Nine year old Amy has already had a rough start in life. She was born with an abnormal heart that hinders her everyday activities. Amy is unable to keep up with kids her own age because she often tires out easily. As a consequence, she has very little friends and is often alone. Amy is forced to take different medications everyday just to survive. Amy’s life consists of medicine, doctors, and constant hospital visits. However, Amy is due for a heart transplant that will save her life. The transplant goes extremely well and now Amy has the opportunity to go to high school and live a normal teenage life. Like Amy, many lives are positively transformed due to the amazing surgery of organ transplants. Scientist and doctors are due the credit for this amazing procedure. However, often overlooked, is the fact that this fascinating medical procedure would not be possible without the use of animal experimentation. Animal testing allows doctors to save countless lives. Without it, Amy along with countless others would die. Animal testing is a largely debated and controversial issue. It was first introduced in the United States in the 1920s (Goldberg 85). Since then, there have been many advances in the field of medicine and science. These advances are due largely to the fact that animals are used in experiments and research. Animal testing has given doctors some of their most successful accomplishments. Also, they help researchers discover how to improve long known theories about the human mind and body. Over 40 Nobel Prizes have been given to researchers “whose achievements depended, at least in part, on using laboratory animals” (Trull 64). These animal experiments have helped humans live a better life. Animal testing benefits doctors... ... middle of paper ... ...nimal testing. Ultimately, without animal testing our lives will be drastically different. So, is animal testing necessary? Absolutely. Works Cited Alan Goldberg. “Alternatives to Animals in Toxicity Testing.” Ed. Jeanne Williams. Scientific American Inc: 1989. Print. “Animal Welfare Act as of February 1, 2010.” Animal Welfare Information Center. United States Department of Agriculture. 8 Nov. 2011. PDF. 19 Nov. 2011. “Fast Facts on Diabetes.” National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases. National Institute of Health. Feb. 2011. Web. 19 Nov. 2011. “FastStats.” Center for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics. 6 Sept. 2011. Web. 19 Nov. 2011. Frankie Trull. “Animals in Research is Critical to Continued Progress in Human Health.” Ed. Jeanne Williams. The Society for Advancement of Education: 1989. Print.
Without animal research, cures for such diseases as typhoid, diphtheria, and polio might never have existed. Without animal research, the development of antibiotics and insulin would have been delayed. Without animal research, many human beings would now be dead. However, because of animal testing, 200,000 dogs, 50,000 cats, 60,000 primates, 1.5 million hamsters, and uncounted millions of rats and mice are experimented upon and die each year, as living fodder for the great human scientific machine. Some would say that animal research is an integral part of progress; unfortunately, this is often true. On the whole, animal testing is a necessary evil that should be reduced and eliminated whenever possible.
The article provides specific examples of illnesses and diseases which have been cured by animal testing that both humans and animals have benefitted. This supports my topic of animal experiments being used for medical advancements. Pointing out that law often requires that products be tested before being sold to the public, George and Wagner additionally help prove my claim that product testing is a purpose of animal experimentation.
Testing animals is used to develop medical treatments, determine the toxicity of medicinal drugs, check the safety of products intended for human use, and other biomedical, commercial, and healthcare roles. The earliest recordings of animal studies date back to Aristotle, who discovered the anatomical differences among animals by analyzing them (Introduction). Advocates of animal testing say that it has enabled the growth of numerous medical advancements, tests to see if new products are save for mankind, acquisition of new scientific knowledge, and because it is accurate (B). Opponents of animal testing say that it is cruel and inhumane to try out on animals, many animals die from the animal testing, it’s unethical, animals don’t have a say in it, the accuracy is in question because they are testing animals and not humans, and the toll of animal testing is high (B). Through the pros and cons of everything, it is bad to test animals because animals are very different from human beings and thus make poor test subjects and are unreliable, the cost and upkeep of it is expensive, and because there are alternatives to animal testi...
Writing this paper did not affect my original line of thinking in regards to the topic. I support animal rights in every way, and am extremely against any sort of testing. Observing the “necessities” of animal testing did not, in any way, alter my negative view of animal experimentation.
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.
The first reason for animal testing is to advance in scientific understanding. The likelihood of achieving the significant advances we have today in scientific understanding or the prevention and treatment of diseases is very low without the use of
Millions of animals are used to test consumer products, but they also become victims to experiments for medical research. In The Ethics of Animal Research (2007) both authors state that there have been many medical advances with the development of medicines and treatments as a result of research conducted on animals (para 1). These medical i...
When someone goes to the store and buys a product, or is prescribed medication, they don’t have to worry if the product is safe to use nor should they. The entire human race benefits from animal research. “Without animal research, medical science would come to a total standstill”(O’Neil 210). It is not as if Scientist and researchers just sit in their labs all day and torture animals for fun. Not to mention animal use is being reduced as much as possible, “most scientist are glad to use alternative test because they are usually faster and cheaper than test on animals”(Yount 72). However, “you cannot study kidney transplantation or diarrhea or high bloodpressure on a computer screen”(O’Neil 212). Besides, “Animal research has led to vaccines against diptheria, rabies, tuberculosis, polio, measles, mumps, cholera, whooping cough, and rubella. It has meant eradication of smallpox, effective treatment for diabetes and control of infection with powerful antibiotics. The cardiac pacemaker, microsurgery to reattach severed limbs, and heart, kidney, lung, liver and other transplants are all possible because of animal research”(O’Neil 210).
According to the California Biomedical Research Association, almost every medical advancement in the last 100 years is a direct result of animal testing and research. The use of animals has become standard procedure in a wide range of testing and experimentation, including product toxicity testing, biomedical and veterinary experiments, drug development and testing, and education. Major advancements in treating and understanding chronic conditions such as cancer, cystic fibrosis, malaria, and tuberculosis, have been achieved due to animal research. Also, the development of pacemakers, cardiac valve substitutes, and anesthetics are also direct results of the testing and observation of animals. On the other hand, many people believe that animal testing is cruel and inhumane. In many laboratories animals are subjected to force feeding, food and water deprivation, physical restraints, and infliction of pain. Because the animals cannot protect themselves, many people argue that exploiting animals to better the lives of humans is wrong and should not be permitted.
Dr. Simmonds, a veterinarian who specializes in the care of laboratory animals, is one of many who believe that animal testing is an ethical practice. He and many others see the testing as inevitable and say it must continue to help humans survive. “The elimination of horrible disease, the increase of longevity, the avoidance of great pain, the saving of lives, and the improvement of the quality of lives achieved through research using animals is so incalculably great…”(Cohen 27-28).
Animals have held an important spot in many of our lives. Some people look at animals as companions and others see them as a means of experimental research and medical advancement. With the interest to gain knowledge, physicians have dissected animals. The ethics of animal testing have always been questioned because humans do not want to think of animals on the same level as humans. Incapable of our thinking and unable to speak, animals do not deserve to be tested on by products and be conducted in experiments for our scientific improvement. Experimentation on animals is cruel, unfair, and does not have enough beneficial results to consider it essential.
In this argumentative essay written by Dr. Ron Kline a pediatrician who wrote his essay titled “A Scientist: I am the enemy”. The article gives an insight on how animal research has helped many people and shine a light on the benefits of animal research. Ron Kline is the director of bone marrow transplants at the University of Louisville. Furthermore, the essay explains his thoughts and his own reasons for his love of medical research. In addition, the essay include the opposing side of the argument which has a lot feedback from activist groups that think that animal research is horrible.