Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Topics on why animals deserve rights
Animal testing should not be banned
Why animal testing banned
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Topics on why animals deserve rights
Anna Mari
Paper 3
The statistics about the number of animals that are affected are possibly countless because there are many animals being rescued everyday (Collins). In 1789, the animal protection movement was born. Jeremy Bentham saw a need for animal protection world-wide and thus created the movement. The rally’s call that Jeremy Bentham was involved in for animal protection was “The question is not can they [animals] reason nor can they talk, but can they suffer” Both the United States and Great Britain signed the first “anti-cruelty” laws in Britain (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health). For the last 50 years, new rules have been created regarding animal cruelty based on people’s newfound opinions for animals changing (Kilroy).
The leading cause of death and disability is diabetes in around 18.2 million people and diabetes also affect cats and dogs. So far incurable, there are medications and treatments to cope with diabetes (“Americans For Medical Progress”). Apparently some doctors disagree. According to UK professor Paul Furlong, animals are not human, so they are poor test subjects especially by cellular or metabolic means. It is difficult to create a similar model to people (“Pros and Cons”). Not only is animal testing time consuming, many animals are used and it is expensive, which is not worth it when 9/10 drugs fail clinical studies do not direct to people even though it helped cure an animal
Around 1975, more animal welfare groups appeared around the world and these programs challenge even using animals for horseback, testing, etc. Some other programs challenge the morality of animal use. (John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health). Animal testing should be last resort if the product can be tested on using alternative testing (Collins). There are around 50 different alternative methods for testing products. When it comes to testing alternatives, there is a system called the 3 R’s. The first is replacing a testing that uses animals, the second is reducing the uses of animals, and the third is refining a procedure to minimize animal pain when testing. Using blood donations, scientists can be used to replace the traditional “pyrogen” tests, testing that involves potentially toxic drugs. Episkin is basically artificial human skin to save rabbits from skin corrosion and irritation tests. The fish threshold method reduces the use of fish when testing chemicals. Reduced local lymph node assay, a type of sensitization test or stimulation test, for skin allergy testing that reduces 75% mice testing. 3T3 neutral red uptake phototoxicity test reduces the uses for rats when testing sunlight sensitivity (Humane Society Of The United States). Another alternative is using computer models and virtual drug trials. Microdosing is when people are given little amounts of the drug
and Europe, which include reduction of animal use, refine animal study techniques, and animal testing replacement. According to Dana ,Bidnall, “Animals are also used, and subsequently killed, every year in many other types of laboratory experiments, from military testing to simulated car crashes to deliberately introduced diseases such as AIDS and Alzheimer 's”(49). Bidnal also states that, “These experiments take place in labs at universities, pharmaceutical companies, and testing agencies, and on farms and military bases around the world”(49). The author suggest,”Researchers who conduct experiments on animals argue that it would be unethical to test substances with potentially adverse side effects on humans; animals are good surrogates because their responses are similar to humans”(49).Bidnal contends with ,”However, some animals are chosen for other reasons”(49). According to Bindal, “Animal testing is not the only option in toxicity testing”(50). Bidnal states, “Alternatives are widely available and include human clinical and epidemiological studies; experiments with cadavers, volunteers,and patients; computer simulation and mathematical models; and in vitro (test tube) tissue culture techniques, to name just a
...Because people see animal testing procedures as unethical and immoral, it’s important for them to consider what their health would be like without the process—potentially afflicted with incurable illnesses. Continuing the animal experimenting process can only prove beneficial in promoting fewer ailments and cures to existing and future diseases.
The European Union (composed of 28 European countries) and India have both banned animal testing in their countries. The European Union has stated that animal testing is unnecessary which is proven by the Food and Drug Administration proved that 92% of all products that reacted positively in animals were harmful or ineffective in humans as we are two completely different species! Albeit, keep in mind that this 92% is a part of the rare drugs that are found to be effective or even safe for animals. In addition, many people may be concerned that we may have to test out new products on humans instead of animals. The thing is that we already do. For the reason that animal testing is so unreliable, someone will have to, some time or another, be the person to test the specific drug.
