Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on animal abuse and cruelty
Animal cruelty research paper
Impacts of science in our lives
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on animal abuse and cruelty
In Lab Rabbit Strongly Recommends Cover Girl Waterproof Mascara For Sensitive Eyes published in The Onion, the author who remained unknown, does a splendid job in mocking the Cover Girl magazine in respect to the way they cruelly treat animals to test their products, not caring what the after effects are. The author writes the article in the rabbits point of view, as if it were the rabbit telling the story, this gives the article a more personal feel as it is read. The author’s purpose for this piece of literature is to inform as well as entertain the reader, given the way the article was narrated, in addition to some particularly funny but also gory details. The most important point portrayed in the article is the rights of animals that are mistreated, killed and gravely injured in those big laboratories without anybody doing anything about it. Rabbit LR4427 is a great example of this, as the story is written in its point of view.
““And if you have a long day... or night," continued LR-4427, attempting a saucy wink despite his surgically excised eyelids, "touch-up's a breeze. Just pack more Long & Luscious into your orbital sockets, your nostrils, your anus–any of the delicate tissues that get stressed by your busy lifestyle–and you're ready to go."”(Unknown) In this piece of the article the author uses the rabbit to sympathize with the reader, as LR-4427 narrates a series of events that Cover Girl has done to him in the process of testing the product. As the audience reads this they can understand what types of torture LR-4427 endures during this painful process. This serves to inform the reader of the atrocious things done to animals during testing for products not juts only in cover girl but in other products as well. ...
... middle of paper ...
... author reveals how animals are treated harshly after then promoting the product in different ways. The outcome of the article is a narrative of a poor rabbit that has been mistreated by the big corporations, and these corporations try their different products on it every day. The rabbit then in a sarcastic way promotes the product. The rabbit is not really endorsing the product, but the author is using this style of satire to make the reader enjoy the reading in a funny yet informing the audience what really goes on inside animal testing facilities.
Bibliography
1. "Lab Rabbit Strongly Recommends Cover Girl Waterproof Mascara For Sensitive Eyes." ." The Onion. N.p., 29 Nov 2000. Web. 10 Feb 2014..
Every year over 100 million animals die in the US; the cause for these deaths, animal testing. This injustice to animals involves testing products such as medical drugs or makeup, on poor imprisoned animals that don’t have the ability to stand for their own rights as most of us do. Animals used for testing are given products that may result in burning, poisoning, or death. These animals are forced to live in confined spaces where they wait until the next horrible experiment. They are, tortured beyond imagination as they are sometimes even cut open while they are alive (know as vivisection), either with expired analgesics or even without them.
“Even if animal testing produced the cure for Aids, we’d be against it” This rhetoric notion was stated by PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) and summarizes the fanatical doctrine animal rights activists preach to their followings. These activists preach a doctrine of hate calling for the end of all meat eating, wearing of fur, use of animals in experiments regardless if they are beneficial or not, and even push for the end of all pets as we know of it. Howard Lyman author of “Mad Cowboy” has not only aligns himself with this rambunctious group of man haters, but supports their nazi like doctrine in his book. On further review of mad cowboy one must dig deep to find any useful knowledge, and when you do find it, one sees that the knowledge has been twisted to fit Lyman’s own agenda. Long dead are the days when knowledge was first gathered then conclusions derived, now statistics and data is twisted and molded to grant validity to ones own agenda.
These were only some of many examples in The Jungle about deceit and corruption exhibited in the meat packing industry. Nonetheless, plants had government inspectors to check for tubercular animals, but Sinclair explains that these inspectors were usually the kind of people who would be easily distracted by those passing, and would not regret missing dozens of other animals. Therefore, people’s faith in those government inspectors had been betrayed, and their health needs were relentlessly ignored. However, Sinclair’s exposing of the scheming meat packing industry increased the awareness of such practices occurring daily.
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.
