Is Animal Testing Necessary Essay

Is Animal Testing Really Necessary?
Imagine a pet, or even a younger sibling, was being tested on, abused, and taunted. Many pets are considered apart of the family. What is enough? Who is going to put a stop to this? What extent should someone go to to protect their family, or even stop it all? While people think it is "okay" to kill animals if it betters the life of humans, it is not okay to abuse or kill animals for experimentations, because animals are living creatures, deserve rights, and the testing rarely benefits since animals do not have the same diseases as humans.
There is no need to risk the lives of innocent animals, since there are advanced scientists who have created reliable, non-animal, methods to test the exact same things.

The non-animal methods are cheaper, faster, and more accurate. There is no reason at all that we should have to test on animals. There is no excuse for the things we put animals through, with no apparent reason. Most of the things that are tested on animals are not reliable anyways. Less that 2% of diseases in humans are found in animals, and a healthy animal will react in a different way than a sick human.

That makes the tests unnecessary and cruel.
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.
In a 2008 study in the journal Alternatives to Laboratory Animals shows that over 80 HIV/AIDS vaccines that worked in nonhuman primates were unsuccessful in human trials. In a 2004 study in the journal Stroke, over 4,000 studies report the intended result of more than 700 treatments of stroke in animal models. Although, none of the approximately 150 of these treatments tested in humans showed clinical benefit. This was recorded in a 2005 paper in the International Journal of Neuroprotection and

Neuroregeneration. Drugs that were supposed to reduce inflammation in critically ill patients, previously tested in mice, failed in nearly 150 human critical trials according to a 2013 study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 92% of drugs that are passed through animal testing, immediately fail when tried on humans. Less than 2%, or to be exact 1.16%, of human illness are seen in animals. Over 98% never affect animals. Over 100 million animals are burned, crippled, poisoned, or abused in US labs every year from experimentations that are unnecessary. There is a test they do in animals where they inject a potential cancer-causing substance into a primate every 2 years, some even inject the substance into pregnant animals and then test the unborn child. Several cosmetic tests mostly performed on mice, rats, rabbits, and guinea pigs include: skin and eye irritation tests where chemicals are rubbed on shaved skin or dripped into the eyes without any pain relief. Any lab that uses mice, rats, birds, reptiles, and amphibians for experimentations are not required by the AWA (Animal Welfare Act) to give the animals any protection or care. Even when there are better alternatives for these innocent animals, they are not required by law to take that type of action. They can do the more harmful experimentation just because they want to. 90% of the animals that are tested on are not counted in the official statistics on animal testing. Ingrid Newkirk, cofounder of PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) said in 1989, “There is no rational basis separating out the human animal. A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy.” That means that they are testing on uncertified animals. Animals that are not meant for that kind of experimentation. These studies are not only inaccurate, but they are giving people false hope.
Animals suffer just as much as humans do. Why do we think it is okay for them to suffer, but not ourselves. There are alternative tests that replace, reduce, and refine. They replace a procedure that uses animals with a procedure that does not. They reduce the number of animals used in a procedure. They refine a procedure to lower animal pain. They are heartless in these tests. They cause pain on them, and then do not give them anything to make them feel better. They do more hurt than good. So, why do we think it is okay to not do any of the alternatives? Is hurting animals fun for some of these people who make these decisions?
Animal testing is pointless. Less than 2% of human illness is shown in animals. Even when they “need” to test certain things, it would not show up in humans the same as it would in animals. We would be fine without animal experimentation. It is cruel and unnecessary. No one and nothing deserves to be tested on. The strong preys on the weak.
“Mice are mice, and people are people. If we look to the mouse to model every aspect of the disease for man, and to model cures, we’re just wasting our time.” -Dr. Clif Barry (Chief of Tuberculosis Research Section, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease)