In Charlie 's case Algernon was able to show him what will happen to Charlie and even though he was not able to do anything about it, he was able to prepare. Doctors need to test new medications so they can see the effects before harming humans. I believe that new procedures and medications should be tested on animals and that it is worth the risk of death of animals if it will potentially save
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.
But, animal testing may not be as safe as many may have originally considered. Those in favor of testing argue that animal testing increases the longevity of humanity and is a pioneer for medical research. Opponents propose safer alternative solutions, and reveal the inhumane aspects of animal testing. But, which side has a more persuasive argument? A student Shany Sun from Lynbrook High, discusses in her article, “The truth behind animal testing,” the overall benefits associated with
Research has further assisted in the development of drugs such as insulin and penicillin. It was said in the beginning that animals would never feel pain while going through such experiments, but there have been many times where labs go against that assumption. In some labs, the aftermath of the experiments are so immoral, it’s impossible for one to think what that animal endured. As of today, labs across the world are trying to enforce the 3Rs, which are replacement, reduction, and refinement. The 3Rs is a campaign who hopes to replace animals with non-living models, reduce the number of animals begin used, and finally refine the practice of using animals according to Hajar.
Laboratory Animal Technicians In our day in age, humanity is constantly threatened by evolving viruses and diseases that could possibly wipe out our population. To combat these dangers, we create vaccinations that give our bodies a kind of shield. However, scientists can not immediately test the vaccination on humans, for there may be some undesirable side effects that make the vaccination hurt more than it helps. This is why scientists first test the vaccinations on animals. Although this practice further helps mankind stay healthy, many are against this because many companies mistreat the animals they test their products on.
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.
For many, death is not an easy topic. There are those who find the ambiguity of what occurs in the afterlife frightening and some others who fear that death will cut their lives short before they fulfill their destinies. In an almost subconscious fashion, mankind has leaned on medical technologies to help deal with the ambiguity of the afterlife. Biotechnology has emerged as the premiere form of medical technology that enables mankind to further try to resist mortality. With the development of biotechnology, people are able to fight illnesses and other harms which also help decrease their chances of dying.
Besides, smallpox disease developed into other complications even after the inoculation, such as stubby fingers, limiting joint movements etc. Due to the smallpox epidemic threat, the inoculation procedure got popular in other places and for other similar diseases. The benefits of inoculation outweighed the risks for children. Boylston figured out inoculation could produce certain type of immunity for the virus which can terminate the infection and save lives. Also, he ensured from his experiments that the inoculation process had less fatal structure of the disease in the human body.
These reasons have brought the animal rights group’s attention to criticism. The scientists and doctors treat the living beings with such disrespect, ignorance, and cruelty. They treat it as if it is a test object, but not a living being. Also, animal use cannot always be reliable and accurate. For example, many drugs that appear safe and effective in animals fail in humans, or cause significant harm and sometimes even death.
In addition, FDA has research and development efforts underway to reduce the need for animal testing and to work toward replacement of animal testing” (4). 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
My own view is that animals should not be used for medical testing because some medicine can work with animals, but we do not know how well the medicine will work on humans. Animal testing has killed millions of animals throughout time, due to the fact that they have been used for testing. It is true that animal testing has been successful on some occasions and that it has helped to improve medical treatments, but also it has been the cause of serious problems. Just because something worked on animals does not mean that it would work on humans as well. For example, the article “Animal Testing” states that “the 1950s sleeping pill thalidomide, cause thousands of babies to be born with several deformities”(Animal Testing).
Laboratory research on animals has helped researchers have a better understanding on treating illnesses such as breast cancer, brain injury, leukemia, malaria, and much more (ProCon.org). What else is the best option to test a hypothesis on other than a person. The best way to test a hypothesis is on a living organism since humans and animals both have very integrated bodies. Since testing, a drug requires a body to circulate blood throughout the body to get the full effect to be able to see the full potential of the side effects, which may include blindness, which cannot be determined on just tissue. Human and animal DNA is very similar to mice, mice are 98% genetically similar to humans and they all have the same set of organs as a human.
(“Animal Testing” 39). New York and New Jersey have similar restrictions. Since scientists continue to make great advances in alternative testing, many feel that the need for animal testing will soon be no longer needed, or tolerated. Until that day, consumers can stand up for animal rights by buying only cruelty-free products and supporting those companies who do not test on
Since it is more affordable, scientists can spend less money and use the remaining to create more drugs. According to the Argumentative Essay: Animal Testing, "There is a large supply of animals for medical research." This quote portrays that the drugs are tested on more animals, meaning that they will be more reliable. If all the animals do not have negative reactions, then the drug should be safe for human use. If some animals react badly to the drug, scientists will know that it needs to be altered.