Animal Testing Argumentative

We live in a world in which people don’t appreciate great things like animals, plants, sea, land, all wonderful and glorious, that was created by God. People call animals as “our smaller brothers”, but then why do people so cruelly and inhumanly treat them? Animals have been studied since the ancient Greeks to advance human knowledge. Today, animals are used in laboratory research studying cosmetics, drugs, household products and equipment. Animal experimentation and dissection also take place in schools and universities. According to J. Ortiz (2012), “every year about 115 million animals are used for different tests and experiments worldwide, and 60-70 million of them are killed, burned, poisoned, etc.” Aren’t you frightened by these figures? Is this really necessary? So, this topic is hotly debated and widely employed for a long time. There are three groups of people formed due to this scientific research using animals.

The first group is for animal testing, the second against and lastly a group of neutral people, who show no interest. In 2010 opinion poll was carried out in America and Australia, where animal testing is performed most. So, 73% of surveyed persons want to ban experiments conducted on animals since they consider such experimenting unethical. There are opinions that animals shouldn’t be used in testing, because it’s cruel and unnecessary. However, there are those who believe that animal testing will discover new ways to help people and other animals in the future. Firstly, animals shouldn’t be used in different experiments because of the unnecessary pain that people do to them. Animals are like a soft target for human beings.

It’s however, not fair to take undue advantage of their helplessness. It should be understood that a monkey or a mouse would experience the same amount of pain that human beings would do, on being made to undergo painful procedures. Animals can feel exactly what humans feel, the only difference is that they follow their instinct while we follow our desires. According to the Animal Welfare Association (2012), “approximate number of animals that experience pain is 31%, animals that experience no pain makes 6%, animals euthanized to avoid pain is 61%”. In addition, The British Union against Vivisection (2002) claims that “75% of animals experimented on are given no anaesthetic”. Moreover, animals used for testing, are often deprived of food, water and sleep. Also animals suffer from the experiments, as they can’t say no. Imagine not having a choice and being used for testing… For everyone this seems like a horrible nightmare, but for animals this nightmare is reality. What if you weren’t able to say no about being tested on? That’s how animals feel because they have no voice.

This is unfair to the animals because they don’t have a choice. For example, animals can’t talk, so the decision on whether or not to be tested on is already made for them. Yang (2009) also consider, that animal testing is inhumanly and unethically. He wrote: “Animals are cut open, poisoned and put into cages for weeks, month, or even year”. Sometimes animals get things, that don’t belong to their bodies. People put into them just to see how they react. They aren’t asked whether or not they can put these things into them. Animals are innocent and they aren’t able to resist from any means of suffering. Just try to put yourself on their place and you will understand how it’s terrible. The second reason against animal testing is that animals and human beings are not similar to each other biologically. BUAV ( n.d.) informed that: “Because animals don’t get many of the diseases we do, such as heart disease, many types of cancer, HIV, Parkinson’s disease, schizophrenia and so on, they have to be artificially induced. This can involve some cruel practices, such as brain damaging, surgery, injection with toxic chemicals or infected tissue from other animals.

Anyway the diseases the animals get are not the same as the human disease. Only 2% of human diseases are recorded inside of the animal kingdom”. One more argument in support of banning animal testing is that humans and animals have different DNA. Furthermore, sometimes an experiment on animals gives the wrong result because animals’ bodies are not exactly the same as our own. According to Mike Levitt (2011), “Currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies.”. When the results of animal tests have been compared to what we see in humans, the results are very poor. For example, BUAV (2012) reports that “over 85 HIV/AIDS vaccines have been shown to work in monkeys, but to date none of these have worked in human trials”.

The third thing that also needs to be said is that we have many alternatives to animal testing. There is a huge range of non-animal research techniques that can also be cheaper, quicker and more effective. Alternative methods have been developed as solutions to problems caused by animal testing. There are almost 400 known alternatives for animal testing being considered. But Haris Amin (n.d.) pointed out that “Nowadays there are three major methods which have been successfully used in experiments. They are computer simulation method, cell culture technique, and microfluidic system. These methods provide more accurate results than animal testing does. Also, these methods don’t need animals in their implementation”. As a result, there is no animal abuse and cold-blood killing of animals involved. Both humans and animals are benefited by using these alternative methods, so a win-win situation can be obtained. Medicine manufacturers can get more credible results in producing their products and help more unhealthy people, while animals can be freed from physical and mental pain caused by animal abuse during medicine testing.

