doesn’t require that we do. What’s even more horrifying is that no animal experiment is illegal, and therefore these ‘tests’ can be completely irrelevant to human health, and no matter how painful or cruel the test may be to animals it is completely legal. Some companies that test their products on animals include Almay, Johnson & Johnson, Clearasil, Axe, Lancôme (owned by L’Oréal), and Pantene (owned by Procter & Gamble).
Mulkeen, Declan and Carter, Simon. “When Should Animals Suffer?” Times Higher Education Supplement 1437 (5/26/2000): p34
When the issue of Animal Testing is brought up in the course of a conversation, almost every single person that is involved in this discussion will have opinions that differ in some way, shape, or form. Many people will talk about the horrific conditions that animals are forced to live under, as well as the pain and suffering that they must endure while being tested. However, these conditions are not all that horrible when you take into account the state of the world we live in. This issue can be debated back and forth until the end of time. It is an issue involving two totally opposite views, pros versus cons. Pro-Con. The Con side will state that so many animals are needlessly used while in a test, but according to Roger Marshall, large numbers must be used in tests in order to account for statistically reliable results (Marshall 1). The Con side will also say it is not needed, and it serves no purpose, however, animal testing is a great thing, because it can help find cures for human illnesses, it can aid in the advancements of medical procedures, and it can also find cures for illnesses of animals. For many years, performing research on animals has had invaluable benefits for the human race, and without the constant developments we receive from it, we might still be plagued by the most medieval of viruses that we do not even think about in this day in age. The probability of heart attacks, strokes, and kidney failure would greatly increase if we did not possess the medication we can now use to control high blood pressure. According to the American Medical Progress Education Foundation, great advancements have been made regarding cardiology, including coronary blood flow, coronary bypass techniques and high blood pressure medication (Research 2). Many medications have been produced as a result of testing on animals, including insulin, the medication used to regulate diabetes. If animals were not used in medical research, we might still be living in a world where we must fear diseases like polio, smallpox, and even measles. Human Benefits. Medicine alone is not the only thing that has been vastly improved due to animal testing, the way we treat diseases and surgeries has all drastically changed and improved.
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
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.
There is alternatives without testing or torturing the animals. These non-animal methods usually take less time to complete, cost a fraction of what the animal experiments would be and they are not plagued with species differences that make extrapolation difficult of impossible. Effective, affordable, and humane research methods include studies of human populations, volunteers, and patients as well as sophisticated in vitro, genomic, and computer-modeling techniques. Companies that are exploring modern alternatives. Some companies are only using human tissues and sophisticated computer technology in the process of drug development and testing. Some companies say that discovery process is much more efficient with human tissues instead of animal tissue.
Not only do we have other options for these tests, but animals testing has actually been proven to be ineffective. Companies claim that this sort of cruelty will benefit the human population by testing the “safety” of the products, as they have been for hundreds of years and although this may have been helpful in the past, scientists have discovered otherwise. “While funding for animal experimentation and the number of animals tested on continues to increase, the United States still ranks 49th in the world in life expectancy and second worst in infant mortality in the developed world” (“Animal Testing Is”). This evidence shows that while we still continue to support and spend money on animal testing, it is not working as well as we thought.Essentially we are torturing the animals for a negative outcome, both for the human and the animal. The Food and Drug Administration reports that “92 out of every 100 drugs that pass animal tests fail in humans” (“Top Five Reasons”). If the products and drugs that we are testing on the animals are not working then there is no use in harming a harmless animal for them. Some may disagree and say that animal testing has enabled us to develop many life saving treatments for both humans and animals. But in reality there has been more cons then pros in animal testing. For example, “Animal tests on the arthritis drug Vioxx showed that it had a protective effect on the hearts of mice, yet the drug went on to cause more than 27,000 heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths before being pulled from the market” (Should Animals Be). While animal testing has enabled us to create great products it is usually ineffective on humans and leads to animals being harmed for no
Executive Summary Every 60 seconds, an animal is abused. Dogs, cats, horses, and many other types of animals are being neglected and tortured everyday, yet resulting in few and minor consequences for the perpetrators. Animal abuse is prevalent in the United States and has been an ongoing issue since the 1970's, and prior to. Society as a whole has chosen to avoid the facts and arguments about animal cruelty, because to some it is seen as acceptable and typical. It becomes much more frowned upon when people actually see the results of the cruelty, especially in the media.
More advanced products have been created to replace animal testing. Products like Epiderm and Thincert can be used as a skin alternative (Rogers). Also, new computer models can predict the toxicity level of tested substances. Animals no longer have to get substances dripped in their eyes and substances rubbed into their skin. These new advances are also more reliable and more accurate than animals (OSHA).
Millions of animals are used to test consumer products, but they also become victims to experiments for medical research. In The Ethics of Animal Research (2007) both authors state that there have been many medical advances with the development of medicines and treatments as a result of research conducted on animals (para 1). These medical i...
There's actually alternatives to animal testing. Its called vitro methods and advanced computer-modeling techniques also called silico models. In the viro method we use human cells and tissue. To test the product to see if it's safe for human use. Silico models is where we use computers and simulations to find the result.
Animal testing is cruel and unreasonable! Animals are a total different species, then humans. What may work for humans. May cause animals' problems, or even in some cases death. Not only is testing on animals risky its cost is dramatically higher!
“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” (Collins, Francis). Francis, the author of this quote, has an M.D., a Ph.D, and is Director National Institutes of Health. Animals are being tested upon in an unprofessional manner for vain and cruel reasons. Some people may support animal testing or not mind it at all. It does provide a way to test new drugs that help human longevity.
As pointed out by Moran and Locke (2014), “these new methods use human blood, cell lines, artificial skin or computer models to test the safety of products” (para. 3). Many companies have adapted these alternatives to reduce or even abolish using animals as experimental subjects for their products. Both Avon Products Inc. and The Colgate-Palmolive Company have reported dramatic reduction in their animal usage (Feder, 1988). Moreover, advanced replacements are claimed to be more precise, less time-consuming and more
Experimentation has been performed on animals such as rats, mice, and primates in testing various products from cosmetics to drugs. The experimentation of animals usually involves pumping a substance into the animal’s stomach or applying it to the skin and eyes; they are confined to cages and not allowed the freedom of their natural way of life. According to a report by PETA (People for Ethical Treatment of Animals),” this causes great stress and discomfort to the animals (2011).” The animals may not die, but they are scared and maimed for the rest of their lives. Practices such as this are still used today even though there are cheaper and more conclusive ways of conducting this testing; in vitro (test tube), genomic, computer modeling technique, and human volunteering. These research methods are more humane, cost effective alternatives to animal testing. “The harms to the animal conflict with perceived societal benefits that will result if ...