Animal Testing Summary

563 Words3 Pages
The author of this article, Arthur Allen, is also the author of The Fantastic Laboratory of Dr. Weigl, Ripe, and Vaccine. He is a health writer and editor at Politico. This article was written to voice the concern mainly about the ineffectiveness of animal testing. It lists multiple causes and events that have failed because of unreasonable animal testing. This source exposes how wrong it is to carry out tests on animals when their bodies are nowhere as developed as us humans, and thus proving that the tests being carried out are just causing harm without purpose. This article is relevant to my project because the author’s main purpose was to show how irrelevant animal testing are due to the impending failure rates. It does briefly talk about…show more content…
Through research, outreach, education, legislation, and policy change, NEAVS advocates for replacing animals with modern alternatives that are ethically, humanely, and scientifically superior. This article was written to inform and persuade those who are using animals as test subjects that there are many alternatives available, which are more effective and more reliable than animal testing. The article mentions several different alternative methods that can be used as opposed to animal testing. It mentions that in-vitro testing isn’t the only form of non-animal alternative testing that exists, as most commonly thought. It also gives multiple cases where animal testing was strictly unreliable and caused great mishaps among many communities relying on this treacherousness. This article discusses several benefits that arise from using non-animal testing methods, including the reliability, accuracy, and cost-friendly. The most important aspect mentioned is that alternative measures are cruelty-free, therefore no animals need to be hurt. This source gives some insight on the history of how the U.S. government has gotten involved in the issue of animal testing, but has not taken any real actions in preventing any harm to the animals. This source pinpoints exact companies and their involvement in funding animal testing. Specifically, it targets the National Institutes of Health (NIH). A particular section mentions the fact that in 2010, approximately 40% of NIH-funded grants and contracts involved animal research despite the continuing evidence of the failures of animal testing. The author involves these statistics to show that even though the rate of the effectiveness of animal testing is declining, companies are still wasting money when that funding could be used

More about Animal Testing Summary

Open Document