Most scientists believe that humans are superior to animals, and that animals should be tested, although they do not necessarily agree with it (Dance). However, most agree that scientists should try to decrease the suffering animals go throu... ... middle of paper ... ... innocent rabbits, along with money and provide more accurate results (“Alternatives”). Animal testing has a positive past, but is extremely controversial. Many people agree and disagree with it. Modern society would be suffering from rare diseases without it, including tuberculosis and polio.
The opportunities presented by scientific advances are used to replace or reduce animal use, and to refine procedures to minimise suffering.” (“Understanding Animal Research”). Animal testing is a controversial subject. Because those who support animal testing may define it as experimentation that uses animals to benefit humans, where it saves lives and provides vital medical treatments. (“Murnaghan”) Animal research has enabled to find treatments for cancer, antibiotics for infections, vaccines to prevent some of the most deadly and weakening viruses and surgery for injuries, illnesses and deformities. (“Do Something”) Despite many animal testing protesters, the benefits of animal testing in the field of medicine for humans outweigh any animal suffering that may occur.
Brettner -2- Experimenting on animals, to some, is important if humans want to continue with improving our medical advances (AMPEF 1). Although animals have helped form useful medicines for humans like anesthesia, they have also helped put dangerous drugs on the market (AMPEF 1). Practolol, a drug for heart disorders that passed animal test was pulled off the shelves when the drug caused blindness in people. Also, arsenic, which is toxic and causes cancer in humans, has not caused cancer in any animals that were tested (PETA 1). “According to the General Accounting Office, more than half of the prescription drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 1976 and 1985 caused serious side effects that later caused the drugs to be either relabeled or removed from the market.
A logical person would say the benefits justify the research. Without animal testing, products would be based on theory. No one would want to use something, which may damage eyes, be poisonous, cancerous, and cause birth defects. Animals used in testing are not from the endangered species list; also many of the types of animals used are killed each year by rat or mouse traps, animal control, exterminators, and animal shelters. Animal testing reaps great benefits such as finding effective drugs to combat disease, improve surgical procedures, and make products safe.
The Food and Drug Administration reports that “92 out of every 100 drugs that pass animal tests fail in humans” (“Top Five Reasons”). If the products and drugs that we are testing on the animals are not working then there is no use in harming a harmless animal for them. Some may disagree and say that animal testing has enabled us to develop many life saving treatments for both humans and animals. But in reality there has been more cons then pros in animal testing. For example, “Animal tests on the arthritis drug Vioxx showed that it had a protective effect on the hearts of mice, yet the drug went on to cause more than 27,000 heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths before being pulled from the market” (Should Animals Be).
No sufficient actions have been done to alleviate the animals’ pain, however, even though the image of a little mouse struggling in a tube is familiar to the general public. In the United States, Animal Welfare Act has been applied to animal testing, but it merely regulates the cage size, sanitations, and food and water. It does not necessarily limit the horrendous procedures that are inflicted to animals. Painkillers, regardless of the pain inflicted to animals, are also not much in use, as it has a possibility of altering the results and destructing the accuracy. People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), a global organization, stated that around 115 million animals die from animal testing each year.
Ray Creek, a board -certified doctor, explains why the use of animals actually slows down medical research. "The simplest explanation is that animal experiments provide misleading data. At best, they tell us a good deal about how animals experience disease, but they rarely tell us something of value that can be applied to humans. Animal tests provide additional data, but not a higher level of accuracy." This very subject is something that I have always thought of, but never thought I was right.
First Draft Is animal testing so bad, if it saves millions of human lives and even other animals? Who would you rather be put at risk: Your relative or a common rat? In my opinion, animal testing is necessary because without it, human lives would be at risk. The main reason for animal testing is to cure humans from diseases. This is beneficial to us because we get cured and the experiments are not done to us!
Even though animal experimentation can occasionally predict an accurate reaction between a chemical and human skin, “some chemicals that are harmful to animals prove valuable when used by humans. Aspirin, for example, is dangerous for some species” (“Animal Testing”). More than 100 prescription drugs have been found to reduce the risk of stroke in animals; however, all of them failed to have the same effect in human trials (“Animal Testing”). Many of the tests performed on animals are criticized by scientists due to their inaccurate conclusions regarding chemicals when in contact with human skin (Barton 8). Experimentation upon animals may have led to treatments for multiple diseases, but “94% of drugs that pass animal tests fail in human clinical trials” (“Animal Testing”).
Animal experimentation is not as good as it may seem to humans because we are not feeling it. It is cruel to animals to experience this. Many experts say is the only way to make new medicine, but you have to think about the animal. Many people don't even know what happens during experimentation on animals. Animal activists definition of "animal experimentation" is the infliction of pain onto animals to see their reaction.