According to Annamaria Bottini, “ animal tests provide their contribution, both with regard to costs and time to market and, more importantly, when wrong decisions on the efficacy and safety of lead substances are taken based on the animal tests performed in the R&D process” (Bottini 9). Moreover, Animal testing makes a astronomical difference in the development process. It can eliminate mistakes that might occur if no testing or clinical testing is done. If a mistake is not caught, it can cost a company a lot of money in going back to resolve the issue that could have been avoided in the first place. That time spent going back costs, researchers a great sum of money.
For many years scientists used animal testing guilt-free and had made many medical advances using it’s methods. However, recently there have been more studies that suggest animal cognition. People such as animal activists have been fighting this animal abuse. Activists argue for the animal’s well-being for the alternatives, but there are benefits for humans from to animal testing, many medical advances have been made with it’s help. The question that emerged was if is animal testing ethically justified.
The most plausible answer for why the animals are being tested on is a business wants to make money and if the business cosmetic is unsafe and harms one human then no one is going to want to buy another cosmetic from that business. This could leave a business with no
These people strongly believe that animals also carry rights like humans and it’s against the rights to change their DNA and genetically modify it for human use. Lastly, the people also strongly disagree with the fact that hundreds of these animals are used for clinical trial research and transgenic animals are not unlike. 2. They can be unsafe for human consumption: - The safety for the products produced by transgenic animal is no guarantee. This is true because not all experiments on transgenic animals are effective.
Animal testing - this issue is one of the most controversial issues discussed around the world today. Many argue that animal testing is inhumane, and that animals should no longer be used for the benefit of mankind. However, I can confidently argue that animal testing is, in fact, the best way to prove a product to be safe. In a survey done in the US, 99% of the active physicians thought that animal testing should be continued - for the present, it is clear that no alternative to animal testing is accurate enough to replace it. Without animal testing, we will become the subject of experiments.
PETA is a strong opponent of this research, believing that the money used to fund these experiments could be used to save animals facing the possibility of being euthanized in shelters (as opposed to undergoing viable abuse as test subjects). Restrictions concerning the execution of experiments have not been widely discussed, resulting in weak stipulations. PETA asserts that researchers must take a safer route and put their funds in trusted institutions that protect the lives of animals. In addition, doctors go to great measures to attempt to save people with genetic diseases, and many do not succeed. There are several instances where the patients die from the side effects from the formidable treatments made out of desperation and those who do survive often have mixed results.
There is different pros for animal testing, including helping researchers to find drugs and treatments, help ensure the safety of drugs, there are no other testing alternatives, and it provides an opportunity to examine a complete life cycle. “The major pro for animal testing is that it aids researchers in finding drugs and treatments to improve health and medicine. Many medical treatments have been made possible by animal testing, including cancer and HIV drugs, insulin, antibiotics, vaccines and many more” (Murnaghan). “Another important aspect to note is that animal testing helps to ensure the safety of
Animal testing is defined as “the use of non-human animals in research and development projects, especially for purposes of determining the safety of substances such as food or drugs” (“Animal Testing”). Unfortunately, some cosmetic companies treat animals unethically during testing; this brings into question whether or not the practice of animal testing can be considered ethical, or even necessary, in regards to cosmetic purposes. Those with pro-animal testing views may argue that the practice of testing cosmetics on animals is necessary for human safety, however, with modern advances in technology, there are now more options for alternatives than ever before. With support from major companies and governments, alternatives to animal testing could potentially become the standard in the near future. Those who support animal testing argue that animal testing in cosmetics is necessary to ensure that the product is safe for human use.
Nearly every medical breakthrough involves animal testing and research. Although this is true, with the technology these days improving tremendously, our doctors and scientists could use technology and their understanding of the human body to come to the results. This will surely eliminate the use and need of animals in scientific testing. I understand that there have been many medical breakthroughs when using animal research, but that still does not deny the fact that it is a waste of animals to test them and get inaccurate results. All things considered, animals should not be used for scientific testing because when they are tested most of the results are