For years, animals have been the subject of various types of scientific testing for many different things. But the question is: Is it right to subject animals to this kind of research? Research in medical science and in multiple product testing. Animals are put through countless hours of suffering just for the possibility of it being beneficial to humans. It is not even guaranteed that the research being done, in places such as medical laboratories, will even be effective when it comes to human trials. So shouldn 't we try to spare animals from such cruelty and find alternative testing methods? Each year, millions of animals suffer due to the various kinds of research that companies and laboratories do. Cosmetic, drug, food, and chemical …show more content…
Drugs that pass testing on animals may not be safe for humans. Animals are very different than we are, therefore we cannot rely on using them as subjects for the testing of drugs which would be administered to humans. And testing in animals does not accurately predict results in humans. "94% of drugs that pass animal tests fail in human clinical trials. According to neurologist Aysha Akhtar, MD, MPH, over 100 stroke drugs that were effective when tested on animals have failed in humans, and over 85 HIV vaccines failed in humans after working well in non-human primates." (Animal Testing- …show more content…
That animal testing is benificial. "The next time an animal rights group claims that animal research provides no human benefit, stop and think about the astonishing medical advances made over the last fifty years. Because scientists experimented with research animals, vaccines were developed, new lifesaving medical and surgical techniques were perfected, diseases were cured”extending our lives and alleviating incalculable amounts of human suffering." (Smith, Wesley J.). Although it may be true that animal testing does help alleviate human suffering to an extent, it does not fully help us understand how things will react when it is a human using
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.
Over 100 Million animals are burned, crippled, poisoned and abused in testing Labs every year. Animals are used to test the safety of products, advance scientific research, and develop models to study disease and to develop new medical treatments all for the sake of mankind. Animals should not be used for scientific research because animal testing is inhumane, other testing methods now exist, and animals are very different from human beings.
Animal testing began when William Harvey used animals 400 years ago to find out how blood circulated through the body. The "modern" era of animal research however started about 150 years ago with the rise of physiology as a science. It was very different back then. There were no anesthetics or effective painkillers, so the animals suffered a great deal, as did patients. Scientists learned that putting animals, or humans through that type of torture was inhumane. Consider having to have a leg amputated, which was not uncommon in those days due to the fact that infections got very severe without the use of antibiotics, without even so much as an anesthetic to control the pain. Now the treatment is there to help the pain, so neither human nor animal has to go through the excess undue strain. Through all the new medical technology still there will be people who disagree with animal testing. Animal testing provides many benefits that looked over most of the time. One of the most common questions is, “why are animals used in research?” The answer to that question can be broken down into three separate categories.
Every year, millions of animals are injured or killed in scientific experiments across the world. Those in favor of animal experimentation say they’re taking animals’ lives to save humans. But is it really necessary to subject animals to torturous conditions or painful experiments in the name of science? Is it ethical to destroy an animal’s life while simply testing lipstick or shampoo? Animal experimentation, like many of the issues we face today, is difficult to argue against, and just as hard to support, but it is necessary to continue this experimentation in order to advance human knowledge and to help save human lives.
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
In many parts of the world, animals are being used in laboratories are still suffering and dying to test cosmetics. In
I am the enemy! One of those vilified, inhumane physician scientists involved in animal research. How strange, for I have never thought of myself as an evil person. I became a pediatrician because of my love for children and my desire to keep them healthy. During medical I school and residency, however, I saw many children die of leukemia, prematurity and traumatic injury—circumstances against which medicine has made tremendous progress, but still has far to go.
Is the use of animals in research justified? Should animal experimentation be permitted? Should these animals be liberated? A logical person would say the benefits justify the research. Without animal testing, products would be based on theory. No one would want to use something, which may damage eyes, be poisonous, cancerous, and cause birth defects. Animals used in testing are not from the endangered species list; also many of the types of animals used are killed each year by rat or mouse traps, animal control, exterminators, and animal shelters. Animal testing reaps great benefits such as finding effective drugs to combat disease, improve surgical procedures, and make products safe.
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
Since experiments are cruel and expensive, “the world’s most forward-thinking scientists have moved on to develop and use methods for studying diseases and testing products that replace animals and are actually relevant to human health” (“Alternatives to Animals”). 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.
Animal testing saves so many human lives by the simplest research that doesn’t harm animals but helps them also. Animal testing consist of new chemicals, pesticides, consumer products, drugs, medical devices, vaccines and many other products. Some americans refuse to donate enough organs to help save lives so testing animals finds way to help saves lives. Animal research has saved and improved millions of animals and people. Today’s medicine we got from animal testing. Without animal testing we wouldn’t have a better understanding of disease and the way the body works. Also it has contributed to many medical advances today. Everyone has probably benefited from vaccines and antibiotics to prevent and treat infections. Lately research are tackling
“Over 1 million animals are burned, crippled, poisoned, and abused in U.S. labs” according to DoSomething.org. And although these animals may be considered protected under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) they are still able to be tortured and mistreated in labs. On top of all this, there is absolutely no guarantee that results and data collected from these procedures are accurate. Our anatomic builds are similar in ways but not at all interchangeable. Even though it has saved lives, animal experimentation should be banned because it is not a guarantee that these procedures are done pain free and humans and animals react differently to the medicines and chemicals used.
“Many medical treatments have been made possible by animal testing, including cancer and HIV drugs, insulin, antibiotics, vaccines and many more” (Murnaghan). They insist that since we can use animal testing to improve the health of people, should we not use what we can to improve it? Even if furthering our health means testing on animals. Others also argue that animal testing does not just help humans. “But animal research hasn't benefited humans alone. Animals also have improved healthcare and a longer lifespan” (“Benefits”). Animal testing has provided cures and vaccines for many animal diseases and health problems. So it aids both animal and human health. Some people believe that since it helps to provide cures for animals, animal testing is helping out its own kind, not just humans. With all the examples of it being right or wrong, animal testing is a very controversial
Animals might not have the exact same science as humans, however, animal testing is correct enough to check whether or not a substance is safe enough for human trials. Looking up on the fact that animal analysis has developed treatments for bacterial infection that the unit is a significant reason behind death and saved many lives. Therefore, causing animals not be taken lightly for the purpose of science for the sole purpose, sparing human lives, may be viewed as ethical to some degree on the off chance that has helped the advancement of science and when it’s all said and done.
Throughout the years animal rights groups and organizations have frowned upon animal experiments. Animal testing has been thought to be inhumane and cold-hearted to animals. Because of these accusations medical researchers have to suffer threats from individuals and the media. If animal testing weren’t allowed would that be a drawback in advancement in medical research? Animal testing is beneficial to people because these trails lead to improvements in medical research. Animal experiments have led to finding new cures and vaccines to fatal illnesses. Because animal experiments are helpful in making vaccines to prevent these sicknesses, these trails are the reason so many lives are saved. Animal testing is very necessary and useful to people, but animal rights groups believe that these trails doesn’t benefit humanity. According to Ellen Paul, “Breakthroughs in treating injuries, like practically all medical advances, depend upon experimentation on animals.” Animal experiments have given way to many new instruments to fight against diseases like cancer (Paul). For example, mice and other rodents contributed to scientists developing new tools for fighting different forms of cancers (Paul). Animal testing has helped science in many ways, but animal organizations like People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) believe that these experiments are cruel to animals. Even though most animals endure some sort of pain during these experiments, the results are very beneficial to people.