The Pros And Cons Of Animal Testing

Even though it has the potential assets, animal testing is not truly accurate, it harms animals immensely, and there are superior options. It is not expected that each individual in the world would join the organization PETA, however, if greater lengths like considering what products they use are tested on animals, the world of animal testing could come to a close. Additionally, simply donating to an animal experimentation prevention organization like PETA could do wonders for the animal movement. Together, the world can restore the safety of animals and ban animal experimentation all around the

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. To add to this, not only do animals have to be treated well because of the laws but also because they would make inaccurate results otherwise. Procon.org argues, “stressed or crowded animals produce unreliable research results.” This means that the scientists have no choice but to make sure the animals are well taken care

Most people are misled on the validity and relevance of the method presented as there is a lack of awareness on the ineffectiveness of animal experimentations.Thus, they express such act as a necessity to the advancement of medical science. In reality, these test provide little progress to the wellbeing of humans as the majority of test results are unsuitable. Therefore, the use of animals for medical testing is unethical, inaccurate, and also there are more than enough technology to resort to rather than animals, especially at this day and

For example, “cell-based methods, next-generation sequencing and ‘omics technologies and computational modelling techniques” assert to the extinct of animal testing (Burden, Natalie, Fiona Sewell, and Kathryn Chapman, 2). The amount of animals lives lost are not justified due to new alternatives. Human products should not be tested on animals because of genetic differences. Humans are animals. But are animals human?

Many different species of animal are used for animal testing some common ones include mice, fish, rats, rabbits, guinea pigs, and hamsters. One of the reasons why some people believe that animal testing is beneficial is because it uses animals that are a close match to humans, this however is not true. Animal cell structures and human cell structures are not alike, and therefore animals make poor test subjects. The majority of animal tests do not contribute to safer makeup products. Animal testing does not have a value in reassuring the safety of makeup products and it has been proven that computers and new modern technology can be more

Those products aren’t like the ones we use, they have different types of chemicals and they try them on the animals to see if it will affect us. Animals testing should not occur because killing an animal is not helping us It’s messing up the world. Animals aren’t something that we could manipulate they are living creatures that have feelings just like us. Humans wouldn’t like to be in cages or laboratories right? Animal testing is cruel because scientists do many horrible tests on the animals.

They hold that “Pain is an intrinsic evil, and any action that causes pain to another creature is simply not morally permissible” (Source B). “[Animals in laboratories] are almost always subjected to isolation, depression, and anxiety” (Source F). These people believe that animal research is an aberration and should be ended immediately. While there does lie credibility in that animals should not forcibly be made to suffer, that does not mean that the solution is to get rid of animal research completely. There is reasonable logic as to why scientists prefer this method above all others.

Bill #2 General Debate Pro- I am in strong support of this bill because animal testing is a dated and cruel method. The anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between animals and people make animals poor models for human beings.The entire concept of animal testing is based on the fact that the discoveries found when an innocent animal is tested on can be applied to human beings. Thomas Hartung, Professor of evidence-based toxicology at Johns Hopkins University, argues for alternatives to animal testing because "we are not 70 kg rats.” Humane Society International compared a variety of animal tests with their in vitro counterparts. An "unscheduled DNA synthesis" animal test costs $32,000 while the in vitro alternative costs $11,000. A "rat phototoxicity test" costs $11,500, whereas the non-animal equivalent costs $1,300.

People still support animal testing even through there are other better ways to test cosmetics and drugs that don’t hurt any living being. Animal testing is unethical to the animals and isn’t as effective as other materials we have access to. Animal testing brings millions of animals a world of pain. It’s cruel and unethical to sentence millions of living and breathing animals to a life of torture and pain. And according to a Listland article, animals used for animal testing aren’t even protected by the animal welfare act, a act that protects research animals from harm.

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).