More handpicked essays just for you.
Reasons why animal testing is inhumane
What are the effects of animal testing on animals
Animal rights abuse in animal testing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Reasons why animal testing is inhumane
Toxicity Testing on Animals Each year million of animals die in laboratories due to animal toxicity testing. They are often tested on for household products, drugs, and cosmetics. Animal testing is cruel and wrong. They should not be tested on just for human safety. Animal rights are being violated because they do not have a choice to do anything. They should be entitled with the rights that humans have. Animals suffer in pain and it does not benefit humans. Proponents may think animal testing is right because it can save people’s lives. People have different perspectives on animals; some see them as family members others see them as another living object that does not matter. In my opinion, I believe that toxicity testing is inhumane and unnecessary. Many animals such as rats, mice, dogs, cats, birds, and monkeys are forced endure unnecessary pain due to animal testing. It is inhumane to use animals for toxicity testing because the animals are left to suffer or die after they are used. According to an online article, “some are forced to inhale toxic fumes, others are immobili...
Over 100 Million animals are burned, crippled, poisoned and abused in testing labs every year. Animals are used to test the safety of products, advance scientific research, and develop models to study disease and to develop new medical treatments, all for the sake of mankind. Animals should not be used for scientific research because animal testing is inhumane, other testing methods now exist, and animals are very different from human beings. While animal testing has led to many life-saving cures, animal testing is cruel and inhumane because it involves inflicting pain and harm on the test subject to study its effects and remedies. Testing involves physically restraining, force-feeding, and depriving animals of food and water.
Testing animals is used to develop medical treatments, determine the toxicity of medicinal drugs, check the safety of products intended for human use, and other biomedical, commercial, and healthcare roles. The earliest recordings of animal studies date back to Aristotle, who discovered the anatomical differences among animals by analyzing them (Introduction). Advocates of animal testing say that it has enabled the growth of numerous medical advancements, tests to see if new products are save for mankind, acquisition of new scientific knowledge, and because it is accurate (B). Opponents of animal testing say that it is cruel and inhumane to try out on animals, many animals die from the animal testing, it’s unethical, animals don’t have a say in it, the accuracy is in question because they are testing animals and not humans, and the toll of animal testing is high (B). Through the pros and cons of everything, it is bad to test animals because animals are very different from human beings and thus make poor test subjects and are unreliable, the cost and upkeep of it is expensive, and because there are alternatives to animal testi...
In this case we are presented with Dr. Marshall Westood who was sitting down for dinner that consisted of pufferfish and rice. Within an hour of eating his meal Dr. Marshall Westwood felt numbness to his lips and tongue, which quickly spread to his face and neck. The symptoms increasingly got worse as he began to feel pain in his stomach and throat that lead to severe vomiting. He was soon after rushed to the hospital. On the way there he experienced difficulty breathing and health care workers had to maintain a patent airway. At this point Dr. Marshal Westwood was experiencing paralysis to the upper body that included the face and the neck. His vital signs showed that he was having an irregular heartbeat. When admitted to the hospital he was given activated charcoal which helped absorbed any remnants of chemicals still present in his stomach. Within a few hours, Dr. Marshall Westwood ‘s symptoms were subsiding and his condition improved.
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
Asking just about any animal rights activists on the thoughts of animal testing, it is virtually unquestionable that the majority of them would come across the thought of some of the laws in regards to animals and how animals are “protected” by these laws. Trained scientists and researchers take on the key role of testing on animals in laboratories and facilities throughout the world. Simply in the United States alone, there are very few laws protecting animals from the unnecessary amounts of suffering the researchers force upon them with many broad exceptions. Additionally, in reference to the scientists who perform these tests, the author lists and goes into detail explaining certain associations that infrequently examine and inspect animal testing facilities to ensure that the guidelines and standards are being followed. The author then goes on to state the problems among these organizations that were originally created by the government to assess
Forensic toxicology is one of the oldest disciplines in forensic science history and dates back hundreds of years. However, the actual understanding and examination of forensic toxicology only dates back for about 200 years. Due to the development of technology, this discipline has been able to progress and flourish.
