Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Should ànimals be used in research
Should ànimals be used in research
The benefits of testing on animals for medicine
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Should ànimals be used in research
Beginning in ancient times, animals were experimented on out of pure curiosity, and people did not understand how different systems really worked. Today, we have an undeniable understanding of the body’s functions and metabolism, proving that this practice is becoming increasingly unreliable, expensive, and above all: cruel. For centuries, innocent animals such as rats, rabbits, guinea pigs, hamsters, birds, cats, dogs, and primates have been used for man’s own selfish wants. In modernity, “an estimated 26 million animals are used and slaughtered every year due to animal research.” (“Should Animals Be Used for Scientific or Commercial Testing?”, 1). For some, animal research is the image of medical breakthroughs. For others, the mere thought brings the image of animals being locked in cages, starved, alone, and in pain. Animals’ rights are commonly ignored, and malpractice is often hidden from the public eye.Widely believed to bring medical gain, animal testing is cruel, inhumane, and costly. This practice is a flawed system that should be bypassed at all conceivable costs. Testing on animals cannot accurately predict what will work in humans. Medical breakthroughs have, in fact, happened without the use of animal testing. For every 5,000 tests used in labs, only a handful are ever deemed to be safe enough to be used in humans. Of the few that …show more content…
Alternatives to animal testing are known it be cheaper while holding the same, if not better, results. Animal research costs about $32,000 per test, while In Vitro costs around 11,000. An animal toxicity test on an animal can cost around $11,500, while the non-animal alternative will cost around only $1,300. Cancer research costs around 2 to 4 million dollars per year. Funds, both public and private, are unnecessarily dissipated on animal tests while the money could be better spent on alternatives that provide real
In modern society, animal experimentation has triggered a controversy; consequently, vast amount of protests have been initiated by the animal rights community. Although these organizations have successfully broadcast their concerns toward animal experimentation, its application continues to survive. Sally Driscoll and Laura Finley inform that there remain fifty million to one-hundred million animals that experience testing or experimentation throughout the world on a yearly basis. But despite opposition, animal experimentation, the use of experiments on animals in order to observe the effects an unknown substance has on living creatures, serves multiple purposes. Those particular purposes are: research of the living body, the testing of products, and the advancement of medicine.
Animal experimentation has always been a highly debated topic. Many have argued for the use of animal experimentation claiming that animal experimentation is the only possible way to find medical treatments to preserve human life. However, animal rights activists have argued that animal experimentation is futile and that it is unethical to use the life of an animal for experimentation without the animal’s consent. Although both sides of the debated issue present reasonable opinions, the use of animals for experimentation is the most effective form scientists have in order to find medical breakthroughs. In Jane Goodall’s essay “A Question of Ethics,” she argues that animals should not be experimented on because there are more advanced alternatives than using animal lives. In Goodall’s defence, we should not support activities
Animals are used as a part of experimentations in order to accomplish new openings. A few individuals think that it is satisfactory, while others contend that it is not moral to sacrifice animals for science. Estimated, that fifty to one hundred million of animals are used for tests in the world. Despite the significance of experiments, the quantity of animals and purpose of research are not under any control. Animals testing should be banned under a few circumstances; we can enhance the situation by using alternative ways such as replacement, reduction, and refinement according to International Society for Applied Ethology.
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...
Since experiments are cruel and expensive, “the world’s most forward-thinking scientists have moved on to develop and use methods for studying diseases and testing products that replace animals and are actually relevant to human health” (“Alternatives to Animals”). 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.
They fear that without these test subjects, humans will have no insight to what a chemical may do to them before using it. These fears though, would not be worsened by the elimination of animal testing; according to The Food and Drug Administration, about ninety-two out of a hundred drugs tested on animals, do not have the same reaction in humans. This number makes it clear that animal testing is far more destructive than it is effective. Recently, scientists have been more successful in growing cells of human body parts that can be used as a much better candidates for testing. Testing on an actual human organ rather than one that possesses some similarities clearly has a better success rate. Some of the areas these lab grown cells have majorly helped in include cancers, sepsis, kidney diseases, and AIDS. These new developments provide a logical reason to end animal testing altogether, but, many other factors also push for the end of this
“Over 1 million animals are burned, crippled, poisoned, and abused in U.S. labs” according to DoSomething.org. And although these animals may be considered protected under the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) they are still able to be tortured and mistreated in labs. On top of all this, there is absolutely no guarantee that results and data collected from these procedures are accurate. Our anatomic builds are similar in ways but not at all interchangeable. Even though it has saved lives, animal experimentation should be banned because it is not a guarantee that these procedures are done pain free and humans and animals react differently to the medicines and chemicals used.