Anti-animal testing scientists believe that these three alternative methods have a good prospect and will give much greater contribution than animal testing does to medicine industry (“Animal Testing: Is Animal Testing Ethically Incorrect?”, 2011). Currently, not enough money is put into researching more alternatives. For example, as BUAV reports (2012), “in 2007 the UK government funded alternatives projects with 2.6 million dollars, however the same year they provided general biomedical research with funding of 643 million dollars.” Dr. Gill Langley (2011) writes that “From my knowledge of the scientific community, I know that it is partly indifference – and partly a fear of new developments. Some scientists simply find it too much bother to change techniques, or dismiss humane methods before they are fully developed.”. Some scientists seem to like doing research that leads to more questions because this means more work for them to do, because there is a common perception that researchers wouldn’t do animal research unless they really needed to, their studies go unchallenged.

On the other hand, others consider that benefits of animal testing outweigh any harm caused. Firstly, animals have a greater population than humans. No accurate count could possibly be made, but population of all animals in the world certainly exceeds 7 billion. Secondly, every day thousands of people are saved from painful diseases and death by powerful medical drugs and treatments. Majority of scientists consider that this incredible gift of medicine would not be possible without animal testing.(“Animal Testing: Harmful or Logical?”, 2012). It is true that when every member in our family is hale and hearty, it is very difficult to comprehend why innocent animals are used for testing purposes. Our heart goes out for these tiny creatures, who have no idea what’s happening to them. They are being sacrificed for our sake! However, the same person understands the significance of animal testing, when his or her loved one gets struck by a life-threatening disease. Then animal testing doesn’t seem to be a large price to pay. Every person wants is for his or her loved one to live longer.

This response or change of attitude is normal, since it is difficult to compare the importance of human life over animal life. Also, using animals in scientific experiments has led to many discoveries that have improved human quality of life. Advocates of animal testing say that the benefits far outweigh the costs. Using animals in experimentation has led to the creation of vaccines, antibiotics, therapies, surgical techniques and medications, saving and improving lives around the world. It is argued that experimenting on live animals produces more accurate and practical results than experimenting on cell cultures. To sum everything up, I have found animal testing to be cruel and wrong. We consider ourselves as humanist society and we can’t let this continue, but we do. We have progressed, scientifically and ethically, beyond the need for animal test subjects.

For almost two hundred years of implementation in medicine industry, animal testing has helped countless people regain their health back indirectly by ensuring the safety and function of medicines they use. On the other hand, innumerous animals have been sacrificed and suffering from animal abuse during medicine testing. This situation is very unfair. While humans are cured, animals are slaughtered. We must acknowledge that animals are not only properties which are made by God to serve human. They are similar to human: they also have feelings, consciousness and rights which are needed to be protected. To continue using animals as test subjects is both impractical and immoral, and animal experimentation should be stopped as soon as possible. Though the information in the above paragraph give a strong argument I still believe that people should stop using animals in terrible experiments and tests.

References:
Animal testing (April 20, 2013), Retrieved May 29, 2013 from Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_testingRanjan Shandilya ( December 16, 2011), “Animal Testing Pros” Retrieved May 29, 2013 from http://www.buzzle.com/articles/animal-testing-pros.htmlDaniel DeNoon (July 9, 2003), Health Feature. Diseases from Animals: a Primer Retrieved May 29, 2013 from http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=52173Institute for Laboratory Animal Research (1991), Science, Medicine, and Animals. Why are animals used in research? Retrieved May 29, 2013 from http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10089&page=4ASPCA kids (2012), Real Issues. Animal Testing Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://www.aspca.org/aspcakids/real-issues/animal-testing.aspxJoan Ortiz (October 10, 2012), Animal Testing : Harmful or Logical? Retrieved May 30, 2013 from http://prezi.com/c-dhhod5puec/animal-testing-harmful-or-logical/Animal Welfare Association (July 24, 2012), Animal Testing Statistics Retrieved May 29, 2013 from http://www.statisticbrain.com/animal-testing-statistics/American Anti-Vivisection Society (2013), Animal Research. Animals Used in Research Retrieved May 31, 2013 from http://www.aavs.org/site/c.bkLTKfOSLhK6E/b.6455835/k.71E1/Animal_Research_Background.htm#.UajLW4tqgrkDr Penny Hawkins (July, 2012), Animal Testing
Retrieved May 31, 2013 from http://www.politics.co.uk/reference/animal-testingBritish Union for the Abolition of Vivisection (2012), What is wrong with animal experiments? Retrieved May 31, 2013 from http://www.buav.org/_lib/userfiles/files/Guides/BUAV_SchoolsGuide.pdfPeople for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (2012), Animals used for experiments. Alternatives to Animal Testing Retrieved June 7, 2013 from http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/alternatives-to-animal-testing.aspx