Furthermore, the advantages gained from captivity of primates, for research and educational purposes, are extensive. If we were to give primates basic human rights, we would have to release them from confinement under all circumstance, including zoos, sanctuaries, and laboratories. Animal testing and research has lead to many great discoveries, including treatments for AIDs and cancer, it is a huge factor of how we got to be as advanced of a society as we are today. It is also crucial in regards to transplant surgery, cardiac surgery, and joint replacements- as well as vaccinations. Primates are very similar to humans, they are able to display basic emotions (i.e. sadness, joy, anger) and share much of the same DNA (i.e. Great Apes are made up of 97% of matching genes.)
According to procon.org, “Evaluating a drug for side effects requires a circulatory system to carry the medicine to different organs.” This means in order to find accurate results we would need something that is living, breathing, and has a system which includes organs, blood vessels, lymph, etc. Besides humans, the only other option are animals. It would be unrealistic to not use animals because it would be impossible to advance in medicine without some sort of experimentation. Keeping animals from being tested is one thing but never being able to progress with modern day treatments is an even worse sacrifice.
Mistreating animals as if one does not care for them is the same as mistreating humans. By mistreating poor doubtless animals it affects them and can sometimes lead into suffering stress. If humans are able to protect each other from harm, then why cannot animals do the same thing by having rights? This question is usefully asked for those who try to protect the rights of animals. In the article Of Primates and Personhood the author Ed Yong, a science journalist, contends, “I feel we should extend rights to a wide range of nonhuman animals… ‘all creatures that can feel pain should have a basic moral status’”
Makeup companies should not be granted permission to test on animals. Cosmetic companies continue to test makeup on many different animals all over the world. Although cosmetic testing is banned in a few countries, most major countries continue to test products on animals. There are much more beneficial ways to ensure that makeup products are safe to use. Makeup companies waste time and money into animal testing.
How Similar Are We? How close to human knowledge do you think animals are? In the book, Planet of the Apes and Philosophy edited by John Huss, it contains several philosophical views on the movie Planet of the Apes. Animals may be limited on what they may do with their brains, but that does not mean that animals cannot do things that humans can with their brains. How do people know that animals cannot think; if they do not have a way to communicate, how would they then interact?
Both do not possess the ability to think rationally. But to make any of them suffer means doing wrong against him or her even if no other humans with sense of justice would be upset if they suffered. If torturing people like them is wrong, so should torturing animals be. Therefore, whatever ethical theory that is rationally accepted would at least recognize that people have some direct duties to animals just as they have to each other. The direct duty view is separated into two views.
After all, the quote given proves that clones usually have a chance of dying faster than a normal human or animal would. So, this is one reason why people should not clone animals and humans. Another reason, people should not clone animals and humans is because
Animals have the same ability to suffer as human do. The absent of cognitive ability, language, or moral judgement cannot become the reasons why they should be discriminated (Singer, 2009). Some says that animals cannot respect our rights, therefore we should not grant rights to them. This makes a typical example of equality and equity cases as it is well known that animals do not have the same cognitive ability as human do, yet we expect them to behave like human. For example, children also do not
Furthermore, animals have different demands, wants and needs compared to humans as they are different species that live under different conditions, where humans do not know what the animals want as there is no communication between the animals and humans. Therefore, each species should have a different type of lifestyle and different rights, so the authors argument towards animals and humans having similar rights is irrational. In addition, the authors are against the property of animals by humans yet have six dogs as pets which make them hypocritical since these pets are considered their property. They cannot set an example towards the issue they are discussing, which is the rights of animals not to be property, when they are going against their own argument by having six animals as their
If some countries have come up with the idea to take care of animals and have made even groups and organizations against animal abuse why do, they inhumanly abuse animals for testing. Experimental tests on animals its something unessential, and what if results are erroneous and in animals works perfect and on human results badly. As well, we know that the human body its pretty similar to an animal's body. Some doctors say that animal testing can slow down he results for a research or for a product.
People say that if u test on the animals nobody would care if they died. The also say that it won’t harm the animals but it really does. Some people also say that animal testing is bad because of the danger you are putting the animals in. The animals are going extinct because of the testing.
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
The closest thing that scientists have to a circulatory system are animals, unless humans are willing to sacrifice their life for a simple scientific cause. Another way to test on besides animal testing is through computer models but according to the California Biomedical Research Association “Computer models can only be reliable if accurate information gleaned from animal research is used to build the models in the first place”. In other words they still need to test on animals (not much, but very little) to create the model they need to test on. Furthermore, the California Biomedical Research Association also stated that “Even the most powerful,
The article, “Of Primates and Personhood: Will According Rights and “Dignity” to Nonhuman Organisms Halt Research?” by Ed Yong is trying to convince the reader to see a different side to primates. The Great Ape Project set legal rights for chimpanzees, gorillas, bonobos, and orangutan. United Kingdom and New Zealand protect great apes from experimentation. For the Great Ape Project they are basically setting laws and higher standards for primates to me experimented on or held captive.
Some of these experiments would never be used because some of them do not work or they are too dangerous for human use, but still the animals used those experiments would die. Also, animals are not used only for medical testing, it should not be done because medical testing at least had help us improving medical treatments, but cosmetic testing and other kinds of products like detergent does not. Animals should not be used to test these kind of products because this only harm the animals and does not leave us with anything that would truly help to improve our living conditions, the thing it does is to torture a lot of