Hundreds of millions of animals lives are taken each year because of the “necessity” of testing products that don’t apply to animals whatsoever. Therefor, I hold my stance as an advocate, or being against animal testing in general. There are many advocates for this topic which is a positive aspect, but it is still happening out there. Once again I believe animals should not be tested on for products because all living things should be treated humanely, there are other ways to test products, and millions of animals are put to their death because of the
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.
According to an article by PETA, “experiments on animals are cruel, expensive and generally inapplicable to humans” (PETA 1). This shows how not only many laboratories and companies that use animals in their experiments are wasting money and time, but also wasting countless lives of animals. As a human, one does not have to suffer through unconsenting pain because no one would ever consent to be treated the way lab rats would be treated. A study done by the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that” medical treatments developed in animals rarely translated to humans” (Hackam, Redelmeier 1). This being said, it is not easy to comprehend why animal testing continues. However, as a community people think that “the benefits to humans does not justify the harm to animals” (Hajar 1). This goes to show how people who are pro-animal testing, marginalize the damage animal testing is doing to animals. While some may say that there needs to be alternative methods to animal testing, others may say that without animal testing it would be harder to test out new products for humans. Yet, with the information given by doctors Hackam and Redelmeier, it is clear to see that the use of animals is no longer
Today, millions of animals are being tested for the use of human products, causing them to fall ill and die, leaving them no choice but to be experimented on. Animal abuse can be more than what meets the eye. Specifically, animal testing is a form of animal abuse and usually ends in the death of a harmless animal. Some might say that there is no other way to test products, but due to the harm that is done and our advancements in science, animal testing should not be tolerated. Our advancements in science have enabled us to create other things that we can test on, instead of harming innocent animals.
Approximately two to four million animals have been used in safety tests. Safety tests are conducted with a wide range of chemicals and products, including drugs, vaccines, cosmetics, household cleaners, and packing materials. This raises issues such as the ethics and humaneness of deliberately poisoning animals, thus harming them, for the sake of marketing a new cosmetic or household product.
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...
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.
In acute toxicity testing animals are forced to endure repeated exposure to chemicals for up to three months. This can be to test for the effects of the chemical on organs such as the lungs, liver, heart, or nervous system. These tests cause a great deal of suffering to the animals forced to endure them due to handling, restraint, force-feeding and the horrific effects of some chemicals. Animals suffer from convulsions, seizures, paralysis and death
It is known that both human and animal have what is known as sensory tissue that acts as an alarm system for your body to warn you that damage could be caused; this means that we both feel pain. The International Association for the Study of Pain describes pain in animals as “an unpleasant sensory and emotional experience associated with actual or potential tissue damage” (The International Association for the Study of Pain). Actually, animals feel pain and react the same way as humans do when inflicted with pain, including screaming and the tightening of muscles. As stated before, when animals are subject to laboratory research or toxicity testing they face immense pain and sometimes death. One famous toxicity test is the Draize test (usually performed on rabbits) this test is infamous for the extreme pain and suffering forced upon the animals. During this test animals are restrained and the product being tested is placed in the eyes, and that animal is then monitored to see any eye damage and to ascertain the effect it would have on a human. End results usually include intense pain and blindness, this test has been chastised as a waste of time and of animal. Although the use of this test has diminished over the past few years it has not been completely eradicated. Animals are still being put through tests that apply immense pain and cause unnecessary deaths while being unable to help with human-safe products. According to Thomas Hartung, a professor of evidence-based toxicology at John Hopkins University, using rats for toxicity, for example, must not be accepted as reliable since humans are nowhere close to being 70-kilogram rats (Hartung). We may be biologically related, but size and structure and health conditions are completely different between human and animal. In fact, a recent study