Animal Testing And Its Effects On A Full Living System

2049 Words9 Pages
Pycroft shows that without animal testing science would not know a majority of the things it does. He thinks that animal testing helps humans learn more about their own bodies without having to test on themselves. Human testing was once a form of testing, but it was stopped when scientists decided to try using animals instead. Animals, chimpanzees especially, are the closest thing in DNA to humans, so it is necessary to test on them if science wants legitimate results. Animals are very human based. In Pycroft’s article he addresses the issue of alternative research methods. He states that claiming microfluidics and microdosing can analyze drug effects on a full living system is absurd. How can a fluid-based chip replicate the most basic heart, let alone a human one? Microdosing can be useful for studying uptake mechanisms of a drug, but gives extremely limited information on its efficacy at treating a condition. ‘Alternatives’ are already widely used in research, but expecting them to replace animal tests in the near future is hugely naïve. It is true that thalidomide does not affect all species, which is part of the basis for drugs being tested on a variety of carefully selected species. These models will never be perfect but, as any scientist will point out, no test is. They must use the best available model, and some of the time this means using animals. Without access to live organisms, science would know far less about the function of the cardiovascular system, how digestion works, hormonal interactions, and a vast array of other data which none of the proposed ‘alternatives’ could even hope to elucidate. Thus, if science values progression of medical knowledge, animal research is a necessity. (Pycroft) Pycroft believes that... ... middle of paper ... ...x finger at his caregiver, Margaret Rousser, who was standing beside us, touched his forehead, then his mouth, puckered his lips, and made loud smooching sounds. It was a trick Eddie had been taught during his days as a Hollywood performer. He often uses the signs, which more-or-less mean "I love you," with the keepers at the Oakland Zoo.’ (Mitra) This proves that Eddie knows who his caregivers are and feels strongly about them. Each animal has their own way of expressing their emotions. Just because their expressions are not obvious to every human does not mean they are not there. Animal testing is not a necessary thing in society. Science has many alternative methods that they could use and still get beneficial results. Innocent animals will no longer have to die or suffer when animal testing becomes banned. Afterall, don’t animal lives matter too? Works Cited

More about Animal Testing And Its Effects On A Full Living System

Open Document