Opposing Views on Animal Experimentation Animal experimentation sends a different message to everyone. The two sides are made of those who think animal testing is beneficial for life and those who think it is unethical and wrong. Those who find these tests to be beneficial are consist of researchers, scientists, and other observers. People and groups who perceive these tests to be cruel and unethical, consist of animal rights activists and organizations that fight for animals rights, such as PETA and ASPCA. Though there are many differences between the two sides, there are also a few similarities. Examples of these similarities include the 3R’s concept and other laws that are fair to both sides. An example of a difference, is the fact that some people think testing leads to medical breakthroughs, while some people think otherwise. While this topic has a variety of points that disagree with each other, they also have points that agree with each other. One of the agreement points is the 3R’s concept. “This principle was ‘invented’ by the English zoologist William M.S. Russell and Rex L. Burch, a microbiologist, and published in 1959 in their book, The Principles of Humane Experimental Technique” (Kolar 115). The 3Rs stand for replacement, reduction, and refinement. This requires researchers to search for a replacement for living animals. Next, researchers need to find ways to reduce the use of animals in all of their experimenting. Lastly, there is refinement where researchers need to filter their animal use for their experiments. Another point of agreement is the Animal Welfare Act. The Animal Welfare Act puts restrictions on experimenting, transporting, and researching on animals. “The intent of congress in passing this act... ... middle of paper ... ...aid to help society, however, others feel that it hurts society. This controversial topic causes people to have such a wide variety of views on the subject. To make it a bit fairer for everyone, laws and regulations have been passed that favor to all of the sides. These laws consist of ways to limit the number of animals being tested and how they can be tested. Yet these laws still give scientist a lot of leeway on how they test on the animals and what they test on them (Beauchamp 113). Although the opposing sides may agree on most of the regulations that are set, they also disagree on many other subjects. These subjects include whether the tests lead to medical breakthroughs or not and whether or not they are ethical. Lastly, there may be laws to help reduce animal testing, but as long as it is still being done, there will continue to be controversy on the subject.
Loeb, Jerod M. “Human vs. Animal Rights: In Defense of Animal Research.” Taking Sides: Science, Technology, and Society. Gilford: Dushkin Publishing Group, 2011
In modern society, animal experimentation has triggered a controversy; consequently, vast amount of protests have been initiated by the animal rights community. Although these organizations have successfully broadcasted their concerns toward animal experimentation, its application continues to survive. Sally Driscoll and Laura Finley inform that there remain fifty million to one-hundred million animals that experience testing or experimentation throughout the world on a yearly basis. But despite opposition, animal experimentation, the use of experiments on animals in order to observe the effects an unknown substance has on living creatures, serves multiple purposes. Those particular purposes are: research of the living body, the testing of
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...
Asking just about any animal rights activists on the thoughts of animal testing, it is virtually unquestionable that the majority of them would come across the thought of some of the laws in regards to animals and how animals are “protected” by these laws. Trained scientists and researchers take on the key role of testing on animals in laboratories and facilities throughout the world. Simply in the United States alone, there are very few laws protecting animals from the unnecessary amounts of suffering the researchers force upon them with many broad exceptions. Additionally, in reference to the scientists who perform these tests, the author lists and goes into detail explaining certain associations that infrequently examine and inspect animal testing facilities to ensure that the guidelines and standards are being followed. The author then goes on to state the problems among these organizations that were originally created by the government to assess
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.
Every year, more and more diseases and sicknesses need cures. The need for new medicine and treatments procedures causes animal research to increase. People that are involved in the fight for animal rights say that the animals should be protected just like humans. However, animal testing can find cures for deadly sick humans, which is more important than the very rare unfair abuse to animals. Animal testing should be allowed because although it can be bothersome to some animals, the outcomes are exaggerated, it creates procedures, and it helps find a cure to human health problems.
