Animal testing has been used all around the world, but most countries have put an end to it except for some countries like the U.S. and China. Europe had stopped using animals for testing because it was inhuman and they urge the U.S. To do the same. Some of the testing they do on animals is not even necessary. We still use animals for testing, even though we have created new alternatives, could we really rely on the tests done on animals? Our Government pays way too much money for animals to be tested on.
In an article I read, written by Charlie Dunmore, it explained how Europe was trying to persuade many countries like the United States and China to stop testing on animals. Better yet, it was the European Union who was trying to convince China, the U.S. and other countries, to switch to other alternatives; to stop cosmetic companies from testing there products on animals. Someone who spoke out for the cosmetic companies stated, "If we want to introduce new ingredients in Europe it's going to be very difficult, because we don't have the tools available to address those endpoints," in that statement that he made, he is suggesting that the poor animals are just tools. The testing procedures these poor animals have to endure is not even to save lives or anything of that sort, now I'm not saying that that is a reason to test on animals, because we have other alternatives; these tests are just for cosmetics that no one needs so bad to save there lives, unless of corse you are a young teenage girl in high school. The Europeans want cosmetic companies to stop testing there products on animals. So if many Europeans voted to force cosmetic companies to stop testing there products on animals then we should be able to the same. It might h...
... middle of paper ...
... money our government is using for testing on animals should be used for something else like paying our doubt, and the animals could be released from being tested on.
In conclusion, contemplating wither or not to switch to alternatives is up to them but for the sake of the poor defenseless animals they should consider making the switch. It has been proven that some of the alternatives work better and are way more accurate then the traditional testing on animals. Our government spends way too much money, that we do not have, to pay for things to be tested on animals when there are clearly more cheaper and better ways to do it. If other countries can why not us and if we are known for being the "free country" then why are the animals being captive, tortured and killed? We should put an end to animal testing, there should be laws preventing harm to these animals.
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
Animal testing is not going to stop because humans the results of it. What can be done to lessen the amount of animal testing done is to put more research into stem cells. With more breakthroughs in stem cell research, scientists can create useable organs to discover cures. Until these breakthroughs are accomplished, animal testing is the best choice the human race has to survive its own
Although animal research is a shareholder in the development of medicine and the advance of cosmetic and household products, it is still not legitimate to abuse those creatures to satisfy human needs and wants. Alternatives have been initiated to relinquish the use of non-human beings since it is against animal rights. Animal testing should be prohibited and new methods should be introduced to non-medical institutions like the cosmetic industries and the household production enterprises. Laboratories should take ease of technology to supersede animals by upgraded alternatives that can help in the development of new treatments that may be more efficient. Personally, I think animal testing is a cruel nature that cannot be justified. Why sacrifice those defenseless lives if superior methods are available?
...e outrageously painful and sometimes deadly to the animals. How on earth is that humane? Some animals even end up having permanent disabilities from all the chemical testing. The findings and conclusions from animal testing rarely work the same way on humans and an enormous amount of money is spent on failed attempts. The rate of success of transferring test results to humans is too low to justify the expense. Taxpayers would be wise to invest this money in alternative methods such as technological advancements. While it may not be possible to completely diminish animal testing, significant reductions need to be made in order to advance the state of technology and improve overall results. Advancements in medicine must be made without perpetuating needless suffering to helpless creatures. Testing needs to stop; animals don’t deserve any of this painful punishment.
Some would argue that animal testing is torture. Some would say that animal testing is completely necessary. There is no reason for animal testing to happen. There are several statistics that point to the negative side of animal testing. There are more pointing to the negative than to the positive. What is the point on testing on animals when we have statistics like how only 1.16% of the diseases are found in animals, or that 92% of the things that do pass through animal testing do not even work on humans? Europe, Israel, and India have already banned animal testing for cosmetics, because it was too harmful on the animals.