Throughout history and into the present time, the topic and practice of animal experimentation/testing has been highly debated. Many people are for experimenting on animals, as it benefits the lives of humans, while others argue that testing on animals should be gotten rid of, with alternatives put in place. In this essay, my aim is to lay out the argument made by Robert Taylor in his article, “Testing drugs on animals: a test case for socially responsible investment”, argues as to why animal testing is beneficial and why companies engaged in testing and why investors in these companies should not be at fault, while then following up with my own counter argument as a response. Consequently, my plan in this essay is to lay out Taylor’s paper,
In the novel The Jungle written by Upton Sinclair, the unimaginable horrors behind the food industry and fundamental support by capitalism are exposed. Sinclair illustrates the foul unsanitary procedures carried out in the meat packing industry and creates a grotesque image for readers. He quotes, “This is no fairy story and no joke; the meat would be shoveled into carts, and the man who did the shoveling would not trouble to lift out a rat even when he saw one—there were things that went into sausage in comparison with which a poisoned rat was a tidbit” (163). In The Jungle, capitalism is what drove the meat processing industries to comply with health hazards and continue the distribution of unsafe products.The food industry in present day
One objection Norcross states in his essay is that “perhaps most consumers are unaware of the treatment of animals, before they appear in neatly wrapped packages on supermarket s...
In the newspaper article and the extract from a novel, the authors illustrate the relationships between humans and rabbits in very contrasting ways. In the extract from "Watership Down," the rabbits are personified to perform human activities; such as socializing with other rabbits, which humans would find unusual and impossible. Through rabbits, Adams can scoff at humans who cannot "sense much in a strange place where they cannot see, but with rabbits it is otherwise." Humans are also considered as shallow-thinking beings, because they don't "sense … where they cannot see," "except the courageous and experienced blind [people]." The roles of rabbits and humans have been reversed within the two texts; in the novel extract, rabbits are thinking creatures and on newspaper it's regarded as normal house pets. In the newspaper article, rabbits are considered by the journalist as the "perfect pet" and "miraculous creature" because unlike cats or dogs they are pets that need very little taking care of. Both texts also discuss how rabbits are "social creatures [from] the wild … [and] benefit greatly from … living indoors with humans." Adams explains that among themselves "rabbits mingled naturally." Again, mockery against human is being mentioned again in the extract from the novel, "[rabbits] did not talk for talking's sake, in the artificial manner that human beings - and sometimes even their dogs and cats do." Adams is trying to challenge the readers' opinion on whether humans only socialize superficially or
Jane goes to work everyday at an animal-testing lab. She pours liquids used in eyeliner into the eyes of numerous albino rabbits. The rabbits' eyes are held open with clips so that for the 72 hour test period, the rabbits can't even blink. The rabbits' bodies are in a box so that only their head protrudes. Jane watches the rabbits and records how the rabbits’ eyes react. She observes as the rabbits’ eyes bleed intensely. Some eyes become extremely deteriorated, and some rabbits even become blind due to the toxicity of the liquid being tested. As she walks down the line writing down what each rabbit's reaction is, Jane notices many rabbits have broken their own necks trying to escape the horrendous pain ("Product...").
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.
Vanessa A. " Animal Testing." The Controversy in Animal Testing. N.p., July-Aug. 2013. Web. 13 Apr. 2014. .
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...
Simple household items such as lotions, shampoos and cosmetics aren’t very expensive and are within reach for the public, yet the public is not knowledgeable of the fact that the products that they use everyday are put through a series of tests which involve the use of harmless animals. Several large commercial companies do not make products for animals; they decide that using these harmless creatures for the testing of their products, could be cause to be harmful to animals still go forward with these types of procedures on an everyday basis. Although these animals are unable to defend themselves or signs of any form of consent for the near death procedures, these companies find this as a cheap solution for testing their products before placing them on the market. There are many other alternatives to testing animals such as embryonic stem cell research. Animal experimentation is wrong and it can be avoided but companies which are greedy for money chose not to.
According to the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (2013) over one hundred million animals suffer and sometimes die from experiments to test chemicals, drugs, foods, and cosmetics (para 3). Although it is good that the companies are concerned that their products do not harm consumers, the law does not require most of these tests animals endure. Furthermore, these tests do not have accurate results, so the animals may suffer but the product is still sold to the people. While products that burnt bunnies’ eyes away are being marketed to consumers, government agencies are using taxpayers’ hard earned money to fund these horrible, pointless experiments.
Rows of rabbits wait in cages, their heads tightly clamped in stocks to prevent movement. The lower lids of the rabbits’ eyes are pulled back. Technicians drip nail polish remover, mascara, shampoo, and astringent into their eyes, where the chemicals stay for three to 21 days. The chemicals burn and often blind the animals. Rabbits’ sensitive corneas make excellent subjects for this procedure—called the Draize test—because they cannot cry to wash away the toxic chemicals. They have no tear ducts.