Animal Testing is Wrong

Persuasive Paper: Animal Testing is Wrong In history, humans have used animals for testing things on. However, people forget the animals being tested on are suffering during these tests. There are ethical questions that come up when testing on animals. Many animal activists say there is no reason why a living creature should be tested on for another beings needs. Animal testing is very expensive, the animals they test on are not protected, and it is unethical. Considering that most tests that pass through animals don’t help humans. 2 out of 100 drugs that pass animal tests are either unsafe or fail in the clinical stages of testing”(“Animal Testing”). Tests that the animals pass can react differently in humans. ” And of the small percentage that are approved for human use, half are relabeled because of side effects that were not identified in animal tests”(Animal Testing). Although medical science’s favourite critters relish temperatures of a little over 30{degree}C, laboratories routinely keep them at five or ten degrees below that.

This s not in order to torture the beasts but, rather, because when kept warm they are unmanageably aggressive. The downside is that they have to eat more than they otherwise would, in order to keep their bodies warm. That changes their physiology. And that in turn alters the way they metabolise drugs, with possibly confusing results(“Be Nice”). Scientists won’t know for sure if a medicine will work in a human even if it works for the animals it was tested on. Some drugs were pulled from shelves in past years because of adverse reactions suffered by people.

Abelson comments that laboratory studies of chemicals and their use in risk assessment have not been shown to have substantiallybenefited human health”(Farland). It would be more accurate to test on humans, but we can’t without the persons consent. At some point in history humans did test on other humans. Human experimentation in Europe and the United States in the late 1800s grew in parallel with advances in science and the institutionalization of medicine. Between 1873 and 1909, the number of hospital beds in the United States increased from 0,000 (178 institutions) to 421 ,065.

During this period, it was not uncommon for scientists to use animals, hospitalized patients, children in orphanages, indigent “feeble-minded” or terminally ill patients, and soldiers without their knowledge or consent(Horner). Instead, they test on animals, such as mice and rats which are not protected under the Animal Welfare Act(AWA). This act provides the minimum protection. It lets the state enforce requirements on animal testing. Even though this act is helpful there are a lot of alternatives to animal testing.

An example of an alternative method, and one that has saved up to one million animals lives, is the ‘in vitro’ production of monoclonal antibodies, which are used in nearly every field of alternative tests are less expensive and require less time to complete. Some scientists say since they are at the top of the food chain we can do whatever we want to the lower levels of the food chain. “Because they are not protected by the law, experimentors don’t even have to provide mice and rats with pain relief”(“Animal Testing”).

This is wrong, no animal should have to go hrough the pain during sugeries. The Animal Welfare Act should make the scientists give the animals a pain medicine. Even though they are animals they still feel pain, anxiety, and other things people can feel. Even before they are tested on the animals are handled roughly which will make the animals fear the humans. Indeed, in many laboratories, animals are handled roughly??”even for routine monitoring procedures that fall outside the realm of an experimental protocol??”and this only heightens the animals’ fear and stress.

Video footage from inside laboratories shows that many nimals cower in fear every time someone walks by their cages. (Animal Testing) When an animal cowers in fear when someone passes their cage they have to be treating that animal badly. Significant fear, stress, and possibly distress are predictable cosequences of routine laboratory procedures. Although, According to Hayes, a professor of surgery and pediatrics at the USC School of Medicine, anyone who doubts the importance of animal research needs to first research any recent medical advances.

He explains that all modern forms of cancer treatment, including surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy are ased on, either entirely, or on some form, on animal experimentation. What he fails to mention is that they treat cancer, they havent cured cancer. Scientists should make every effort to study separate animals and to learn more about their abilities to feel their torture, Heffner4 psychologically and physically to understand their true feelings. While it is clear that some animal testing is important, they should focus on improving human studies rather than rely on animal studies even if they do sometimes help us.

The scientific ommunity has wasted $20 million on unsucessful animal testing. No matter where you look, there is another reason animal testing should end. Hopefully in the future, we will no longer have to depend on animals to give us results on safe products. Research has shown that human beings would rather test on animals than test on humans. Animal testing however in the end really only causes unnecessary suffering to animals. Progress based on the mistreatment of animals cannot be progress. We could also be the ones chained up and experimented on by a higher being in the future. (Word count 911)