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. It is important to notice that (1)
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 ,
Although the idea of testing with animals may sound horrible, animal testing is extremely necessary to keep developing new medicines, and treatments. The benefits of animal testing outweigh the cons of hurting animals for our own wellbeing. These benefits include, many long found treatments and cures that has helped many people throughout the years. Animal testing is also the only way that scientists can properly test on. And lastly, whether many people believe it or not it also benefits animals as well.
Medical and cosmetic animal testing has been a very controversial topic for a long time. Many people seem mortified at pictures of disfigured bunnies, cats, and monkeys that are disfigured due to animal testing, but are fine with buying milk at the store that came from a cow that was given hormones, causing its udders to be painfully swollen. People are fine with chickens being kept in a wire cage their entire lives, causing painful lacerations to their feet, before being brutally slaughtered. For some reason however, people get upset about the same kind of treatment to animals even when this "abuse" is leading to the fast advancement of medical treatments. Animal testing has contributed to many life saving cures and treatments.
There is much controversy over whether or not animals should be used to test new procedures and medications. I personally believe that animal testing is crucial to scientific development. Every life lost is a tragedy but as seen in the story, Flowers for Algernon, by Daniel Keys, it will help us determine what will happen to a human test subjects without human losses. In this essay I will support my belief that animal research is important to human survival and is worth the risk. Animal research has played a vital part in nearly every medical breakthrough over the last decade.
In this paper, I will be making an argument about why animal testing is a good thing for humans to have for the sake of products. Animal testing has caused a great relief of pain and suffering to humans. It has been the foundation of humans finding curves for diseases and then being able to treat those diseases. Animal testing makes it possible for humans to develop new drugs and vaccines. Personally, I stand for the use of animal testing as a beneficiary of science and human products.
It also may be claimed by animal rights activists that the only important factor is that animal testing harms living creatures, but the only other option is to harm humans. Andre and Velasquez pointed out that “While we may have a duty to not cause animals needless suffering when we are faced with a choice between the welfare of humans and the welfare of animals, it is with humans that our moral obligation lies” (7). Though animal testing is not the most popular