Animal Testing Arguments

Animal testing is the inhumane act of using conscious, innocent animals to test products without care of what the aftermath may be. According to PETA, the largest animal rights organization in the world, more than 100 million animals are slaughtered in U.S. laboratories every year. Those who have the heart to inflict this type of brutality do this by immobilizing them in restraint devices for hours, in order to drill holes into their skulls and have their spinal cords crushed (PETA). Along with the physical atrocities that humans are forcing these vulnerable animals into, humans are also isolating them from their own kind, confining them in barren cages, and thus traumatizing them for the rest of their lives. Those who possess an ounce of compassion

Many human diseases exist in other species also. Cancer, heart failure, asthma, rabies, etc. are natural diseases in many different animals and testing began with animals with cures, preventions, and treatments now available for animals and humans. The polio vaccine used in humans is still used in wild chimps today and was originally tested on primates before it was introduced to humans. The elimination of smallpox is possible because it was originally tested on animal. These are only a few that we contribute to the use of animal testing.

However, Robert Garner and Sarah Rose A. Miller who are opponents of animal experimentation claim that it is unacceptable because it causes animals to suffer. Two aspects of the arguments about animal research are about the use of laboratory animals and the idea of using substitution for live animals, and although the authors mostly disagree

There is much controversy with regards to animal testing for medical research and there has been throughout the centuries. We can trace the issue back all the way to the 4th century when we have the first record of animal experimentation, Aristotle dissecting animals for study. In the 1600s, scientists began using animals as a way to explore the human body which led to many advancements in the medical field. Such advancements include Emil von Bering finding a cure for diphtheria toxin for guinea pigs; further research allowed him to produce a diphtheria vaccine for humans (Bright).In spite of these many medical achievements brought on through the use of animal testing, there are still those that argue the practice is not justifiable and should

Researchers estimated over 26 million animals were used for scientific tests and commercial testing subject every year in the United States. Over the years animals were used to be tested on medical treatments, products for human uses, health care, and etc. The practice of researching on living animals has started since 500 BC. Opponents of this act say that it is cruel to experiment on animals, there are other methods available to replace the cruel act of experimenting on living animals, and that the human bodies and animal’s bodies are totally two different features and the research often yields irrelevant results. The federal Animal Welfare or AWA passed the animal testing act in 1966 and amended in 1970, 1976, and 1985.

The companies in charge of the laboratories are the providers of the funds, facilities, and personnel of the IACUC. Therefore, the company can sway the IACUC’s ruling in favor of the business because the companies picked these IACUC members to oversee the ethical treatment in the facilities. In addition, the IACUC cannot actually prevent the laboratories from causing suffering in animal experimentation if the scientist deems the experiment as a scientific need. This means that if the experimenters claim that the use of procedures that subject laboratory animals to pain and distress is necessary to further human health, then the IACUC will approve the experiment. This is a problem that needs to be fixed because it allows scientific experimenters to conduct any procedure that will cause suffering to the animals.

This is because researchers can study the effects of treatments over lifespans or even generations. Though this is true many people argue animals can suffer like humans do, so it is speciesism to experiment on them while refraining from experimenting on humans. According to Peter Singer from the AWA, (animal welfare act) “Discriminating against animals because they do not have the

Unfortunately, this can cause unpredictable results that can prolong the forthcoming treatments and cures for scientists to discover due to incorrect information collected. In a study, researchers have reported that “out of 93 dangerous side effects, only 19% could have been predicted by animal testing” (“Arguments against Animal”). This displays how a majority of the data concluded during animal testing is not functional to the public because of the limited positive outcomes. There are innumerable obstacles and challenges that scientists are faced daily when conducting medical research. For instance, when researchers were analyzing cancer medications over 93% of the materials that were executed successfully during animal experimentation

Imagine an enraged animal rights activist charging toward a scientist in a white lab coat, desperate to free the little mice that are being used as test subjects. Although comical, this scene may be quite accurate when describing the passion that animal lovers have when it comes to the touchy subject of animal testing. For centuries, animal testing has been used in the medical research field, however many are now beginning to question whether it is ethical. Millions of animals are killed per year due to animal testing, so is this practice worth banning? Animal testing is a controversial subject, with supporters pointing out the medical advances that have stemmed from animal research and animal rights activists declaring it cruel and immoral.

One of the major issues that support animal testing is the fact that it has been used successfully in history to develop cures and treatments for diseases which killed human being in large numbers. The following are examples of illnesses and viruses that were cured through the use of animal testing : the development of Penicillin was primarily based on the testing of the Penicillin drugs on mice,

Science researches believe that products which have been tested on animals will make humans’ life better. However, the main concern on this issue is that animals are suffering from unnecessary pain. Animals are mostly exposed to radiation, forced to inhale poisonous gases and injected with harmful substances prior to the experiment. Thus, animal testing should be banned because it is cruel, the result is unreliable and expensive.

“The assumption that animals are without rights and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance is a positively outrageous example of western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion is the only guarantee of morality”. The term “animal testing” refers to non-human animals being experimented on to analyze the effects of everything from cosmetics to medications. More than 115 million animals are tested on worldwide and an average of 10% survive. Using animals for research may be beneficial for humans but it is not worth the death and suffering of millions of animals.

Introduction Animals testing have significantly contributed to the advancement of scientific knowledge in general and to biomedical progress specifically. Many example showing that laboratory animals in medical development and other aspects have significantly influenced human health and reduced suffering, for example improved diagnosis of infectious disease (Hau, Jann, Schapiro & Steven, 2002). But since 1960s and 1970s, animals testing protests has gained prominence and strength, people start to argue is it moral to continue “cruel” animal testing. Animal Testing is a Moral Act In the rest of this article, I shall apply different concept under utilitarianism try to discuss whether animal testing are moral acts. It is important to notice that (1) in this article, applying the general idea of utilitarianism which is “the greatest happiness of greatest number” and (2) the animals testing under the rules and regulations.

In the end, the minimal protections offered by the AWA and PHS policy provide no real safety or relief to the millions of animals in labs and offer only a false sense of security to the caring public. All it takes is for people to know the facts about animal testing and what truly goes on behind closed doors. If more people understood how it affects the lives of animals, maybe, just maybe their could be a change in the way people think about animal

Behind Scientific Research are Animals’ Screams Animals are a part of our lives, undeniably and the issue of using animal in research remains controversial during the past few decades. Some supporters despite their acknowledgement of animals’ essential roles in human lives believe that it is acceptable to test on animals for scientific and commercial research whereas others state that animal testing is tantamount to abusing them and depriving their own rights. However, under no circumstances are animals used to suffer brutal human tests. Firstly, some people agree with the idea of using animals for human’s health care benefits because of certain similarities between animals and humans.