Animal Testing: What if You Were in Their Place?

Every year about 241,000 rabbits are tortured in United States laboratories to test for the effects that household products, such as cosmetics, dishwashing liquid, and drain cleaner will have on their eyes ("Rabbits in Laboratories | PETA.org." 1). Scientists will drip chemicals into the eyes of the animal to see how much irritation it will cause, a process known as the Draize eye irritancy test ("Rabbits in Laboratories | PETA.org." 1). The test is certainly not pain free; it often causes distress, such as redness, swelling, and sometimes blindness. After the rabbits are finished being toyed with, they are killed ("Rabbits in Laboratories | PETA.org." 1). The Draize eye irritancy test is just one of the thousands of examples of profuse animal testing that has been going on for centuries. Mice, rats, dogs, pigs, cats, fish, birds and primates are tested every day by human beings in an attempt to learn more about the functions of our own bodies ("Update: Animal Testing" 2).

The issue of animal testing has become an important topic of debate because despite the cruel and inhumane treatment of laboratory animals, people who support animal testing claim that the research benefits are phenomenal and surely outweigh the animals’ pain and suffering. I feel as though the question of whether or not animal testing is immoral is an easy answer. Animal testing on any species is unethical and should be abolished as soon as possible because it is a form of animal cruelty, provides inaccurate results, and there are better alternatives that can be pursued.

First of all, animal testing is immoral because it involves harming or killing animals for the purpose of “science”. Animals that are tested on are enslaved, beaten, burned, poisoned, electr...

... middle of paper ...

...ewpoints In Context. Web. 21 Apr. 2011.

Howard, Carol. "Alternative Testing Can Replace Animal Experimentation." AV Magazine CXIII (Spring 2005): 14-15. Rpt. in Animal Experimentation. Ed. Cindy Mur. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 25 Apr. 2011.

Philips, Trevor. "Human Self-Interest Will Ensure That Animal Experimentation Continues." The Independent (25 Apr. 1998). Rpt. in Animal Experimentation. Ed. Cindy Mur. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 21 Apr. 2011.

"Rabbits in Laboratories | PETA.org." People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA): The Animal Rights Organization | PETA.org. Web. 20 Apr. 2011.

"Update: Animal Testing." Issues & Controversies On File: n. pag. Issues & Controversies. Facts On File News Services, 31 Mar. 2006. Web. 20 Apr. 2011.