Imagine being a helpless animal: scared and hungry, in a metal box crammed with angry strangers. Now imagine being poked, prodded, and cut with the roughest grip. The pain and confusion is unbearable, while the humans are showing no sympathy. All of the pain and suffering is caused because they want to enhance the way they look. Animal testing has been around and used for centuries, but the human race has advanced extremely in science since that time, so there is no logical reason to continue the testing of animals. Animal experimentation should be eliminated because animals have feelings, the experiments are inhumane, the results are unreliable, it is wasting tax money, and there are better methods than having to test on animals.
Animals have feelings and show emotion, unlike many of the scientists who experiment on them. Animals have emotions and have the ability to show empathy towards other animals. Chandna reports, “In one notoriously cruel experiment, macaque monkeys were given food only if they pulled a chain that electrically shocked another monkey. Nearly all the monkeys preferred to go hungry, and one macaque went without food for 12 days rather than cause pain to another” (Chandna). This undoubtedly demonstrates the ability of an animal to show feelings and empathy towards another, even if the outcome is the animal itself suffering. Many humans would react the same way in a similar situation. In a different experiment rats would be offered a treat for themselves while another rat was confined, but instead of eating the reward they would free the other rat and share the treat with them (Chandna). It is not surprising that the rat would share their treat due to them being extremely social animals who “become emotionally ...
... middle of paper ...
...Nov. 2011: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher.Web. 17 Mar. 2014.
Maxwell, Marius. "Chimpanzees Don't Hold Cures for Diseases." People for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals. 06 Jun. 2007: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Mar. 2014.
"Merck Joins Companies Ending Chimpanzee Research." Trentonian. 30 Jan. 2014: n.p. SIRS
Issues Researcher. Web. 17 Mar. 2014.
Sandler, Jessica, and Kate Willett. "Scientists' Blinders Cost Human and Animal Lives." People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. Aug. 1 2007: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 17
Mar. 2014.
Sullivan, Kristie. "No More Excuses for Testing Cosmetics on Animals." Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine. 11 Apr. 2012: n.p. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 02 Mar. 2014.
Vastag, Brian. “Maryland Lab’s Chimpanzee Testing Draws to a Close.” Washington Post. 01 Jul.
2012 A.3. SIRS Issues Researcher. Web. 02 Mar. 2014
...merican Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA), College of Charleston Foundation, Centerstone and Vanderbilt University.
Goodall argues that her readers have an ethical obligation to protect animals from suffering, but she also implies that it might be necessary sometimes to abandon that obligation. She points out that animals share similar traits with human beings: they have a capacity for certain human emotions, and they may be capable of legitimate friendship. Goodall’s evidence for this claim is an anecdote from her research. She recounts that one chimpanzee in her study, named David Greybeard, “gently squeezed [her] hand” when she offered him food (62). Appealing to readers’ emotions, Goodall hopes to persuade readers that the chimp is “sociable” and “sentient,” or feeling (62). According to Goodall’s logic, if researchers are careful to avoid tests that cause human suffering, they should also be careful to avoid tests that cause suffering for other life forms.
Zak, Steven. “Ethics and Animals.” Taking Sides: Science, Technology, and Society. Gilford: Dushkin Publishing Group, 2007
Although animal research is a shareholder in the development of medicine and the advance of cosmetic and household products, it is still not legitimate to abuse those creatures to satisfy human needs and wants. Alternatives have been initiated to relinquish the use of non-human beings since it is against animal rights. Animal testing should be prohibited and new methods should be introduced to non-medical institutions like the cosmetic industries and the household production enterprises. Laboratories should take ease of technology to supersede animals by upgraded alternatives that can help in the development of new treatments that may be more efficient. Personally, I think animal testing is a cruel nature that cannot be justified. Why sacrifice those defenseless lives if superior methods are available?
