Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Is animal testing ethical
The benefits of testing on animals for medicine
Negative impacts on animal testing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Is animal testing ethical
As the medical community works tirelessly to find cures for some of the world’s most deadly diseases, the use of new technology has propelled them to life-saving discoveries, allowing research and testing without actual test subjects. These cures come in the form of medications and treatments that can take years if not decades of development simply to get them ready to be tested. While some of this research is done without any test subjects, many researchers still employ a method that has been used for centuries: testing on animals. The ethics of this method has been the subject of controversy for almost as long as its use and has been a catalyst for discussion, both sides believing themselves to be right.
One point in opposition of animal
…show more content…
testing is the unreliability of test results and data. It is easy to see that at a base level, animals are very different from humans. This difference can also be seen in the way that humans and animals react to certain treatments and drugs as evidenced through various medical research projects. There are many examples of drugs being effective on animals, while failing miserably in the human testing phase. Medications for strokes, spinal cord injuries and HIV vaccines have all shown positive initial results in animals while failing when tested on humans (Akhtar). These results have caused scientists to take a step back and reevaluate how their research is conducted. Animal testing alternatives can include computer modeling and even organs grown on microchips. The “human gut-on-a-chip that replicates intestinal muscular contractions and a lung-on-a-chip with air-sac and capillary cells that exchange oxygen for carbon dioxide” built at Harvard’s Wyss Institute are new ways researchers are moving away from animal testing (Bilba). By refocusing on more human-based research techniques, the results can become more accurate, leading potentially life-saving drugs to a faster approval for the public. Cruel and inhumane treatment is also a chief concern for those fighting to end animal testing. PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) regularly speaks out against animal testing, targeting research facilities with undercover operations and public ad campaigns. By their estimates, “100 million animals suffer and die in the U.S. every year in cruel chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics tests as well as in medical training exercises and curiosity-driven medical experiments at universities” (“Animal Testing 101”). Over the years, there have been various public figures who have voiced support for PETA and their message. In 2013, actor and long-time animal rights activist, James Cromwell was arrested while protesting the use of cats in experiments at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (Oldenburg). Yelling about cruelty while holding large pictures of a somewhat-sedated cat with a metal device attached to its head, Cromwell interrupted a board of regents meeting to protest what he believed passionately to be wrong (Oldenburg). Seeing how this issue moves people to such actions can make it difficult to understand the reasoning for such tests and research. While few people find the idea of animal testing appealing, there are those in the medical community who believe it will always be necessary in some capacity.
To completely eliminate all animal testing could have a detrimental effect on medical research, specifically psychology (Bennett). Without the Nobel prize winning dog salivation experiment of Ivan Pavlov, classical conditioning may not be as understood as it is today (“Pavlov’s Dog”). Studying how great apes learn and communicate has been essential in revelations about our own evolution (Bennett). Losing animals as a means for medical research could mean losing future discovery and, “understanding [of] the neural, behavioral, cognitive, developmental, physiological, genetic and biological processes that contribute to human and animal health and disease” (Bennett). To certain medical communities, the benefits of animal research far outweigh the …show more content…
pitfalls. With many regulations already in place, some question whether the ethical issues of animal testing are even applicable anymore. Research involving animals is heavily monitored, with several laws in place at the state and federal levels (Hajar). Educating the public on such laws could lessen the arguments against animal research and lead to a better understanding of the process. The Three R’s mandate has been signed into law around the globe, including the United States. This model includes searching for replacements for animals in experiments, reducing the use of animals, and refining experiments to reduce the risk of pain and discomfort to animals (Hajar). By using this method, scientists are able to conduct necessary research while still being sensitive to ethical questions. Because of the massive amount of misinformation regarding animal testing, it is also necessary to be transparent about not just the research process but also why the research is being conducted.