Throughout history, beginning as early as 500 BC, animals have been used to test products that will later be utilized by humans (“Animal Testing” 4), what isn’t publicly discussed is the way it will leave the animals after the process is done. Many innocent rabbits, monkeys, mice, and even popular pets such as dogs are harmed during the testing application of cosmetics, medicine, perfumes, and many other consumer products (Donaldson 2). Nevertheless, there are many people whom support the scandal because "it is a legal requirement to carry out animal testing to ensure they are safe and effective” for human benefit (Drayson). The overall question here is should it even be an authorized form of experimentation in the United States, or anywhere else? The fact of the matter is that there are alternatives to remove animals out of the equation for good (“Alternatives” 1). They are cheaper, and less invasive than the maltreatment of the 26 million innocent animals that are subjected to the heartlessness of testing each year (“Animal Testing” 4). All in all, due to the harsh effects of animal testing, it should be treated as animal cruelty in today’s society.
“There can be many reason for animal cruelty, like any other form of violence, is often committed by a person who feels powerless, unnoticed, or under control of others. Some who are cruel to animals copy acts what they have seen or that have been done to them, others see harming an animal as a safe way to get revenge against--or threaten-- someone who cares about that animal”. (“Animal… Statistics”) Concerns towards abusing animals have gone up in the past. Although there are not many cases on animal abuse, many have occurred. Abusers are charged with Criminal Animal Abuse and then sentenced to life in prison. Some animals that are physically abused are sometimes rescued by Animal Control, and are taken it to an animal shelter. However, many shelters have not had the space to keep the animals so the workers would have to put them down (Carol Roach). Researchers have shown that the main animals getting abused are dogs, chickens, horses, and livestock (“Animal...
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...
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
There is alternatives without testing or torturing the animals. These non-animal methods usually take less time to complete, cost a fraction of what the animal experiments would be and they are not plagued with species differences that make extrapolation difficult of impossible. Effective, affordable, and humane research methods include studies of human populations, volunteers, and patients as well as sophisticated in vitro, genomic, and computer-modeling techniques. Companies that are exploring modern alternatives. Some companies are only using human tissues and sophisticated computer technology in the process of drug development and testing. Some companies say that discovery process is much more efficient with human tissues instead of animal tissue.
Animal testing has long played a part in the science of testing, and it still plays a very important role in the medical world. Testing on animals in order to create a cure for AIDS is one thing, but testing on animals for human vanity is another. Animal testing is used to test the safety of a product. It has kept some very unsafe substances out of the cosmetic world. However, in this day in age, animal testing is not the only way to test the safety of a product. Animal testing in cosmetics has decreased over the years. However, it is still used by many companies in America. Animal testing is not only cruel, but it is also unnecessary in today’s advanced scientific world.
Executive Summary Every 60 seconds, an animal is abused. Dogs, cats, horses, and many other types of animals are being neglected and tortured everyday, yet resulting in few and minor consequences for the perpetrators. Animal abuse is prevalent in the United States and has been an ongoing issue since the 1970's, and prior to. Society as a whole has chosen to avoid the facts and arguments about animal cruelty, because to some it is seen as acceptable and typical. It becomes much more frowned upon when people actually see the results of the cruelty, especially in the media.
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...
More advanced products have been created to replace animal testing. Products like Epiderm and Thincert can be used as a skin alternative (Rogers). Also, new computer models can predict the toxicity level of tested substances. Animals no longer have to get substances dripped in their eyes and substances rubbed into their skin. These new advances are also more reliable and more accurate than animals (OSHA).
Experimentation has been performed on animals such as rats, mice, and primates in testing various products from cosmetics to drugs. The experimentation of animals usually involves pumping a substance into the animal’s stomach or applying it to the skin and eyes; they are confined to cages and not allowed the freedom of their natural way of life. According to a report by PETA (People for Ethical Treatment of Animals),” this causes great stress and discomfort to the animals (2011).” The animals may not die, but they are scared and maimed for the rest of their lives. Practices such as this are still used today even though there are cheaper and more conclusive ways of conducting this testing; in vitro (test tube), genomic, computer modeling technique, and human volunteering. These research methods are more humane, cost effective alternatives to animal testing. “The harms to the animal conflict with perceived societal benefits that will result if ...
Animal testing is cruel and unreasonable! Animals are a total different species, then humans. What may work for humans. May cause animals' problems, or even in some cases death. Not only is testing on animals risky its cost is dramatically higher!
As pointed out by Moran and Locke (2014), “these new methods use human blood, cell lines, artificial skin or computer models to test the safety of products” (para. 3). Many companies have adapted these alternatives to reduce or even abolish using animals as experimental subjects for their products. Both Avon Products Inc. and The Colgate-Palmolive Company have reported dramatic reduction in their animal usage (Feder, 1988). Moreover, advanced replacements are claimed to be more precise, less time-consuming and more