Four journalists named Helen Jones, Larry Andrews, Marcia Glaser, and Fred Myers thought it would be a good idea to create a nonprofit organization to help animals that have are treated cruelly by either abuse or when they are left alone. The Humane Society has been helping animals since November 24, 1954(2). Their mission since the beginning has been celebrating animals and confronting cruelty. There are a great number of things that the Humane Society has been doing for the animals, like saving them from people who want to harm them. The list of animals that the Humane Society helps is very long, because they don’t just help the household pets that you might have thought. The conditions of the Humane Society change due to the types of animals
League, Animal Defense. “Policy Statement on Animal Research.” Civil Rights in America. Woodbridge, CT: Primary Source Media, 1999. American Journey.Student Resources in Context. Web. 6 Feb. 2014.
Evans, Kim Masters. "Research Animals." Animal Rights. 2009 ed. N.p.: n.p., 2014. N. pag. Student Resources In Context. Web. 8 Apr. 2014.
This theme song to a popular cartoon is a farce dealing with experiments carried out on animals. In the cartoon one mouse is made very smart and wants to take over the world while the other is clearly not as smart. While the cartoon makes jokes, the reality is that mice and other animals re being used for medical tests every day. For some people this testing brings up ethical questions. One of the biggest questions: is it really necessary to take the lives of animals in the name of science and for the betterment of humanity? For animal rights activists, like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), the answer is no. PETA pressures labs into halting experiments because they believe that animals are not to be used by humans for "food, clothing, entertainment, or to experiment on" (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals 1). Its stance is that any testing is painful, inhumane, and unnecessary when alternatives are available. The PETA website says that "animals, like humans, have interests that cannot be sacrificed or traded away simply because it might benefit others." (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals 2-3). Essentially, PETA is of the opinion that animals and humans should have identical rights. In their press releases PETA puts out pictures of rabbits with open flesh wounds and dogs with rashes on their skins--all in an attempt to disgust people into sympathy for their cause. In actuality the number of lab animals used has been cut in half in the last 25 years (James-Enger 254). Of the animals used, 90 percent are rats and mice (James-Enger 1). Moreover, 11 million animals die each year in animal shelters (Americans for Medical Progress 2) and an astounding 95 percent ...
Some would argue that animal testing is torture. Some would say that animal testing is completely necessary. There is no reason for animal testing to happen. There are several statistics that point to the negative side of animal testing. There are more pointing to the negative than to the positive. What is the point on testing on animals when we have statistics like how only 1.16% of the diseases are found in animals, or that 92% of the things that do pass through animal testing do not even work on humans? Europe, Israel, and India have already banned animal testing for cosmetics, because it was too harmful on the animals.
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 'Secondary' of the 'Secon Singer P. Animal Liberation, Inc. A New Ethics for the Treatment of Animals. Avon Books. New York, NY: New York, 1975. Spencer, Colin.
"Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals." AALAS Foundation. 2005. American Association for Laboratory Animal Science. 2012 .
Waples KA, Stagoll CS. Ethical issues in the release of animals from captivity. Roundtable. 1997; 115-120.
First of all, animal testing should be banned in order to protect the rights of animals. In other words, animals’ rights are infringed by experimenting on them. Animals and humans are similar in many ways. To begin with, they have similar levels of biological complexity. They both are aware that they exist and they both make conscious choices. Philosophy professor at North Carolina State University Tom Regan points out "Animals have a basic moral right to respectful treatment. This inherent value is not respected when animals are reduced to being mere tools in a scientific experiment." (F. B. Orlans) Experimentation on an animal ...
The experiments and other data show that animals are not just driven by instincts alone. There is more to them than that. It is hard to watch dogs play and believe that they derive no fun or pleasure from it at all. Animals have shown that they are sensitive to their social surroundings. They punish one another and alleviate other’s pain. Some monkeys in established communities attack those that find food and don’t share. These studies are important. A better understanding of how animals are feeling could create a whole new guideline of rules on the way animals should be treated. Humans should not be so arrogant to believe they are the only animals capable of emotion. How are we capable of seeing from their viewpoint and assume they feel no emotion.