There has been over a million animals that have been tested, and some have died because of the medicine they have been exposed to. If many of the animals have died, then the people that work for the hospital or the vets have to get those dogs, and get rid them. The people would have to get more animals that are nice and healthy. There are many scientists who believe their work can’t be complete without animal testing. Many people think that animals should be tested because some substances may be harmful to humans if not thoroughly tested for safety.
Frankly, animal testing is unethical on many levels. People would make a huge fuss if an animal was mistreated in the simplest way, but yet, when it comes to animal testing they protest and say it’s for the better good of the human life. I agree that striving to find new medicine to cure us is very important indeed; but why harm beautiful creatures, such as animals, to obtain uncertain cures for ourselves while there are loads of other ways to discover new
They assert that it is the best way to save a lot of people's lives by using relatively small numbers of animals. Trull says that the success of animal testing has led to safe treatments for human. Admittedly, this is certainly true about some animal testing. However, in the USA, more than 100,000 people died due to the drugs that were successfully passed by animal testing. This fact shows that even though the drugs have been developed and tested successfully on animals, they are not 100 percent safe.
The scientists have to treat all the test subject humanely because if not and someone gets hurt or dies the scientists will be responsible for the accident. Testing upon animals saves humans from having To volunteer to be tested on and possibly die from the drugs. When using animals I won't matter because compared to how many animals we kill for food the test are a small
Animal testing - this issue is one of the most controversial issues discussed around the world today. Many argue that animal testing is inhumane, and that animals should no longer be used for the benefit of mankind. However, I can confidently argue that animal testing is, in fact, the best way to prove a product to be safe. In a survey done in the US, 99% of the active physicians thought that animal testing should be continued - for the present, it is clear that no alternative to animal testing is accurate enough to replace it. Without animal testing, we will become the subject of experiments.
We need to stop makeup, cleaning products, medicine and all other chemical based products being tested on animals not only because it is horrendously cruel but there is also a huge amount of money that is wasted in the process of testing. According to most statistics, human results only agree 5-25 percent of the time which means that the process of animal testing is practically pointless as the results hardly ever benefit our knowledge of how to improve the products
However, they seem to completely neglect the fact that their pets can fall seriously ill, or have a grave accident. Since vet science advanced considerably of the last years, medical interventions for pets cost almost as much as for a person. They can amount to outrageous sums of money? People have usually a health insurance from the time they are born. But what about pets?
Most of them compare animal testing to racism or sexism. According to these activists, all animal deserve respect and should not suffer for any reason. And I agree with them because the vast majority of experiments using animals are so invasive and damaging. These poor animals do not willingly sacrifice themselves for the advancement of human welfare and new technology. Sadly, everyday animals' rights are violated when they are used in experiments because they are not given a
With today’s day and age, people have so many different and better options than animal testing. According to www.onegreenplanet.org, “clinical observation, clinical research, in vitro research with human tissue, autopsies, computer modeling, technology, human drug surveillance, epidemiology, pathology, preventive medicine ” are some ways that are an alternative to animal testing. The claim is supported by this piece of evidence, because it lists other methods besides animal testing to test new medicines and cures. Although some of these methods may be expensive, at least animals won’t get hurt. Some people may believe testing on similar working body system is a better way of getting results.
Animal Testing: Beneficial to mankind or just plainly immoral? A controversial subject such as animal testing always has strong supporting evidence coming from both sides of the metaphorical “battlefield’’, but is there really a need to choose a side? Is it possible that there is a “right” and a “wrong” argument on this topic? Testing different products (albeit medical or cosmetic) is extremely difficult to do without a suitable test subject, because when testing products for humans it is often times frowned upon when e.g. new medicine for combatting cancer is tested on a live person.