Argumentative Essay On Animal Testing

Using animals for research subjects and testing the safety of products on them has been an extremely debatable issue for decades. Animal experimenters are very aware of this ethical problem and acknowledge that experiments should be made as humane as possible. In whichever way individuals perceive the lives of animals, the fact remains that animals are being exploited by research facilities and cosmetics companies all across the country and all around the world. Proponents of animal testing say that it has enabled the development of many life-saving treatments for both humans and animals and that there is no alternative method for researching a complete living organism. However, the pain, the suffering, and the deaths of animals are not worth the possible human benefits. Therefore, animals should not be used in research or to test the safety of products.

Many people believe that animal testing is only morally right if the animals are sacrificed to make products safer for human use and consumption. Others also believe that animal testing is justified because the lives of animals are not as important as a human life, therefore, having no rights. The problem with this reasoning is that the animals’ safety, well-being, and quality of life

The anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between animals and people make animals poor models for human beings. Paul Furlong, Professor of Clinical Neuroimaging at Aston University, states that "it's very hard to create an animal model that even equates closely to what we're trying to achieve in the human." (Increase Spend on Non-Animal Replacement Techniques, 2013). Thomas Hartung, Professor of evidence-based toxicology at Johns Hopkins University, argues for alternatives to animal testing because "we are not 70 kg rats." (Life Science Technologies: Animal-Free Toxicology,