One of these claims is that animal testing uses the three R’s in order to make testing more humane. These three R’s are reduction, refinement and replacement, meaning that scientists must attempt to reduce doses administered to test animals, refine experiments to make them more humane and try to replace animals altogether. If this method was always used, animal testing would be humane and ethical, but the three R’s are often neglected because the research results are viewed as being more important than the animals. Another claim that animal testing is ethical, is that animal testing has always been essential to medical breakthroughs. Although animals have served as important models for breakthroughs in drugs and medical procedures in the past, modern technology allows us to use more accurate models for testing such as cell structures. The final claim many people make is that animals are not able to feel pain anyway, so testing them does not matter. If an individual has ever observed a dog even step on a sticker and have it caught in their paw, they have seen an animal whimper and cry while hopping on three legs to try to stop the pain. It is a simple and minuscule pain, but animals feel it, so they will feel any pain involved in animal testing as well. Animals should be replaced in
The information that animals have provided scientists over the past decades has changed society, and is still changing society for the better. Millions of lives have been saved with the use of animal testing and many more will be saved with continued research. However, there are many who dismiss this monumental achievement completely and oppose the use of animals in laboratory research. Though many find this practice to be
Animal testing has been a highly debated topic in recent years. There are many people who have finally started to speak their minds and tell how they feel about testing on animals. But just as there are those who oppose animal testing, there are those who fully support it. A majority of people who do not support animal testing provide valid facts and information for why it is not needed. Some of the facts that they provide revolve around the conditions that the animals have to endure in the testing labs. The Animal Welfare Act lays out rules about how animals are allowed to be tortured, beaten, maimed, and all sorts of other things as long as they get pain relief. Those who oppose animal testing also provide facts that show how unreliable the
Imagine having a headache and not having aspirin to take, or being diabetic and not being able to take certain types of insulin (Williams 3). It seems impossible that these drugs could be unavailable to humans, but they would not be attainable had scientists not tested these drugs on non-animal subjects. Contrary to what many people believe, testing drugs on animals often give defective results. “More than 205,000 new drugs are marketed worldwide every year, most undergo the most archaic and unreliable testing methods still in use: animal studies” (PETA 1). Although animals may seem the like ideal specimens for testing new drugs, the experiments are untrustworthy and can cause unknown side effects.
Animals are currently being tested all over the world. They are being tested for things such as cosmetics, prescriptions drugs, and used for scientific testing. It is estimated that over 100 million animals are used for testing. Rats, mice, guinea pigs, rabbits, and monkeys are common animals used to test newly developed products. These testing procedures and conditions in which these animal must live are widely scrutinized among animal activists. There are many heated debates on whether or not animals should be used for testing. Current government regulations require that all new production available for human consumption undergo animal testing. New procedures for animal testing are necessary to allow the researchers to meet government regulations and to appease animal activists. Animal research should be ended, it is wrong to assume that animals do not feel pain or anguish as they endure needles, pain, diseases, and death.
Animal testing is the running of tests and the research done in a laboratory on animals. Some of the tests are done to benefit human lives and other tests are done to determine side effects of a certain household or cosmetic products. It is a topic that has been up for debate for many years not only in the United States, but all around the world. While some support the advances that come from the research others oppose the cruelty that the media projects to society. No matter what one’s opinion of the subject is, it is still something that our society and culture deals with.
Animal testing is a controversial topic with two main sides of the argument. The side apposing animal testing states it is unethical and inhumane; that animals have a right to choose where and how they live instead of being subjected to experiments. The view is that all living organism have a right of freedom; it is a right, not a privilege. The side for animal testing thinks that it should continue, without animal testing there would be fewer medical and scientific breakthroughs. This side states that the outcome is worth the investment of testing on animals. The argument surrounding animal testing is older than the United States of America, dating back to the 1650’s when Edmund O’Meara stated that vivisection, the dissection of live animals, is an unnatural act. Although this is one of the first major oppositions to animal testing, animal testing was being practiced for millennia beforehand. There are two sides apposing each other in the argument of animal testing, and the argument is one of the oldest arguments still being debated today.
Animal testing is an intense contentious matter that has created a division among people; there are those who support and those who are against it. Animal testing, also identified as animal experimentation is when non-human animals are used in conducting experiments, especially in medicine. There are a number of unending debates on whether animal testing should continue or not, as some groups squabble that, it is an unethical process while others argue that it is ethical since it has large benefits on the health of humans. In addition, there is another group that advocates for the use of alternatives, instead of live animals. Although animal testing is considered as an inhumane and an unethical practice, it is crucial
A large issue is animal testing. “More than 25 million vertebrate animals are used in testing in the United States each year. When invertebrate animals are thrown into the mix, the estimated number rises to as high as 100 million.”(dosomething) The laboratory testing of animals is important to biomedical research, product safety testing, and education. Biomedical researchers use animals to extend their understanding of the workings of the body and the processes of disease and health, and to develop new vaccines and treatments for various diseases for humans and other animals. However, the morality, the necessity, or the validity of the studies are questionable. Thousands of animals are helplessly killed every year that animal testing is being conducted. “Ninety-four percent of animal testing is done to determine the safety of cosmetics and household products leaving only 6% for medical research” (about my planet). This can cause harm to the animals and may in turn be fatal. It is not fair nor is it humane to conduct experiments on animals to make sure a product or procedure is safe for us. There are no reasons to regard an animal’s life as if it is insignificant in contrast to a human life. During the testing, animals may be force fed or put in restraints in order for the scientists to get the product into their systems. Ani...