Progress Without Cruelty Research Paper

Isabel Baumgarten
Liz Curry
Writing 123
Essay 1.1
April 22, 2015

Progress Without Cruelty

When many of us purchase our every day shampoo, mascara, eye drops, or lotion, we fail to think about the deadly process undergone in order to achieve that perfect product. We fail to think about the fact that over one hundred million innocent animals are killed for the sole purpose of benefiting our lives. Whether it is for medical training, experimentation, or a simple biology lesson, these brutal murders take place in laboratories across the U.S., including ones located in college or university campuses. The use of animals in university laboratories should be banned because the use of animals in university laboratories is unethical and violates many of the morals we hold as a society.
With as many laboratories that exist on college campuses, there are very few guidelines that are regulated which in turn lower the

standards in many of these labs. The Animal Welfare Act, also referred to as the AWA is the only federal law to this day that covers and protects animals regarding their use in research. In general, this act aims to regulate the animals’ care, use, and transportation. The downside of the act is that it provides the bare minimum amount of protection. It even excludes many species such as birds, rats, and mice, which take up about 90% of the total animals in laboratories. It also excludes cold-blooded animals such as reptiles and fish as well as farm-raised animals like cows and pigs, . The Animal Welfare Act also states that experiments on rodents, fish, birds, and reptiles do not have to be reported (Neavs). Overall, this just increases the chance of cruelty and places no limit on what researchers may or may not do to the animal since they have no need to document it on paper.
As a result of the processes necessary to undergo these experiments, animals are often killed in the end, but also endure intolerable pain throughout the entire experiment or process. Any aspect that these animals would receive in their natural habitat or even better yet a home, is stripped from them. Most of the time they are isolated in empty wire cages and live in isolation their entire lives. This results in extreme social and physical abnormalities as well as trauma. They are forced to be in unhealthy environments and even breathe in or swallow toxins. Scientists inject new and untested substances through inch long needles into their eyes and even strap them in devices to confine movement in order to do so. If the experiment does not go as planned or the substance or chemical being tested requires further adjustment, scientists will go as far as killing the animal right then and there. They do not think twice about it because they have gotten what they needed from the animal: confirmation that their product is either usable or unusable. Often times, these animals are simply burned alive for easy disposal or have their spinal cords smashed.
For someone to say that this treatment of any creature is ethical and should not be banned is an injustice. All humans on this earth are granted the right to a life, and animals deserve every much of that right as well. Researchers have no right to think they have the power to abuse or even end the lives of these innocent animals. Their lives should be just as respected as human lives are. William Deresiewicz states in his article, “Faulty Towers: The Crisis in Higher Education,” that “what we have in academia, in other words, is a microcosm of the American economy as a whole” (4). Just as universities across the United States are regarded as microcosms, these animals are the microcosms of scientific research that goes on in college laboratories as a whole. In the university researchers’ minds, animals are inferior to humans and lower on the evolutionary chain. Therefore, it is justifiable to abuse their lives in order to better our own.
Although many argue that it is unethical, vast majorities believe the use of animals in college laboratories should not be banned because the use of animals in laboratories does not violate the morals we hold as a society and presents us with a number of scientific benefits.

They believe that the outcomes we gain from testing on animals outweigh the harms scientists inflict on them. For them testing on lab animals is the most efficient way to know our products are safe, ready, and available for human use. Experiments are more accurate and efficient to perform on these creatures as well as more cost effective. Those who believe experimentation on animals does not violate the ethics or morals we have as a society use the justification that animals reproduce more quickly than humans. They think that just because a variety of common drugs were invented and created first experimenting on animals, we must do this for all new products. To them, it is justified because testing on non-human species will help lead us to greater advancements in medicine and

science.
Even though people who believe in the continued use of experimentation on animals attempt to justify their stances with claims such as the fact that animals reproduce on a quicker scale compared to humans, they could not be more wrong. Supporters of animal research in universities say that since animals are able to reproduce is a more timely fashion than humans, it is acceptable to cut their lives short of what they would be. For someone to say this is an injustice. For someone to claim that it is moral and ethical to abuse animals just because they are not part of the human species shows how much they care about the other inhabitants of the world we live in.
Being able to identify that experimentation on animals is wrong, immoral in every sense, and should be banned is only the beginning of the issue at hand. The next step is finding a way to actively protest this injustice and finding a way to raise awareness about the abuse the happen every day in these university labs. Companies and schools should be encouraged to use less harmful and deadly chemicals and substances. The government can also play a rather large role in the process of banning animal experimentation by offering a tax reduction for companies who do so. As a result of these companies using more natural ingredients and no longer experimenting on animals, there will also be an enormous decrease in the amount of deadly toxins flowing through our environments and ecosystems. Above all, those in support of saving animal lives should encourage the rest of campuses to purchase products that have not first been tested on animals, also knows as cruelty free products.
The use of animals in company and university research labs to test products has been a topic of debate across the U.S. for many years. There are people who grant these animals the same right to life as humans receive, as they should. However, there are also many people who stand by their stance that since they are not human, these humans are therefor inferior and it is acceptable to inflict harm and death for means of making medical or scientific advancements. Humans violate animals’ right to life when they use them in research. They are born with the same right to respectful and humane treatment as humans. However, this right is unrightfully taken away when they are subjected to experimentation. They are not given a choice on whether or not they want to participate in the experiment, they are forced to participate. No matter how much science or medicine may benefit from this testing, it is morally wrong. It causes unnecessary pain and suffering to the animals when there are plenty of alternate methods. We cannot justify the fact that executing hundreds of thousands of animals is making our lives better. They should be treated with the same respect and dignity that we treat all humans with.

Works Cited

Deresiewicz, William. “Faulty Towers: The Crisis in Higher Education.” The Nation. The Nation, 4 May 2011. Web. 21 April 2015
"Laws and Regulations." Neavs: Humane Science is Superior Science. New England Anti-Vivisection Society. Web. 20 April 2015