Going back to the cat experiments being performed at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, the photographs of the cat test subjects were disturbing. However, when all of the information about the testing was divulged, with revelations such as the fact that this was a test for cochlear implants and everything done to the cat test subjects has since been done to humans, the procedures being performed become more accepted. By describing procedures without context, they can sound barbaric. Hearing about an animal test subject enduring a procedure where, “a device is surgically implanted into the shoulder area. Wires are then forced into veins in the chest, and electrical impulses are sent through these wires” doesn’t seem as terrible when it is also known that this was the procedure, “to implant a pacemaker into a 14-year-old child with a heart problem”
(FBRadmin). While animal testing may never be a fully understood and applauded element of medical testing and scientific discovery, it doesn’t have to remain clouded by Frankenstein-esque imagery. By enforcing regulations already in place and providing information on existing research processes and their findings, it is possible to continue animal testing and research while being mindful of the ethical dilemmas these tests can present. Although new techniques are being developed, not everything can be tested with them to the degree of accuracy necessary. To completely remove all animal testing before new research techniques can be properly vetted could result in harmful or even deadly medications being released to the public for use. It could also set back medical discoveries and prevent new therapy techniques from ever being developed. Animal testing and research is not done out of malice, nor do the researchers delight in any possible harm that may come to animals used. The results of the tests performed are necessary not only to the medical community but to all mankind. Until technology catches up, animal testing remains essential to medical research and discovery.
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
Without animal research, cures for such diseases as typhoid, diphtheria, and polio might never have existed. Without animal research, the development of antibiotics and insulin would have been delayed. Without animal research, many human beings would now be dead. However, because of animal testing, 200,000 dogs, 50,000 cats, 60,000 primates, 1.5 million hamsters, and uncounted millions of rats and mice are experimented upon and die each year, as living fodder for the great human scientific machine. Some would say that animal research is an integral part of progress; unfortunately, this is often true. On the whole, animal testing is a necessary evil that should be reduced and eliminated whenever possible.
Since psychology’s founding, animals has been used as an important way for psychologist to test their hypnosis, and conduct experiments. From Pavlov’s experiments with Dogs and response, to a modern lab studying the brain of sleeping rats, Animals have provided a huge opening in psychological testing. A significant amount of psychological tests would be impossible without the use of animals. Some people claim the psychological research on animals is inhumane citing psychological test involving electric shocks. Others, however, claim that psychological testing on animals, not only provides important research to help improve the lives of both people and animal, but also creates a way to preform test that would be impossible with human subjects.
Animal experimentation has always been a highly debated topic. Many have argued for the use of animal experimentation claiming that animal experimentation is the only possible way to find medical treatments to preserve human life. However, animal rights activists have argued that animal experimentation is futile and that it is unethical to use the life of an animal for experimentation without the animal’s consent. Although both sides of the debated issue present reasonable opinions, the use of animals for experimentation is the most effective form scientists have in order to find medical breakthroughs. In Jane Goodall’s essay “A Question of Ethics,” she argues that animals should not be experimented on because there are more advanced alternatives than using animal lives. In Goodall’s defence, we should not support activities
According to the California Biomedical Research Association, almost every medical advancement in the last 100 years is a direct result of animal testing and research. The use of animals has become standard procedure in a wide range of testing and experimentation, including product toxicity testing, biomedical and veterinary experiments, drug development and testing, and education. Major advancements in treating and understanding chronic conditions such as cancer, cystic fibrosis, malaria, and tuberculosis, have been achieved due to animal research. Also, the development of pacemakers, cardiac valve substitutes, and anesthetics are also direct results of the testing and observation of animals. On the other hand, many people believe that animal testing is cruel and inhumane. In many laboratories animals are subjected to force feeding, food and water deprivation, physical restraints, and infliction of pain. Because the animals cannot protect themselves, many people argue that exploiting animals to better the lives of humans is wrong and should not be permitted.
