The Pros And Cons Of Animal Testing

Episkin provides a unique method of testing to ensure the safety of both humans and animals by providing accurate data. To make a sample of Episkin, scientists take leftover samples of skin cells, or keratinocytes from breast surgeries; this is a safe way to acquire the cells necessary for the sample while not doing harm to a human being (Merali 1). Since Episkin utilizes cells from humans rather than animals, it provides scientists with accurate results regarding multiple chemicals and substances (Merali 1). This is due to the differences in the genetic makeup of humans and animals which makes the sensitivity of each type of skin vary tremendously. Scientists can declare these chemicals either safe or toxic because “they can check the proportion

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”). These tests do not provide scientists with information that can be trusted and are impractical to conduct for human

Since “the anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between animals and people make animals poor models for human beings”, most animal tests are useless and cannot determine relevant data that is useful in humans (“Animal Testing”). Thalidomide, a sleeping pill, was tested on multiple pregnant animals and did not have any effects on their offspring (“Animal Testing”). This drug was later used in humans and caused over 10,000 babies to be born with severe birth defects (“Animal Testing”). Mice were one of the many rodents to have this drug tested on them and their offspring. Even though mice share 98% of their DNA with humans, they still fail to provide reliable results when tested on the mice: Their offspring was not harmed, unlike the human children (“Animal Testing”). There are a myriad of mistakes regarding the data collected from cruel animal experiments which causes the tests to be