Animal Testing in The United States

Have you ever thought about how an animal might react differently to certain studies? Can we really count on testing being done on an animal to prove whether or not it is safe for us? Millions of animals are used in the United States to be tested on every year and these testing’s are used for many things. Some of the tests used on animals establish the toxicity of a certain medication and determines whether or not a product is safe for human use. Although some might argue that animal testing has assisted in many life-saving cures and their treatments, all animal experimentation should be outlawed because it is ineffective and advances in technology have made animal testing unnecessary. Animals cannot mimic a human body simply because we are different in many ways. Therefore, animal testing is unreliable for determining the potential benefits and harms of human use.

According to the Food and Drug Administration 92% of drugs tested on animals are not good enough to determine if a drug is acceptable for human consumption, and that percentage is only increasing. This shows that animal testing’s are not practical ways of telling if it is good for human use and cannot effectively tell if a drug could be potentially dangerous for us. Animal bodies react completely different from how a human body reacts to certain things. Let’s take the 1950s sleeping pill thalidomide for example, although the pill was tested on pregnant animals, they didn’t show any birth defects unless they had a high dosage. This same pill caused severe deformities in more than 10 thousand human babies. This is telling us that many babies suffered from the mistakes of animal testing. This goes to show that what might work on an animal might not work on a human. Animal testing should be outlawed because it is proved ineffective for determining what can and cannot be harmful for humans.

It is said because of the short lifespan in animals it’s better to test products on them before it reaches the human race. Has anyone stopped to think that animals can suffer like humans do? We would never put a human through the same pain that animals go through when they are being tested on. According to the National Geographic site, animals are self-aware and can tell who their friends and enemies are. They dream of higher status, compete, and live a life in a career (in their own way), and like us, they also want to stay alive and continue their success through their children. Let’s take the gorilla Koko for example. Koko has shown that it is possible for animals to feel. She has mourned a loss that we have all mourned, the loss of Robin Williams. With Koko showing her ability to feel hurt, who is to say she doesn’t feel anything else? Yes, an animal might have a shorter life span, but does that really give us a reason to continue on with these painful tests?

Animal tests may mislead researchers into ignoring potential cures and treatments. A report on Slate.com stated that a “source of human suffering may be the dozens of promising drugs that get shelved when they cause problems in animals that may not be relevant for humans.” Just this alone is proof that we shouldn’t rely on something that cannot replicate our bodies. How many “experiments” have failed on an animal that might have worked on us? Would we ever know the real answer to that? All the facts just point to animals not being the best source on trying to identify what might work on our bodies. If people feel its okay to experiment on animals who can express feelings, then they should also be able to test on humans, but they don’t.

Let’s put ourselves in an animal’s position for a second, imagine yourself being injected with different diseases and medications. Imagine how their body reacts and how painful it can be. ProCon.org tells us that in these experiments they are forced to breath in chemicals, they’re forced to feed and/or be deprived of food, they endure neck-breaking, decapitation, and they’re purposely wounded or burned just to analyze the healing process effects of which these wounds would cause, as well as being physically drained, and being killed by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, or other means. All of these testing’s are cruel and inhumane. Would we ever put the human race through any of that? If you answered no, then why would it be ok to put another species who can feel emotion through it? Why not use alternative testing?

Alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals. As stated in the New York Times, “The methods for engineering tissue samples are created to reduce animal testing. In other cases, testing is being conducted virtually, using computers and simulation software. And for some tests, people have replaced animals.” This just proves to show that we don’t necessarily have to test an animal. There are other methods that we can use. In conclusion to everything we have discussed, we have showed why all animal experimentation (including cancer research) should be outlawed as advances in technology have made animal testing unnecessary. We have also discussed how animal testing can be detrimental on how we discover cures and treatments, and how animals can suffer like humans do, the pain we put animals through on these testing’s we wouldn’t ever put a human through. There are many things to consider when it comes to animal testing. Most importantly how harmful it can be not just to the animal but the human race as well