The use of animal testing has been beneficial, discovering many different medications that have saved human lives. However, animal testing is an unethical practice going on in society. In my opinion, the problems of animal testing outweigh the benefits. Morally, animal testing is a cruel and inhumane practice used in countless experiments. Animals have no voice in whether they want to be used for testing or not.
This paper examines both the detriments and benefits of animal experimentation in modern science specifically in the fields of medicine, health and drug research. To begin, I shall present the perspective of supporters of animal experimentation and follow with the perspective of those opposed. Next, I shall produce my own stance on this controversial issue and establish a conclusion. 2. The Advantages of Animal Experimentation It is the general consensus of the populous that it would be unethical to experiment on humans first, and that some other method of safety testing is required prior to human experimentation.
Animal Experimentation Jeremy Bentham a philosopher and a utilitarian humanitarian once said, “The question is not, “Can they reason?” nor, “Can they talk?” but “Can they suffer?”(the-principles). Why are there so many animals in the world suffering from animal experimentation? Animal experimentation is used in order to test products and to discover new medical research. While animal experimentation is necessary many people believe it is wrong and inhumane. Animal experimentation may be very important but it is questioned whether or not if it is wrong and if there is any way to find substitutions in place of using animals.
Our society is split into supporters and opponents of animal experimentation. The latter tend to resort to violent methods of protest, namely they intimidate physicians involved in animal testing, etc. Whereas proponents of animal testing emphasize that without employment of animals in research advances in modern medicine would be impossible, antivivisectionists do not take into consideration numerous benefits of animal experimentation to humans and claim that it is unethical to use animals in tests. It is the conflict between animal rights advocates and scientists, who conduct experiments on animals to improve the welfare of people. Alternatives to animal research, clinical value of animal testing, human domination over animals and their greater moral significance, exposure of animals to needless suffering and abuse are the questions that are frequently raised by antivivisectionists.
One of the most touchy aspects of our relationship with animals is the use of animals in laboratory sciences. Some manufactures of cosmetics and household products still conduct painful and useless tests on live animals, even though no law requires them to do so. Some people, called anti-vivisectionists, are at one extreme in their concern. They want an abolition of all experiments on live animals. At the other extreme there are those who say that it is quite all right for us to do whatever we like to animals.
With the advancing of new technology, medications and medical advancements haven’t we gained this knowledge by animal testing/ animal cruelty? Do we, as humans, think animal testing/ animal cruelty and domestic violence all have similarities and should all of them have the same fines? Many people dating back for centuries, struggled over these same questions that we still struggle over today. What many people don’t know is that these type of abuses still exist in the world and will get stronger if we don’t do something about it. Those who know are divided between wanting to help both the animals and humans in need of help or that, these abuses are the only way we can advance.
Throughout the years animal rights groups and organizations have frowned upon animal experiments. Animal testing has been thought to be inhumane and cold-hearted to animals. Because of these accusations medical researchers have to suffer threats from individuals and the media. If animal testing weren’t allowed would that be a drawback in advancement in medical research? Animal testing is beneficial to people because these trails lead to improvements in medical research.
They often assert that research with animals causes severe pain and that many research animals are abused. The activists do not feel the need to put the animals through such pain. Many of the experiments are replicated also which causes an unneeded demand for animals to perform experiments. Experiments which have already been proven are still being experimented with. However, animal research is an integral part of today's society when thinking of how much progress we have gained in human health with the use of animal experimentation.
A central argument to this debate is whether or not animals are moral patients, with feelings anId the ability to suffer, and if we as humans are entitled to use them as means. Many people feel that we have made great medical advancements that would not have been possible without the use of animals. Alternatively, some feel that despite the medical advancements made, the use of animals remains an unethical practice. I feel that animal experimentation has the capacity to be very beneficial to medical research. However, scientists should try to prevent as much suffering as possible.
The foremost reason people are against animal testing is because animals are tested without their consent. Many animals go through pain, discomfort, and even death in these experiments. Some people who support animal testing refer to the fact that animal testing has obviously made many major medical discoveries. Also, support of animal testing is aimed to the protection of humans. Most scientists believe that humans are superior to animals, and that animals should be tested, although they do not necessarily agree with it (Dance).