To give you a technical definition, animal vivisection is the use of non-human animals in research and development projects, for purposes of determining the safety of substances such as foods or drugs. It is estimated by the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, or PETA, that over 100 million animals are harmed every year by this on-going process. There are several types of tests that are used on animals behind closed doors. The Draize eye test is a type of eye irritancy test that is mainly used on rabbits. They physically scream while toxic chemicals are poured into their eyes; which can lead to redness, bleeding, ulcers, blindness, and often death at the end of the experiment. Rats are typically injected with carcinogens that induce …show more content…
One of the main reasons being because it is not always accurate. In fact, The Food and Drug Administration stated that 92 out of the every 100 drugs that pass in animal testing fail when given to humans. For example, rabbits are used to test substances in their eyes, yet the structure of the cornea in a rabbit significantly differs from that of a human’s. Rats are induced with cancer cells, yet studies have shown that they are much more prone to cancer than humans are. Animal testing is also very wasteful. While I am a strong advocate towards the search for a cure to cancer, the odds of finding one based on an animal test are very low. Huge charities such as the Cancer Fund of America donate a portion of their donations to animal testing when they could be researching and trying other methods that do not include testing them on animals. Instead of facing the truth that animal testing does not have a high successful percentage rate on humans, the problem is swept under the rug and more animals are killed every day. The scientists who do admit to this universal problem have discovered new beneficial ways to test chemicals, cosmetics, and other consumer products that are currently being tested on animals. Harvard’s Wyss Institute developed “organs-on-chips” that comprise human cells that are grown to replicate the organs in a human body. These chips can be used for toxicity testing, drug testing, and to research cures for diseases. The institute says that “organs-on-chips” have been shown to more accurately imitate human physiology, drug responses, and diseases than the cruel experiments on animals have shown. The HuRel Corporation and other companies have already turned these chips into products that can be sold to researchers in the place of animals. And that is just ONE of the many methods that have been created to use in the substitution of animal testing. So, my question is, what on earth are
Is animal testing really worth taking away animal’s valuable lives? No, I think it’s wrong, inhumane, and cruel. Animals have feelings like humans do and they should be treated with respect even though they are just animals.When animals are tested over time they live in cruel and harsh conditions. They are tied up and changed to their cages or devices they are being tested on. Almost all tests fail in humans and it is not worth sacrificing an animals life.Think about all the things animals have to go through all the harsh and cruel treatment.They are put in conditions where they are not allowed to eat or drink and move around. Is it really worth killing an animals for eyeliner that will never hit the market or for drugs that all fail in humans. So here are some of the reasons I think we should ban all animal testing.
“According to Humane Society International, animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force feeding, forced inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, the infliction of burns and other wounds to study the healing process, the infliction of pain to study its effects and remedies, and "killing by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, neck-breaking, decapitation, or other means.”(Peta). Have you ever wondered if a product you own was safe to use? Did you know that millions of animals are tested on each year for the daily products you use? According to Peta, around 26 million animals are tested each year in the United States for scientific and commercial testing. Animals are used to develop medical treatments, determine the toxicity of medications, check the safety of products destined for human use, and other biomedical, commercial, and healthcare uses (Peta). Animals are harmed or sometimes even killed in this process. Animals are not the same as humans, therefore; the testing done on Animals is not helping our human society, it’s hurting the animals. There are alternative ways to performing testing rather than testing on animals.
There are many ways the animals suffer some of the ways are being forced feed, also being food and water deprived, and being inflicted of burn. Many cosmetic companies use The Draize eye test, which is used to evaluate irritation caused by shampoos and other products. This test uses rabbits, the rabbits are being incapacitated in stocks with their eyelids held open by clips, sometimes for multiple days, so they cannot blink away the products being tested. The rabbits are tortured for days even there is an
Another reason animal testing does not make sense is because we have alternative ways of testing. There are many new ways of testing besides testing on animals. By doing these other types of tests, people can save animals from pain and save their lives. In the article, “Alternative Testing” stated, “some new ways of testing could include ways like using tests on cells, using tests on types of tissues, and using tests on computer stimulations” (Howard). The article, “Ban Animal Testing” stated, “that an alternative method of testing is in vitro studies, which are cells used to test properties of drugs and tissues can also be used to test products and reactions from drugs as well” (Stachura). Some would argue to say that these alternative tests
People have different views to this question, but ultimately multiple tests and studies show that animal testing does not help improve human health. Scientists and researchers have predicted what percent of animal tests are accurate on humans and what percent of human tests are accurate on humans. They predicted that sixty-five percent of animal tests used on humans would be accurate and that seventy-five percent to eighty percent of human-cell line tests used on humans would be accurate ("Product Testing: Toxic and Tragic"). Thousands of people die from animal tested drugs because it is shown that ninety-two percent of animal tested drugs don't work. So, only eight percent do ("Fact! Testing Drugs on Animals Does Not Work to Help Humans"). If people actually looked at the data above, then it could in the end be a winning situation for both humans and animals ("Fact! Testing Drugs on Animals Does Not Work to Help
Live mammals make up the majority of testing for medicine. This is because of the simple fact that nothing compares to testing on living, breathing organisms. The inner workings of a rat and human are similar in all ways that matter, so they are used to demonstrate how drugs affect the body. One huge reason to test these drugs on living things is to detect if these drugs actually do work in the organism, and how soon it shows symptoms of getting back to better health. Also, with symptoms, we are also able to