Animal testing has been used for developing and researching cures for medical conditions. For example, the polio vaccine, chemotherapy for cancer, insulin treatment for diabetes, organ transplants and blood transfusions are just some of the important advances that have come from research on animals (“Animal Testing”). Consuming animals for research benefits in developing various treatments and also benefits in discovery better methods for cures. According to the article “Animal Testing”, it says that the underlying rationale for the use of animal testing is that living organisms provide interactive, dynamic systems that scientists can observe and manipulate in order to understand normal and pathological functioning as well as the effectiveness of medical interventions. It relies on the physiological and anatomical similarities between humans and other animals (MacClellan, Joel). Meaning that animals have the same body components and features as humans and is the best thing to research on to better understand the human development. Even though several argue that animal testing is harming the animals, one has to think back to all the benefits that has come from it. There may be a little remorse for endangering animal lives, but realizing how far medicine has come makes it worth the while.
"Using Animals for Medical Testing Is Unethical and Unnecessary." The Ethics of Medical Testing. Ed. Tamara Thompson. Detroit: Greenhaven Press, 2012. At Issue. Rpt. from "Animal Experiments: Overview." People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals [PETA]. 2011. Opposing Viewpoints in Context. Web. 18 Nov. 2013.
Every year approximately 100 million animals are killed as a part of scientific research in the United States alone. Animal testing is a highly controversial practice in the modern world. There are records of animals being used in biological and medicinal research as far back as 384 BCE with the ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle. Many people believe animal testing is unethical as it is bringing harm to animals in order to benefit humans. Ever since the beginning of this practice, animal testing has been used for a variety of purposes, all of which are inhumane and unethical.
Throughout history, animal testing has played an important role in leading to new discoveries and human benefit. However, what many people forget are the great numbers of animals that have suffered serious harm during the process of animal testing. Animal testing is the use of animals in biological, medical, and psychological studies. The development and enhancement of medical research has been based on the testing of animals. There are many questions being asked if animal research is good or not or if the benefit for us is way greater the abuse of animals. Doing tests on animals can help find ways to cure diseases, but testing on them is wrong. Although we want to find cures for diseases to help many people, testing on animals not only brutally hurts them but it also denies the animals the rights they have.
Millions of animals are used to test consumer products, but they also become victims to experiments for medical research. In The Ethics of Animal Research (2007) both authors state that there have been many medical advances with the development of medicines and treatments as a result of research conducted on animals (para 1). These medical i...
The text “Samuel Willard: Two Sermons” describes the adversity of the Puritan leader Samuel Willard to the religious faith expressed through visual images. Across two sermons, respectively “Enquiry into the Divine Attributes, 1689” and “What Is Forbidden in the Second Commandment, 1701”, Willard argues why any images created to represent God is wrong, sustaining his arguments with Biblical passages that indicate the historical errors of creating idols (visual images) for worshiping religious faiths. In the first sermon, Samuel Willard states that pictures and images cannot reflect the God or other religious values or religious episodes, because the shapes of God, the Spirits or the Angels are unknown to humans. He catalogues any attempt to
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.
Throughout centuries medical research has been conducted on animals. “Animals were used in early studies to discover how blood circulates through the body, the effect of anesthesia, and the relationship between bacteria and disease” (AMA 59). Experiments such as these seem to be outdated and actually are by today’s means, scientists now study commonly for three general purposes: (1) biomedical and behavioral research, (2) education, (3) drug and product testing (AMA 60). These three types of experiments allow scientists to gain vast amounts of knowledge about human b...
Animals have held an important spot in many of our lives. Some people look at animals as companions and others see them as a means of experimental research and medical advancement. With the interest to gain knowledge, physicians have dissected animals. The ethics of animal testing have always been questioned because humans do not want to think of animals on the same level as humans. Incapable of our thinking and unable to speak, animals do not deserve to be tested on by products and be conducted in experiments for our scientific improvement. Experimentation on animals is cruel, unfair, and does not have enough beneficial results to consider it essential.
It has long been debated as to whether it is ethical to use animals for experimentation. When considering whether animal research is ethically acceptable or not two main concerns must be raised. The first issue is whether it is absolutely necessary to use animals in order to acquire information that may contribute to the improvement of people’s health and well-being. The second issue is whether the use of animals is defendable on a moral ground.