Skincare products, chemicals, and medicines. What do all of these things have in common? The unfortunate truth is that they are all just a few of the many items that develop from cruelty towards animals. In a 2016 study done by the USDA, it was reported that over 800,000 animals were used for testing just that year, and that animal testing is on the rise. The vast majority of these animals are either harmed or die from testing every year. Why should human’s safety be their suffering, especially when this method of testing has better alternatives? According to the investigation done by The National Research Council of the U.S., there is already an efficient alternative to safely test products without involving animals. The answer to this problem …show more content…
In vitro testing is done by performing lab tests using human cells and tissues. This form of experimentation has already proven itself to be both quicker and less costly than animal testing. The "EpiDerm™" system is one method of in vitro testing that tests primarily for skin irritation. In an article from the Physicians Committee, costs between EpiDerm testing and animal testing were compared. When testing for skin corrosivity, using animals as a test subject cost nearly a thousand dollars more. This price difference is because the animals must be kept in a healthy state up until testing is performed. Shelter and food are primary costs that must be fulfilled throughout the experimentation period. Another in vitro test is "Corrositex," which tests for chemical corrosiveness. This testing claims that while animal testing can take weeks to provide results, Corrositex can take "as little as 3 minutes and no longer than 4 hours." It is stated that "one customer saved up to $50,000 annually" using this form of in vitro testing versus animal testing. Another major benefit of this method is that no animals are …show more content…
There is a belief that in animal testing there is little to no risk for humans. One massive issue that disproves this reasoning is the often forgotten fact that there are various biological differences among species. There have been several cases in which a product has been tested on an animal and had no harm recorded, but caused significant damage to humans. In 2006 an antibody known as "TGN1412" was tested on animal subjects and deemed safe. When a dosage 500 times smaller than what was given to the animal subjects were given to a handful of human volunteers, all subjects ended up in intensive care in with deathly conditions. Multi-organ failure was one outcome of this critical situation. This damaging event could have been avoided if in vitro testing was used
She sits alone in a threadbare, chilly, metal cage. Her eyes dart around wondering when the next torture will commence. If the testing fails to kill her, the stress definitely will. Entering is the doctor who plans to perform an eye irritancy test. The rabbit’s eyes will be held open with clips for at least three days if she survives that long (“Frequently Asked Questions”). Similarly, if these procedures would be performed on a human, they would be considered illegal. Yet, scientists continue to make harmless animals suffer incessantly. Annually, countless animals are abused in American test labs; however, alternative practices should be implemented in order to participate in worldwide trade, save innocent lives, and provide more accurate data.
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
“According to Humane Society International, animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force feeding, forced inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint, the infliction of burns and other wounds to study the healing process, the infliction of pain to study its effects and remedies, and "killing by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, neck-breaking, decapitation, or other means.”(Peta). Have you ever wondered if a product you own was safe to use? Did you know that millions of animals are tested on each year for the daily products you use? According to Peta, around 26 million animals are tested each year in the United States for scientific and commercial testing. Animals are used to develop medical treatments, determine the toxicity of medications, check the safety of products destined for human use, and other biomedical, commercial, and healthcare uses (Peta). Animals are harmed or sometimes even killed in this process. Animals are not the same as humans, therefore; the testing done on Animals is not helping our human society, it’s hurting the animals. There are alternative ways to performing testing rather than testing on animals.
Millions of animals are being unneedlessly tested on for cosmetics, even though there are plenty of alternatives available and most of the results are unreliable or not applicable to humans. Although the fight against animal testing has made huge progress recently, America has yet to stop this cruel practice and chooses to torture animals while other countries are making a stop to the testing (“Animal Testing 101”).
