"We call them dumb animals, and so they are,
for they cannot tell us how they feel,
but they do nut suffer less because
they have no words."
Sewelle, Anna. Black Beauty.(2000)
Through the course of evolution both the animal and the human species have evolved; humans ironically taking form from prehistoric animals as well.
As our body and mind have evolved we have separated from each other on this so called hierchy chain. The human species once a hunter similar to Paleolithic animals have now assumed the dominant role on this planet. Unavoidably there are obstacles such as disease, and pollution that we cannot overcome at this period in time; diseases and colds being the sole killer of almost a quarter of the life form on this planet. J.B.S Haldanes, "Some enemies of science" (1928) Persuades readers towards emotional, rather than ethical responses regarding the constant struggle in the right to use animals for medical, and physiological research (pp 225-230). In regards to Mr. Haldanes position on the matter, that rules and regulations required to be filled out for animal experimentation, "anti vivisectionists who are against all painful or possible painful experiments" (1 p 227) that apparently have no results for science as well as the lies on pain and suffering in animals stated by anti-vivisectionists need to be cleared up and made understandable. These laws and allegations must be permitted, and truthfully told for us as a people to succeed in science.
J.B.S Haldane's Work's on science have sparked many controversial arguments with animal rights, and anti-vivisectionists regarding the fight on animal experimentation. Today in many countries as well as England in 1928 the procedure to obtain permission for animal experimentation is a long and horrendous procedure. In 1928, under the British Law Code "scientists had to obtain a license for virtually painless experiments" that are only permitted to be carried out in a small number of scientific laboratories. (2 p 226) Today in North America and England laws are being passed out by the dozen regarding the use of animals-specifically what type of animal, and for the type of scientific experiment. Due to these growing animal rights laws as well as a large number of anti-vivisectionists protesting, scientists are being debarred from a wide field of science. Arguably if these rules are not cut down and procedures are held at a medium or minimum, science regarding disease; that saves human lives, will therefore fall behind as we proceed into the future.
"The Case For Animal Rights" written by Tom Regan, promotes the equal treatment of humans and non-humans. I agree with Regan's view, as he suggests that humans and animals alike, share the experience of life, and thus share equal, inherent value.
Loeb, Jerod M. “Human vs. Animal Rights: In Defense of Animal Research.” Taking Sides: Science, Technology, and Society. Gilford: Dushkin Publishing Group, 2011
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
Imagine a puppy spending his entire life in a locked cage where he is deprived of food and water, and force-fed chemicals from time to time. This is the life of animals in a laboratory. Live-animal experimentation, also known as vivisection, is not only unethical, but also cruel and unnecessary. In the article “Vivisection is Right, but it is Nasty- and We must be Brave Enough to Admit This”, Michael Hanlon claims vivisection is a moral necessity that without the use of animals in the laboratory, humans would not have modern medicine like antibiotics, analgesic, and cancer drugs (1). For example, Hanlon believes sewing kittens’ eyelids together can aid researchers to study the effects of amblyopia in children (1). Conversely, the use of animals
For centuries scientists have used animals to study the causes of diseases; to test drugs, vaccines and surgical techniques; and to evaluate the safety of chemicals used in pesticides, cosmetics and other products. However, many scientists amongst animal- right activists forbid the use of animals in scientific research regardless how many illnesses are eliminated through the use of animals in scientific research. Amongst animal right activists, David Suzuki also raises concerns towards animal experimentation. In his article, The Pain of Animals, Suzuki argues that humans have no right to exploit animals because--much like humans--animals also experience pain. In contrast to Suzuki, Haldane, in his article, Some Enemies of Science, argues because animals are very similar to humans, scientists have no choice but to use animals in scientific experiments. Both authors greatly contrast their opinions towards animal experimentation; however Haldane has a more explanatory approach towards animal experimentation. He argues animal experimentation should be acceptable because other forms of animal exploitation are acceptable in society. Secondly, unlike other forms of exploitation which seek pleasure in killing animals such as leisure sport, scientists, most likely do not harm animals; if pain is intended on an animal it is strictly for the purpose of scientific advancement. Thirdly, although, animal experimentation may cause some extinction, it is only one of many other causes of extinction, if other causes are not condemned; then neither should animal experiment...
For thousands of years scientist have been performing vivisections on animals to find information on new chemicals, drugs, and vaccines. Vivisection is when scientist perform dissections among living animals mostly for the purpose of educating and retrieving information. Experimenting on animals has become the tool that has helped us comprehend the body functions of an animal and how a disease transforms the bodily functions, but over the years it’s caused animal rights activists to question the usefulness and the sincerity of using animals for this purpose. Although animal research has been helpful in the past, it is morally wrong in the sense that experimenting on animals is not the only way to collect information. There are other alternatives
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 broadcast 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 products, and the advancement of medicine.
The morals of a modern society entails protections for all species of life. Humans do not have the nature to not inflict harm on innocent animals around the world.Animal research is unjust and neglectful to species in every animal kingdom.The animal kingdom has been disturbed since men step foot on this earth. Some people are so selfish that the only thing that look over is about their own selves and not other humans or living things in this world. Animal rights is a big thing to some people and to others it not this paper talks about how it's cruel to research on animals, how research doesn't improve health,and how it's not regulated.
“The scientific study of how humans developed did not begin until the 1800s in Europe. Until that time, people relied on religious explanations of how humans came into existence. Starting in the 1500s a scientific revolution began to sweep Europe. Thinkers started using scientific methods and experiments to try to better understand the world and the creatures living in it. Eventually these methods were turned to the question of human origins” (The Nature Of Human Origins, 1). Earth made it possible for species to change over time because Ancient Earth provides ability to plenty of time.The Homo Sapien a is very complex creature. The species started off very simple by living in caves and surviving with little food and then later evolved into a species that were able to do many more complex things. The first species was Sahelanthropus tchadensis They were one of the most simple humans in that time period and on. They had very small skulls compared to Homo Sapiens today and their motor skills were just the same. We have evolved and changed for the better both mentally and physically. The Evolution of Homo Sapiens started off simple, such as the Neanderthals, and now we are the most advanced species to ever walk the planet so far.
Animal testing is a controversial topic with two main sides of the argument. The side apposing animal testing states it is unethical and inhumane; that animals have a right to choose where and how they live instead of being subjected to experiments. The view is that all living organism have a right of freedom; it is a right, not a privilege. The side for animal testing thinks that it should continue, without animal testing there would be fewer medical and scientific breakthroughs. This side states that the outcome is worth the investment of testing on animals. The argument surrounding animal testing is older than the United States of America, dating back to the 1650’s when Edmund O’Meara stated that vivisection, the dissection of live animals, is an unnatural act. Although this is one of the first major oppositions to animal testing, animal testing was being practiced for millennia beforehand. There are two sides apposing each other in the argument of animal testing, and the argument is one of the oldest arguments still being debated today.
Animals are similar to humans in many ways, but we frequently mistreat them. There are scientists who believe that apes are close to us by their DNA. In the article, “Of Primates and Personhood:
Peter Singer, an author and philosophy professor, “argues that because animals have nervous systems and can suffer just as much as humans can, it is wrong for humans to use animals for research, food, or clothing” (Singer 17). Do animals have any rights? Is animal experimentation ethical? These are questions many struggle with day in and day out in the ongoing battle surrounding the controversial topic of animal research and testing, known as vivisection. Throughout centuries, medical research has been conducted on animals.
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.
Animals are used in research to develop new medicines and for scientists to test the safety of the medicines. This animal testing is called vivisection. Research is being carried out at universities, medical schools and even in primary and elementary schools as well as in commercial facilities which provide animal experiments to industry. (UK Parliament) In addition, animals are also used in cosmetic testing, toxicology tests, “defense research” and “xenotransplantation”. All around the world, a huge amount of animals are sentenced to life in a laboratory cage and they are obliged to feel loneliness and pain. In addition scientists causing pain, most drugs that pas successfully in animals fail in humans. It is qualified as a bad science. Above all, animals have rights not to be harmed even though the Animal Welfare Act does not provide them even with minimal protection. The law does not find it necessary to use current alternatives to animals, even if they are obtainable. Animal testing should be banned due to animal rights, ethical issues, alternative ways and the unreliability of test results in humans.
There is always a special relationship between humans and animals, and some people will consider and treat their home animals as a part of their family members. In the recent decade, the animal experimentation plays a very significant role for biomedical research. Those animal experimentation allows scientists to do medical research on animals to develop new drugs for saving human life and preventing human suffering from diseases, and it also helps to ensure the safety of the drugs. Since some animal’s biological systems have a remarkable similarity with humans, it is tough to find an effective replacement for animal research. Although most of animal researches bring humans benefit, some people argue that animal research is torturing animals and violating animal rights and it should be banned. In fact, most of the alternative cannot provide accurate and correct information for the scientists, so animals should be allow use in scientific research.