Every year in the USA about 70 million animals are experimented on (Monamy 34). Almost all these animals are euthanized after they are no longer needed. But I’m not going to focus on the moral aspect of this subject because that would be a never ending argument of opinions. After doing research I found that there are more important reasons why this practice should be modified. Our government’s dependence on vivisection should be toned down or totally replaced because it is misleading, its faulty results, and with better alternatives available. Vivisection is defined as the cutting of live animals and applies to all experiments conducted on animals. Eighty-five percent of the animals used are rats and mice but dogs, cats, primates, guinea pigs, horses, and other farm animals are extensively used(Bad Medicine). These animals are usually bred for this purpose but are also obtained from animal shelters and zoos. The research includes cosmetic testing, drug testing, and medical experiments. Cosmetic testing is not required but is done to prevent lawsuits in case something goes wrong. They involve testing cosmetics on animals to see reactions. This includes the Draize eye test where drops of whatever they are testing are placed in a restrained rabbit’s eye to see irritation levels, force feeding chemicals, and placing chemicals under the skin to test reactions. Drug testing is required by law and involves testing new drugs on animals to see if there are adverse effects and if it works on them. Lastly medical experiments are used to study diseases and ailment. This includes inducing diseases and injures, so they can be studied (Cothran 15). This practice was started in 200 B.C. when the religious leaders began condemning the then co... ... middle of paper ... ... in this way will behave the same in humans: because in many respects the human is not the same as the animal.”(Bad Medicine) “Despite all this evidence animal testing is still conducted much the same as it was 100 years ago” (Bad Medicine). Alternatives like testing on human cells, cell cultures, organ slices, computer stimulation, and lab on a chip. Not to mention studying sick people and basing their theories on evidence obtained not on something that isn’t accurate. These alternatives are not just species specific they are more accurate and less costly than vivisection (Cothran 43). All in all, despite prescription drugs, which are all animal-tested, being one of the leading causes of death in the USA, vivisection results are still trusted by the general public. This is a dangerous situation which will not only lead to more animal suffering but also to human.
According to Marna Owen, from "Animal Rights; Yes or No? claims that each year 80,000 animals are used and often killed for the sake of medical research. He describes experiments in which puppies are burned, cats eyelids are sewn shut, and baboon's heads are crushed. A fiery debate arised and according to the book 6 people chained themselves to the psychol...
One must remember that scientists who carry out animal testing are human to and most definitely do feel some sense of guilt using these animals for the sole reason to benefit mankind. However, “if there were good alternatives to animals that worked better or as well, for less money and hassle, scientists would use them” (Source D). Many believe that animals testing is wrong, but they must understand that at the current time there is no other option. It is difficult to find a different practice has been so substantial and has improved millions of lives and society as a whole. Animal testing, though the testing on animals may not be the best option, the after effects of testing has been successful over the past decades and will continue on this path as scientists and researchers gain more knowledge. There may be a point in time that society becomes so better off that there would be no more need to test
Imagine a puppy spending his entire life in a locked cage where he is deprived of food and water, and force-fed chemicals from time to time. This is the life of animals in a laboratory. Live-animal experimentation, also known as vivisection, is not only unethical, but also cruel and unnecessary. In the article “Vivisection is Right, but it is Nasty- and We must be Brave Enough to Admit This”, Michael Hanlon claims vivisection is a moral necessity that without the use of animals in the laboratory, humans would not have modern medicine like antibiotics, analgesic, and cancer drugs (1). For example, Hanlon believes sewing kittens’ eyelids together can aid researchers to study the effects of amblyopia in children (1). Conversely, the use of animals
In the late 1930’s while the United States was going through The Great Depression the Soviet Union was going through its own turbulent times. This would be known as the Moscow Show Trials, which took place under the Soviet leader Joseph Stalin. The book Darkness at Noon by Arthur Koestler takes place during this time period. The main character Nicholas Rubashov has been imprisoned even though he always has been loyal to the goals of the party (Koestler). This showed a shift that was happening in the country and an attempt by Stalin to eliminate any possible opposition even if they were heroes in the revolution. In the text two different concepts come to light vivisection morality where the party comes before the individual and anti-vivisection morality where the individual is sacred. Rubashov in the beginning does not embrace individualism however throughout the novel he begins to adopt individualism that he refers to as grammatical fiction. Vivisection morality is never a justifiable political system. Suppressing the rights of human beings is not only inhumane but also counter productive in creating an effective and wealthy society.
