In the past, animals have been subjected to inhumane and often unnecessary tests to determine the lethality of chemical-containing drugs and products. Such experimental procedures have angered animal rights enthusiasts and made many question the usefulness of such testing. Typically, the information received from toxicity tests on animals cannot adequately predict the effects that new drugs and products will have on humans. Thus, the recent progression of in vitro and in silico assays has benefited not only lab rodents, but researchers alike. Animal models have been the standard for safety testing since the early twentieth century, when rats, mice, and dogs were (and still are) used in both biomedical and cosmetic research. During this time, the United States passed The Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act requiring pharmaceutical and cosmetic companies to conduct tests on animals to ensure the safety of their products (Evans, 2013). These tests were deemed toxicity tests for their measurement of harmfulness and lethality of new drugs and products. Such tests as the Draize test on rabbits, which measures dermal corrosivity, were common protocol for testing shampoos, pesticides, and household chemical products (Rangantha & Kuppast, 2012). Other tests include acute toxicity tests conducted to determine the effects of immediate chemical exposure, product testing measuring carcinogenicity and birth defects resulting from chemical exposure, and various drug tests which determine lethal side effects and appropriate dosages (Evans, 2013). Though some of these tests have provided important and inferential data regarding the harmfulness of consumer products and drugs, they are highly criticized for their inhumane procedures, costliness, and irre... ... middle of paper ... ...ch in Latin translates to “in glass”) methods, have provided versatility to safety testing. This is because in vitro methods can isolate tissue or cell components from either animal or human participants. In doing so, these assays can better predict the activities of drugs, antibiotics, vaccines, and chemicals in relation to human use (Rangantha & Kuppast, 2012). Moreover, the preparation and study involved in in vivo assays, or procedures that use whole organisms, is more complex than their in vitro counterparts. In particular, toxicity measurements in animals requires exposure to and ingestion of potentially lethal substances until 50% of the group dies off (Rangantha & Kuppast, 2012). This test, known as the Lethal Dose 50, has been replaced by the use of donated human tissue. By using human tissue it is also possible to detect toxic effects on human organs.
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.
She sits alone in a threadbare, chilly, metal cage. Her eyes dart around wondering when the next torture will commence. If the testing fails to kill her, the stress definitely will. Entering is the doctor who plans to perform an eye irritancy test. The rabbit’s eyes will be held open with clips for at least three days if she survives that long (“Frequently Asked Questions”). Similarly, if these procedures would be performed on a human, they would be considered illegal. Yet, scientists continue to make harmless animals suffer incessantly. Annually, countless animals are abused in American test labs; however, alternative practices should be implemented in order to participate in worldwide trade, save innocent lives, and provide more accurate data.
Approximately two to four million animals have been used in safety tests. Safety tests are conducted with a wide range of chemicals and products, including drugs, vaccines, cosmetics, household cleaners, and packing materials. This raises issues such as the ethics and humaneness of deliberately poisoning animals, thus harming them, for the sake of marketing a new cosmetic or household product.
SUMMARIZE: The article grants information on new models in cosmetics to take the place of animal experimentation. It goes on to talk about how the European Union has now banned using animal-based test for cosmetic reasoning. Pharmaceutical companies and regulatory agencies have been using computer-like tools to assess the toxicity it has for years. The author incorporates information on cosmetics and the outlook on further research. ‘According to experts, combination of laboratory-based with virtual work will be the future of testing and is progressing faster than they expected.” (87 words)
Sophisticated methods of testing are now being applied to human cells in petri dishes. Human volunteers are also being used and micro-dose 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.
Animal testing has long played a part in the science of testing, and it still plays a very important role in the medical world. Testing on animals in order to create a cure for AIDS is one thing, but testing on animals for human vanity is another. Animal testing is used to test the safety of a product. It has kept some very unsafe substances out of the cosmetic world. However, in this day in age, animal testing is not the only way to test the safety of a product. Animal testing in cosmetics has decreased over the years. However, it is still used by many companies in America. Animal testing is not only cruel, but it is also unnecessary in today’s advanced scientific world.
Not only does it hurt the animals, but how do we know that; for instance a rabbit has the exact same reaction of a human. Technically, they could be wasting a animals life and potentially disabling it for its life. That said it could have a different reaction on the human body and could possibly hurt humans more than the animal. "We are not 70 kg rats" said Thomas Hartung, a professor at John Hopkins university. You need to consider when testing on an animal because you do not want to waste an animal on things that humans want, but not need. Will this effect humans in the same way animals?
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
The Web. 5 February 2016. Driscoll and Finley’s article, while including a historical view on animal experimentation, mentions information regarding the topics of product testing and the use of experiments simply for research. The use of animals to test cosmetics is introduced in their article.
Every year millions of animals such as rabbits, cats, and mice are used to test new products such as cosmetics, household cleaners, and medicines that often lead to poisoning and even death. In China, it is required that all products are tested on animals before being released to the public; on the contrary, the United States does not have this same requirement (Facts). As a result of the Animal Welfare Act being signed- making it illegal to test on humans- scientists use animals because the tests are similar to human testing. Only 6% of animals used in assessing the safety of new medicines and vaccines suffer in great pain because using anesthetics would alter the validity of the data (Kanade). Animal testing is the most effective technique for evaluating medicine and cosmetics because the animal’s anatomy is similarly structured to humans. Mice are the mos...
One of the largest controversies involving the testing on animals is the harm that is inflicted on them. Proof lies in the many leaked photographs showing the horrific pain that has been forced onto beings that cannot speak for themselves. A test called Lethal Dose 50%, or LD50, is a test to assess cosmetics such as lipstick, nail polish, skin care products, and others. This can leave the rabbits, dogs, mice, or other unfortunate animals left crippled with severe untreated chemical burns. During the assessment of the product the animals are force...
Each year, thousands of animals are brutally tortured in laboratories, in the name of cosmetic research. A movement to ban animal testing for cosmetic purposes has been gaining popularity, with many companies hopping on the bandwagon against this research. New alternatives have been developed to eliminate the necessity to test on animals. This is only a small beginning of what is necessary to end these immoral acts. Animal testing in cosmetics is useless and cruel, and can be accomplished by other methods of research to end the suffering of animals.
Animal testing is one the most beyond cruelty against animals. It is estimated about 7 million innocent animals are electrocuted, blinded, scalded, force-fed chemicals, genetically manipulated, killed in the name of science. By private institutions, households products, cosmetics companies, government agencies, educational institutions and scientific centers. From the products we use every day, such as soap, make-up, furniture polish, cleaning products, and perfumes. Over 1 million dogs, cats, primates, sheep, hamsters and guinea pigs are used in labs each year. Of those, over 86,000 are dogs and cat. All companies are most likely to test on animals to make patients feel safe and are more likely to trust medicines if they know they have been tested on animals first (PETA, N.D, page 1). These tests are done only to protect companies from consumer lawsuits. Although it’s not quite true, Humans and animals don’t always react in the same way to drugs. In the UK an estimated 10,000 people are killed or severely disabled every year by unexpected reactions to drugs, all these drugs have passed animal tests. Animal testing is often unpredictable in how products will work on people. Some estimates say up to 92 percent of tests passed on animals failed when tried on humans (Procon.org, 2014, page 1). Animal testing can’t show all the potential uses for a drug. The test results are...
“Developmental toxicity testing involves giving pregnant female animals, usually rats and rabbits, doses of chemicals administered orally. The animals are killed just prior to delivery and the fetuses are examined for any sign of toxic effects by the test substance” (excerpt from aavs.org). The above passage is just one of the many heinous experiments conducted in labs. About 95% of small animals such as mice, ra...
Some of these inhumane ways of testing animals include force feeding, forced inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, the inflictions of burns, and wounds to study the healing process. This is just a very small list of ways that animals are being inhumanely killed in advancements of medicine as well as science. “Many animals are even being killed by using carbon dioxide asphyxiation. Other ways in which animals are being killed include neck breaking, decapitation, etc. However, while this paper has focused on scientific and medical advancement this isn’t the only way in which animal cruelty as meet the blade and been killed.”( TRAANI, C., HABERLEN, J., C., &SPINNEY, R. A.) One of the largest and astounding numbers in the amount of animals being tested on or killed includes that of the cosmetics area. “For instance shampoo products when testing shampoo products rabbits are incapacitated in stocks with their eyelids held opened by clips, sometimes for multiple days so they cannot blink away the products that are being tested.”( Animal