The Infringement of Animal Rights

1155 Words3 Pages

Throughout history animal testing has had a very important role in finding new discoveries and helping save human lives. However, the companies providing these test tend to ignore the fact that animals are having to suffer unimaginable pain during these experiments. Some scientist believe that animals are non-human, so the pain they suffer does not matter (DeCoux, Elizabeth). Companies put animals through unnecessary torture for human benefit and selfish intentions. Animals have rights and humans are ignoring these rights as if they do not exist. Animal experimentation for human benefit is unethical and should be against the law. Innocent animals are dying, because humans are injecting them with diseases such as cancer. Most scientist would say that this is just a more accurate way to gain test results on how to cure more dangerous diseases. In reality, harming animals for insignificant reasons such as cosmetics and medical benefits, is not humane. Although some people might argue the difference between raising animals for research and raising animals for food. The difference is, raising animals for food is natural. Without food we cannot live. Plus animals raised on farms are not mistreated, they are feed, taken care of, and are in their natural habitat. Carol Sheridan, who was part of the intracardiac injection studies recorded some of the affects that these injections had on animals, she stated that “Animals injected with TMD-231, LMD-231, or MDA-MB-468 cells were killed when they developed one or more of the following signs: hind limb paralysis from suspected spine metastasis, excessive weight loss, visible tumors, or labored breathing from lung metastasis” (Sheridan, C.)”. It seems as if some scientist view an an... ... middle of paper ... ...esting." Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 200 (1992). DeCoux, Elizabeth. "In the Valley of the Dry Bones: Reuniting the Word'Standing'with its Meaning in Animal Cases." William & Mary Environmental & Policy Review 29 (2005): 681. Otto, Stephan K. "State Animal Protection Laws-The Next Generation." Animal L. 11 (2005): 131. Sheridan, Carol, et al. "CD44+/CD24-breast cancer cells exhibit enhanced invasive properties: an early step necessary for metastasis." Breast Cancer Res 8.5 (2006): R59. Wisdom, Jennifer P., Goal Auzeen Saedi, and Carla A. Green. "Another breed of “service” animals: STARS study findings about pet ownership and recovery from serious mental illness." American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 79.3 (2009): 430-436.

More about The Infringement of Animal Rights

Open Document