It should be noted that, animals are metabolically, physiologically, and anatomically unlike from human beings, hence, the tests working on animals can surely prove to be unsuccessful in human beings (Animal Experimentation). Animals react very differently compared to human beings, and therefore, tests done on animals can be hazardous when done on human beings. In addition, even though humans and animals share a number of biological traits, they have biological differences and this is enough reason to question the data obtained from animal experiments and is to be used on humans. It is very wrong to subject animals to cruel procedures in the name of promoting the future human health and this denies them a normal life, yet they are at liberty to yet there is no prove that these tests can work well on human beings. For example, guinea pigs are used in animal experimentation, yet a guinea pig and a human being react very differently to some drugs, for instance penicillin is toxic to a guinea pig, and a cure to human beings. This proves that, any test done on a guinea pig will automatically be unsafe for human beings. Another example is that, drugs that are effective on dogs, or other animals can fail to be effective on human beings. Therefore, it is important to note that, animal testing has its
For thousands of years scientist have been performing vivisections on animals to find information on new chemicals, drugs, and vaccines. Vivisection is when scientist perform dissections among living animals mostly for the purpose of educating and retrieving information. Experimenting on animals has become the tool that has helped us comprehend the body functions of an animal and how a disease transforms the bodily functions, but over the years it’s caused animal rights activists to question the usefulness and the sincerity of using animals for this purpose. Although animal research has been helpful in the past, it is morally wrong in the sense that experimenting on animals is not the only way to collect information. There are other alternatives
For decades, using animals for laboratory testing has been a controversial issue. Typically, animal testing is used to test cosmetics and medicines that may be used on humans. Scientists tend to use animals for testing when there’s a chance that the chemicals used in the substances could cause harm to the person using them. It is estimated that more than 115 million animals world-wide are used in lab experiments every year. Since only a small proportion of countries collect and publish data concerning animal use for research, the exact number is unknown. The question is whether the use of experimenting with animals is morally right or wrong. Most people would agree that of course it is wrong. If these heinous acts were committed outside labs,
This is just one of the countless barbaric tortures forced upon animals. Studies show that in 1994, over 3,500 animals were killed in the United Kingdom, with almost another 21,000 more used in France for cosmetic purposes only (Celebrities, 95). These numbers reflect totals in only two countries. Research by Congress estimates that as many as 22 million animals are used annually for experimental research (Testing, 96). This research is funded by over $5 billion in tax revenue (Bio-Med, 97).
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
Every year, over 100 million animals are killed for experimentation, biology lessons, medical/military training, and cosmetic, drug, and chemical testing. Animals are tortured all over the world and still lack lawful protection.
vivisection Animal Research and Testing, Is it Ethical? “It is a simple fact that many, if not most, of today’s modern medical miracles would not exist if experimental animals had not been available to medical scientists. It is equally a fact that, should we as a society decide the use of animal subjects is ethically unacceptable and therefore must be stopped, medical progress will slow to a snail’s pace. Such retardation will in itself have a huge ethical ‘price tag’ in terms of continued human and animal suffering from problems such as diabetes, cancer, degenerative cardiovascular diseases, and so forth.” 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.
Animal testing is one the most beyond cruelty against animals. It is estimated about 7 million innocent animals are electrocuted, blinded, scalded, force-fed chemicals, genetically manipulated, killed in the name of science. By private institutions, households products, cosmetics companies, government agencies, educational institutions and scientific centers. From the products we use every day, such as soap, make-up, furniture polish, cleaning products, and perfumes. Over 1 million dogs, cats, primates, sheep, hamsters and guinea pigs are used in labs each year. Of those, over 86,000 are dogs and cat. All companies are most likely to test on animals to make patients feel safe and are more likely to trust medicines if they know they have been tested on animals first (PETA, N.D, page 1). These tests are done only to protect companies from consumer lawsuits. Although it’s not quite true, Humans and animals don’t always react in the same way to drugs. In the UK an estimated 10,000 people are killed or severely disabled every year by unexpected reactions to drugs, all these drugs have passed animal tests. Animal testing is often unpredictable in how products will work on people. Some estimates say up to 92 percent of tests passed on animals failed when tried on humans (Procon.org, 2014, page 1). Animal testing can’t show all the potential uses for a drug. The test results are...
Over 100 million animals are used in experiments; 95% of these animals end up dying. Animals are killed and mutilated for the sake of science. Some experiments can involve “blinding, severing of limbs, damaging brain, and ingesting various drugs.” (Coster,
Animals are used in research to develop new medicines and for scientists to test the safety of the medicines. This animal testing is called vivisection. Research is being carried out at universities, medical schools and even in primary and elementary schools as well as in commercial facilities which provide animal experiments to industry. (UK Parliament) In addition, animals are also used in cosmetic testing, toxicology tests, “defense research” and “xenotransplantation”. All around the world, a huge amount of animals are sentenced to life in a laboratory cage and they are obliged to feel loneliness and pain. In addition scientists causing pain, most drugs that pas successfully in animals fail in humans. It is qualified as a bad science. Above all, animals have rights not to be harmed even though the Animal Welfare Act does not provide them even with minimal protection. The law does not find it necessary to use current alternatives to animals, even if they are obtainable. Animal testing should be banned due to animal rights, ethical issues, alternative ways and the unreliability of test results in humans.
"The assumption that an animal species can stand as a reliable model for human biological reactions amounts to playing Russian Roulette with the patient...