Peter Singer, an author and philosophy professor, “argues that because animals have nervous systems and can suffer just as much as humans can, it is wrong for humans to use animals for research, food, or clothing” (Singer 17). Do animals have any rights? Is animal experimentation ethical? These are questions many struggle with day in and day out in the ongoing battle surrounding the controversial topic of animal research and testing, known as vivisection. Throughout centuries, medical research has been conducted on animals.
Animals have held an important spot in many of our lives. Some people look at animals as companions and others see them as a means of experimental research and medical advancement. With the interest to gain knowledge, physicians have dissected animals. The ethics of animal testing have always been questioned because humans do not want to think of animals on the same level as humans. Incapable of our thinking and unable to speak, animals do not deserve to be tested on by products and be conducted in experiments for our scientific improvement. Experimentation on animals is cruel, unfair, and does not have enough beneficial results to consider it essential.
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.
The deployment of animals for medical research has brought heated debates from both the proponents and opponents each holding to their views in a tight manner. Those who are in support of animal research argue that it has been constituting a vital element in the advancement of medical sciences throughout the world providing insights to various diseases, which have helped in the discovery and development of various medicines that have brought an improvement in the qualify of living of people. Such discoveries have gone so deep that but for them many would have died a premature death because no cure would have been found for the diseases that they were otherwise suffering. On the other hand, animal lovers and animal right extremists hold to the view that animal experimentation is not only necessary but also Cruel. Human kind is subjecting them to such cruelties because they are helpless and even assuming such experiments do bring in benefits, the inhuman treatment meted out to them is simply not worth such benefits. They would like measures, including enactment of legislations to put an end to using animals by the name of research. This paper takes the view there are merits in either of the arguments and takes the stand a balanced approach needs to be taken on the issue so that both the medical science does not suffer, and the animal lovers are pacified, even if not totally satisfied. The rest of the paper is organized as follows: The next section discusses both the sides by taking account the view of scholars and practitioners and the subsequent section concludes the paper by drawing vital points from the previous section to justify the stand taken in this paper....
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 ...
Every year, millions of animals experience painful, suffering and death due to results of scientific research as the effects of drugs, medical procedures, food additives, cosmetics and other chemical products. Basically, animal experimentation has played a dominant role in leading with new findings and human advantages. Animal research has had a main function in many scientific and medical advances in the past decade and is helping in the understanding of several diseases. While most people believe than animal testing is necessary, others are worried about the excessive suffering of this innocent’s creatures. The balance between the rights of animals and their use in medical research is a delicate issue with huge societal assumptions. Nowadays people are trying to understand and take in consideration these social implications based in animals rights. Even though, many people tend to disregard animals that have suffered permanent damage during experimentation time. Many people try to misunderstand the nature of life that animals just have, and are unable to consider the actual laboratory procedures and techniques that these creatures tend to be submitted. Animal experimentation must be excluded because it is an inhumane way of treat animals, it is unethical, and exist safer ways to test products without painful test.
Although animal experimentation seems cruel, it serves many purposes. It’s been around for so many centuries, many ways that it’s taking ways. So it’s always been a part of us which just improves us. Animal experimentation is very beneficial to the human race, for it has helped us find new ways to get rid of diseases, it has given us access to medicines that could not have been obtained without the help of animal experimentation and continues to benefit us in finding much more about ourselves.
More than 40 non-animal tests have been validated for use, and these modern alternatives can offer results that are more relevant to people, often more cheaply and quickly, too. That’s because advanced non-animal tests represent the very latest techniques that science has to offer, replacing outdated animal tests that have been around for many decades and haven’t stood the test of time. (hsi.org, p.1).