Every year millions of animals are abused, injured, and hurt. It seems as if humans are not very concerned about animal rights according to these statistics.. Animal rights is the idea that animals should not have to suffer and be able to be in possession of their life. Some people are willing to sacrifice things such as certain brands of makeup or certain kinds of food to improve animal welfare. For many years animals have been experimented on and placed in factory farms. Factory farming is a method of producing food products where the factories value how much they produce and how much they profit over the welfare of the animals. These farms keep animals confined in small spaces and make the animals eat things they were not originally
Animals and humans have different genes meaning that the products being used are going to have different effects on different species (Burrell). After a drug has been tested on a animal, the drug still has to go through a human trial. Which means that the drug they just spent all that time testing on the animal, still needs to be tested on a human to actually make it purchasable. Sadly, “92% of experimental drugs that are safe and effective in animals fail in human clinical trials because they are too dangerous or don’t work” (“11 Facts”). Meaning that most of the drugs used on animals, actually are not benefiting humans. A few of the drugs passed from animals, were detrimental to humans. For example, a arthritis drug tested on mice, seemed to protect their hearts, but when used on humans, it was the cause of heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths (“12 Pros and Cons”). Even when some drugs are passed, they show some side effects that were not shown during the test trial. Animals have been used to help the “war on cancer”, but the tests haven’t transferred from humans to animals. The former head of the National Cancer Institute, Richard Klausner, has stated, “The history of cancer research has been a history of curing cancer in the mouse. We have cured mice of cancer for decades and it simply didn’t work in humans” (“Animal Testing”). Meaning that they have learned the ways of curing mice with
and Europe, which include reduction of animal use, refine animal study techniques, and animal testing replacement. According to Dana ,Bidnall, “Animals are also used, and subsequently killed, every year in many other types of laboratory experiments, from military testing to simulated car crashes to deliberately introduced diseases such as AIDS and Alzheimer 's”(49). Bidnal also states that, “These experiments take place in labs at universities, pharmaceutical companies, and testing agencies, and on farms and military bases around the world”(49). The author suggest,”Researchers who conduct experiments on animals argue that it would be unethical to test substances with potentially adverse side effects on humans; animals are good surrogates because their responses are similar to humans”(49).Bidnal contends with ,”However, some animals are chosen for other reasons”(49). According to Bindal, “Animal testing is not the only option in toxicity testing”(50). Bidnal states, “Alternatives are widely available and include human clinical and epidemiological studies; experiments with cadavers, volunteers,and patients; computer simulation and mathematical models; and in vitro (test tube) tissue culture techniques, to name just a
Since ancient times, animals have been the subjects of medical and safety testing. But only relatively recently has discontent been expressed by large numbers of people. Referred to as animal rights activists, this displeasured community condemns all animal use in medical, product testing, and research experiments despite the beneficiary outcomes because they firmly believe that interfering with another living creature’s life is immorally and ethically wrong. One individual who sides with the activists is named Jamie Aronson. Having earned a Ph.D from the University of Massachusetts located in Boston, Aronson affirms that “animals do not have a voice in our society.” Opposing Aronson is the duo of Patricia George and professor of State University
Not only do we have other options for these tests, but animals testing has actually been proven to be ineffective. Companies claim that this sort of cruelty will benefit the human population by testing the “safety” of the products, as they have been for hundreds of years and although this may have been helpful in the past, scientists have discovered otherwise. “While funding for animal experimentation and the number of animals tested on continues to increase, the United States still ranks 49th in the world in life expectancy and second worst in infant mortality in the developed world” (“Animal Testing Is”). This evidence shows that while we still continue to support and spend money on animal testing, it is not working as well as we thought.Essentially we are torturing the animals for a negative outcome, both for the human and the animal. 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). While animal testing has enabled us to create great products it is usually ineffective on humans and leads to animals being harmed for no
Hundreds of millions of animals die every year from animal testing in the United States. Innocent animals are used everyday in laboratories for biology advancements, medical training, curiosity-driven experimentation, and chemical, drug, food, and cosmetic testing. They are used to provide information to make better products that are safe for human use. Although animal experimentation has some benefits, the negatives outweigh the positives. Animal testing is killing off innocent beings for the possible human benefit, and with modern technology, there are alternative ways to test products that leave animals unharmed.
Specific Purpose: To persuade my audience to act aganist animal testing because it is cruel and inhumane.
Every year, thousands of animals are tormented, and then die during the animal experiments. Another fact is from Vivisection Information Network, there is a rough estimate from the European Union that 10.5 million vertebrate animals were used in animal experiments, which is 28,800 per day or one every three seconds. Around 18.5 million animals were used in the USA per year (Updated). Also, there are still a large amount of animals that have not been registered. Even though there are disadvantages and disagreement in using of animal experiment, there is also some evidences show that animal experiment is inevitable for the future progress, and the human beings would not have greater life quality without animal testing.
Some alternatives are EPISKIN or EpiDerm, which are reconstructed models of the human epidermis that can be used in skin testing and experimentation (NIEHS). Another alternative product is artificial fake human eyes. Human tissues and cells can be developed and studied. Also, they have made the chicken eye test, in which eyes are taken from slaughterhouses and used to identify chemical damage. Fortunately, the eyes are not useful and trashed at the slaughterhouses, so scientists would only be helping the corporations out.