“Animal testing has its flaws and its benefits and results in helping humans while harming animals. Animal advocates claim that this act is extremely inhumane and unjust to animals; yet, are we doing the right thing? Are humans so much more important than animals? Is an animal’s life worth less than a human’s? These are all questions we will have to ask ourselves when we take our next vaccine or medicinal
Current animal testing has been a contentious subject ever since it started off 150 years back. Although a lot of people discover animal testing inhumane and egoistic, it is a important factor to boost our understanding of medication and to improve our understanding of science. Animal testing, to some, is the way to ameliorating our level of living and preserving many lives, and therefore has many benefits. On the other hand, the negatives may not be passed, and scientists are constantly trying to decrease the damages with some methods they create in the process. Even so, to the dismay of numerous animal lovers in addition to those who are endeavoring for animal rights, animal testing will not be stopped every time soon because, for now, it is the most trustworthy form of testing that includes the safety of daily products we use more carefully than any other procedure.
Evidence of animal testing can be found in greek writing as early as 500 B.C. Clearly showing that animal testing has been around for a long time, but only recently has it become a topic of real concern. Used for the purpose of developing medical treatments that could one day benefit humankind, determine the toxicity of medications (usually in at least two animal species), and to check the safety of products that are destined for human use. http://animal-testing.procon.org/ Animal testing has sprouted debate among the human population. Proponents of animal testing argue that animal testing is necessary to achieve medical breakthroughs, without animal testing who would they use for experiments, and that animal testing is important for learning. Arguments for those against animal testing include the fact that animals are biologically different than humans, they are caged in inhumane living conditions, must undergo painful experiments, and it is extremely costly.
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
...eel as much pain through testing as we would if we got tested on. Therefore, it is up to us to aid these defenceless animals and to put a halt to animal testing once and for all!
“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.
Simple household items such as lotions, shampoos and cosmetics aren’t very expensive and are within reach for the public, yet the public is not knowledgeable of the fact that the products that they use everyday are put through a series of tests which involve the use of harmless animals. Several large commercial companies do not make products for animals; they decide that using these harmless creatures for the testing of their products, could be cause to be harmful to animals still go forward with these types of procedures on an everyday basis. Although these animals are unable to defend themselves or signs of any form of consent for the near death procedures, these companies find this as a cheap solution for testing their products before placing them on the market. There are many other alternatives to testing animals such as embryonic stem cell research. Animal experimentation is wrong and it can be avoided but companies which are greedy for money chose not to.
Animals should not be victims of vivisection when they have just as much of a right to be here as we do. The money used for animal testing could be used for a project with better potential. Animal testing should not be acceptable considering all the alternatives that technology has the power to do. The abuse of animals in medical experiments is a flaw on humanity, the sooner we end it, the better.
Every year thousands of animals are euthanized due to animal testing such as cosmetic testing, medical testing, and dissection. (A Critical Look at Animal Experimentation) (Types of Animal Testing) Some of the things we use every day such as; make up, soap, furniture polish, and varieties of cleaning supplies, are tested on rabbits, guinea pigs, dogs, cats, and other animals. (Animal Testing) Cosmetic testing is used to test a product and its ingredients, medical testing finds cures for different illnesses; and dissection is used to help high school students in science classes have a better understanding of the class or students undergoing the medical field in college. (Animal Experimentation) Animal testing is not required by law; it is only used to protect companies from consumer lawsuits, provided new research for diseases, and provide a visual learning experiment for students. (A Critical Look at Animal Experimentation) It has been proven that there are more reliable and less expensive alternatives to animal testing, such as; computer models and cell and tissue tests. Animal experimentation should be eliminated because it is an inhumane method for testing purposes.
Animal experimentation is contentious issue in today’s society that, whether it continue or should stop. Many animals such as monkey undergo painful suffering or even death as a result of scientific research for the sake of humans’ health. Among the animals monkeys are the main victims of the scientists’ experiments because of their human-like characteristics and physical process to humans. Monkeys’ similarities allow the scientists to test effectiveness of the new discovered drugs, food additives, and chemical and even cosmetics products. Although, such medical experimentations had helped scientists to produce vaccines, and medicines that are necessary for elimination of some deceases, but the test had negative medical effect on monkeys.