Animal testing has been used for developing and researching cures for medical conditions. For example, the polio vaccine, chemotherapy for cancer, insulin treatment for diabetes, organ transplants and blood transfusions are just some of the important advances that have come from research on animals (“Animal Testing”). Consuming animals for research benefits in developing various treatments and also benefits in discovery better methods for cures. According to the article “Animal Testing”, it says that the underlying rationale for the use of animal testing is that living organisms provide interactive, dynamic systems that scientists can observe and manipulate in order to understand normal and pathological functioning as well as the effectiveness of medical interventions. It relies on the physiological and anatomical similarities between humans and other animals (MacClellan, Joel). Meaning that animals have the same body components and features as humans and is the best thing to research on to better understand the human development. Even though several argue that animal testing is harming the animals, one has to think back to all the benefits that has come from it. There may be a little remorse for endangering animal lives, but realizing how far medicine has come makes it worth the while.
The ethics behind using animals for experiments and tests has been questioned and debated for years. Many people believe that animal experimentations can be crucial towards medical breakthroughs such as the cure for cancer, HIV/AIDS or asthma. Meanwhile others argue that animals that are used to test cosmetics such as make-up and perfumes are inhuman because is not going to help improve the human race. Animals suffer through multiple types of torture such as being forced to ingest poisonous chemicals, blinded, burned, stapled, and infected with disease viruses. Even though animal experimentation may be considered inhumane to many, animal experimentation is crucial to advancements in medical research and can lead to a better quality of life; on the other hand, animal experimentation should not be used to develop cosmetics because such experimentation is cruel and unnecessary.
The roots of animal experimentation began in the early 1600s when the world expressed in interests on the functions of animals and their uses in human life. However, it wasn’t until the incident regarding the drug thalidomide in 1960 did the government make it a requirement for drugs be tested on animals. During the incident, millions of women took the medication believing that it would be a source of relieve from morning sickness, not knowing however that it would cause irrevocable effects on their unborn children (Watson 4). Although the ruling seemed to provide a sigh of relief to some, the very idea of placing animals in strange uncomfortable environments and experiencing pain and euthanasia angered many. According to the American Anti-Vivisection Society, commonly known as AAVS, It is wrong to treat animals as objects for the purpose of scientific research, and to cause them pain and suffering (“Animal Research Is Unethical and Scientifically Unnecessary”). Although the arguments against animal experimentation seem credible, animal testing on medicines and products are necessary in order to insure the safety of human beings.
...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.
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.
It should be noted that, animals are metabolically, physiologically, and anatomically unlike from human beings, hence, the tests working on animals can surely prove to be unsuccessful in human beings (Animal Experimentation). Animals react very differently compared to human beings, and therefore, tests done on animals can be hazardous when done on human beings. In addition, even though humans and animals share a number of biological traits, they have biological differences and this is enough reason to question the data obtained from animal experiments and is to be used on humans. It is very wrong to subject animals to cruel procedures in the name of promoting the future human health and this denies them a normal life, yet they are at liberty to yet there is no prove that these tests can work well on human beings. For example, guinea pigs are used in animal experimentation, yet a guinea pig and a human being react very differently to some drugs, for instance penicillin is toxic to a guinea pig, and a cure to human beings. This proves that, any test done on a guinea pig will automatically be unsafe for human beings. Another example is that, drugs that are effective on dogs, or other animals can fail to be effective on human beings. Therefore, it is important to note that, animal testing has its
Everyday scientists perform different tests on cells (known as in vitro testing) to assess numerous concepts, such as drug efficiency and nanoparticle toxicity. Unfortunately, these tests do not always provide the best or most accurate results since the human body is composed of several different cell types, all of which interact and cause robust responses that cannot accurately be mimicked or studied with single cells. Thus, current techniques are being employed to imitate the complexity of the human body by using more than two cell lines combined together.
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 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.
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...
It still comes as a surprise to me that with all the technology in today’s society, we are still relying on animals for cosmetic research. Some people think that it is acceptable and even justified to test on mere animals rather than risk hurting people. So, for these kinds of people, animal testing makes perfect sense. However, in my opinion, animals are living creatures and have the right to live out their lives as nature intended rather than simply surviving in cages while being poked and prodded with whatever scientists fancy. I think it is depressing and sort of grotesque that I am using products that have been tested on animals that are even commonly bred as our pets. So, I began my research to find out what companies still test on animals, why they do so, and what other alternatives they could use in place of animal testing.