Introduction Animals testing have significantly contributed to the advancement of scientific knowledge in general and to biomedical progress specifically. Many example showing that laboratory animals in medical development and other aspects have significantly influenced human health and reduced suffering, for example improved diagnosis of infectious disease ( Hau, J., & Schapiro, S. J. 2002). But since 1960s and 1970s, animals testing protests has gained prominence and strength, people start to argue it is moral to continue “cruel” animal testing. Animal Testing is a moral act In the rest of this article, I shall apply different concept under utilitarianism try to discuss animal testing are moral acts.
Animal testing is mandatory for human existence. Animal testing helps develop life saving cures, animals also benefit from it, and some products must be tested on animals before they can be released in stores. First, according to the text, “ Animal research has also contributed to major advances in understanding and treating conditions such as breast cancer, brain injury, childhood leukemia, cystic fibrosis, malaria, multiple sclerosis, tuberculosis and many others” (Should Animals Be Used 3). These life saving cures and treatments have made life easier. Imagine how many more cures we could have with animal testing.
Procon.org reads, “If vaccines were not tested on animals, millions of animals would have died from rabies, distemper, feline leukemia, infectious hepatitis virus, tetanus, anthrax, and canine parvovirus.” The main debate over testing on animals is that people want the animals’ well being to be taken care of. It is understandable that some will sympathize with them however, if their goal was to keep an animal healthy then the best option would be to let the animal be tested on so that it can be cured. Taking away animal testing will also take away an animal’s last option in surviving. There is an argument that the animals will not be taken care of because they must go through inhumane acts in order to be tested and they would never benefit from testing. Although, this isn’t the case because there are laws that regulate how the animal should be cared for such as the Federal Animal Welfare Act.
Animal Experimentation for Medical Development The use of animals for medical research has been around for centuries, it is not a new concept and there is a deep passion for and against this practice. This topic intertwines a great deal of emotion and facts, which takes solid evidence to distinguish between the two. There is the scientific view and the view of ordinary people who challenge the morality of animal experimentation. Many of these practices have shown a negative effect on the animals used and are not for the faint hearted; however, this type of experimentation has lead to many useful vaccines and advancements for humans. Animal experimentation in the medical view is the act of testing a controlled variable on a non-human animal
Introduction Animals testing have significantly contributed to the advancement of scientific knowledge in general and to biomedical progress specifically. Many example showing that laboratory animals in medical development and other aspects have significantly influenced human health and reduced suffering, for example improved diagnosis of infectious disease (Hau, Jann, Schapiro & Steven, 2002). But since 1960s and 1970s, animals testing protests has gained prominence and strength, people start to argue is it moral to continue “cruel” animal testing. Animal Testing is a Moral Act In the rest of this article, I shall apply different concept under utilitarianism try to discuss whether animal testing are moral acts. It is important to notice that (1) in this article, applying the general idea of utilitarianism which is “the greatest happiness of greatest number” and (2) the animals testing under the rules and regulations.
Stunt research development Animal testing open doors in research of new products and medication that will significantly speed up the development in the medicine field. Drugs used to prevent and treat cancer HIV diagnosis and other serious conditions have all been tested on animals first the animal rights puts a stop on such research, risking the lives of humans in the process. Reduce risk on human
Animals are Calling Out for Help Thousands of animals across the United States are being beaten, starved, abandoned, and left to defend for themselves. Animal cruelty has become a nationwide problem in today's society. In the Public Service Announcement (PSA), "Sarah McLachlan Animal Cruelty", produced by the ASPCA, this commercial persuades the audience through pathos appeals, but the PSA's representation of the appeals of ethos and logos are showing animals in America suffering from cruelty and neglect every day. The ASPCA and spokesperson, Sarah McLachlan are trying to convey a message to the public that there is an urgent need to donate money to save the lives of animals being abused and neglected. This appeal to the ethical(ethos), emotional(pathos), and logical(logos) senses of the audience to expose the evils of animal cruelty and convey to the audience that animals are in need of help.
In addition, the IACUC cannot actually prevent the laboratories from causing suffering in animal experimentation if the scientist deems the experiment as a scientific need. This means that if the experimenters claim that the use of procedures that subject laboratory animals to pain and distress is necessary to further human health, then the IACUC will approve the experiment. This is a problem that needs to be fixed because it allows scientific experimenters to conduct any procedure that will cause suffering to the animals. This needs to change because these committees do not protect the animals, it is only a weak barrier to lessen animal suffering (Rowan).
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.
Also drugs and vaccines applied on animals fail on human clinical trails. However, Animal testing plays a vital role in a great medical advances and participate in many life-saving cures and treatments in last few centuries. Animal testing plays an important and effective role in both human health and veterinary as well . Firstly, for human health ,