An Evil Science: ANIMALS IN RESEARCH Dating back to ancient times, animals have been used in research to advance biomedical sciences. However, the ways the human race can exploit these living creatures are absolutely evil. The main concern animal rights advocates have are not concerned with the idea of using animals in research but the way people can torture these animals. The twentieth century has witnessed some of the cruelest acts of violence in the laboratory but it has also seen the rise of the animal rights movement. Cruelty will always exist in this world, in some form or another, but hopefully it can be abolished from the laboratories. One could hear the agonizing screams of the horse from a great distance. Inside the lab the horse was being wrestled to the ground as its limbs were bound with ropes. The researchers sat on the horse to keep it still as they were carrying out their cruel deed. Sometimes this experiment could take up to four hours and always the horse was fully conscious as its throat was slit to expose the jugular vein. After the scientists extracted the blood they needed to make a cheap medicine, they left the horse to bleed to death and then they threw the mutilated carcass onto the streets. This is only one example of the cruelty associated with animals in research. In this case, a horse was tortured and slaughtered to obtain a blood serum that is now rarely used due to the risk it poses to humans. A simple and humane alternative to this process is to merely use a needle to draw blood from the animal. (http://stopanimaltests.com/f-turkishHorses.asp, 7/30/06) Advocates for animal testing claim that, since the beginning of history, many advances in biomedical sciences have been a product of using anima... ... middle of paper ... ...d though it still cannot be seen, the end of animal testing is approaching ever so slowly. In some laboratories evil continues to prevail, but in many others, good is dominating. Works Cited Stephens, Martin L., Ph.D. Alternatives to Current Uses of Animals in Research, Safety Testing, and Education. Washington, DC: Humane Society of the United States, 1986. "The Hidden Lives of Rats and Mice." Stop Animal Tests. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. 30 July 2006 hiddenrats/ >. "Animal Testing." Wikipedia. 27 July 2006. 30 July 2006 . Pratt, Dallas, M.D. Alternatives to Pain. N.p.: Argus Archives, 1980. Ryder, Richard. "Institutional Speciesism: Cruelty is Wrong." Animal Experimentation: Good or Bad? By Richard Ryder, et al. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 2002. 57-74.
In modern society, animal experimentation has triggered a controversy; consequently, vast amount of protests have been initiated by the animal rights community. Although these organizations have successfully broadcasted their concerns toward animal experimentation, its application continues to survive. Sally Driscoll and Laura Finley inform that there remain fifty million to one-hundred million animals that experience testing or experimentation throughout the world on a yearly basis. But despite opposition, animal experimentation, the use of experiments on animals in order to observe the effects an unknown substance has on living creatures, serves multiple purposes. Those particular purposes are: research of the living body, the testing of
Frankie Trull. “Animals in Research is Critical to Continued Progress in Human Health.” Ed. Jeanne Williams. The Society for Advancement of Education: 1989. Print.
Each year animals are brought to animal testing labs where scientists preform experiments on them to see if a product is safe for a human or not. These animals patiently await the next procedure to be done on them because they have no other choice. These experiments can cause multiple side effects on animals that can be both painful and agonizing. These experiments can also last days which means that the innocent animals have to live in pain up until a scientist thinks that the experiment has gone on long enough. Also, animal experiments cannot always be trusted because they have different genetics than humans so
Howard, Carol. "Alternative Testing Can Replace Animal Experimentation." AV Magazine CXIII (Spring 2005): 14-15. Rpt. in Animal Experimentation. Ed. Cindy Mur. San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 2004. At Issue. Gale Opposing Viewpoints In Context. Web. 25 Apr. 2011.
Lloyd, Emma. "Alternatives to the Use of Animals in Research." Animal Experimentation (2008): n. pag. Web. 27 Feb 2011.
Right now, millions or animals including mice, rabbits, primates, cats, dogs and others are locked inside cold cages in laboratories across the country. More than 100 million animals each year suffer and die from chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics tests as well as biology lessons, medical training exercises, and curiosity-driven medical experiments at universities. Throughout history, animal testing has played an important role in harming animals for human advantages, making many animals suffer. Animal testing should be excluded because its inhumane, violates the rights of animals, and there are safer alternatives.
Ferdowsian, Hope R. "Ethical and Scientific Considerations Regarding Animal Testing and Research." EBSCO Animals. EBSCO, Sept. 2011. Web. Mar. 2014.
For centuries, the use of animal experimentation in the biomedical field has been questioned ethically. Do the benefits of animals used in research outweigh the pain that the animals endure? Animal rights activists will argue that there are new alternatives that are more accurate than animal testing. Nonetheless, scientists will continue to use animals for the advancement in the medical field because there have been various cases where animals have paved the way, medically, for humans to this day. Additionally, testing on animals instead of humans puts humans out of harms way. The first Animal Cruelty Act was created in 1835 to regulate the use of animals for scientific purposes. According to Franco (2013), the “Enactment of the 1986 Animals
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
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...
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.
For countless decades humans have taken it upon themselves to take defenseless innocent wild animals to test and experiment on them. Ranging from powerful drugs and lotions to chemicals, vaccines, and packing materials. The practice of using animals for testing has been a controversial subject for the past thirty years. The question is whether animal testing is morally right or wrong. An integral part of the debate, over animal testing and experiments, mainly centers on the question of an animals moral status. Most people would agree that animals have some moral status. Which is why we find it wrong to abuse pets or needlessly hurt other animals.
Hundreds of millions of animals die every year from animal testing in the United States. Innocent animals are used everyday in laboratories for biology advancements, medical training, curiosity-driven experimentation, and chemical, drug, food, and cosmetic testing. They are used to provide information to make better products that are safe for human use. Although animal experimentation has some benefits, the negatives outweigh the positives. Animal testing is killing off innocent beings for the possible human benefit, and with modern technology, there are alternative ways to test products that leave animals unharmed.
For years animal testing has been a very controversial issue around the globe. Animal testing has been very beneficial to people, but has cause an up stir to animal rights activists and organizations like PETA. “The earliest references to animal ex...
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.