On the other hand, it is a cruel and inhumane. The products that enhance the beauty of the human body. The foreground of cosmetic products may be worthy to use, but very few know the background of the beauty or drugs in the process of a testing product that is often used for animal testing for beauty or medical.
“The idea, as I understand it, is that fundamental truths are revealed in laboratory experiments on lower animals and are then applied to the problems of the sick patient... It is plain nonsense.” (Pickering. S. G. 2009) For example, animal testing is the way they feel pain and suffering. They do not get some food and water to inhibit the body a long time and it causes burns and painful to test the effects of treatment. Even kill them
…show more content…
If it found that the cells die or stop growth, it shows that the substance that tested it is toxic to cells. The performance test of this chip works as well. It does also know faster results. No one expects the chips to be used instead of animal testing in this early, but it helps to detect toxins reduces the mortality of the animals. Finally, animal tests cannot predict the results reliably. The researchers claim that the animal 's body structure is different from the structure of the human body. That means animal experiments cannot be trusted too much. Many medications have been tested on animals but found to be harmful to humans. In 2004, the FDA estimates that 92% of the drugs through clinical trials and research on animals fail to reach the market. Recent data indicate that the failure rate of animal research to human research may rise to 96%. “Animal tests...less predictive than tossing a coin.” (Archibald. K. 2009) For example, the sleeping pills thalidomide has been tested with rats, cats, guinea pigs that pregnancy; it found that there were no abnormalities or defects in the testing of this drug. Unless it is given in very high doses. When used with pregnant women found that serious irregularities occurred, and affects the baby up to 10,000 …show more content…
But the bad news is the effect on humans because it causes a heart attack and more than 20,000 died of a sudden heart attack. Most of the drugs tested on animals, approximately 94% found that the failure occurred in experiments with humans. More than 100 types of medicines that were invented to treat stroke can affect animals, but completely failed in humans. Including vaccines for the treatment of HIV more than 85% works well in mammals but failed in humans as well. In conclusion, I disagree with use animals for experiments because testing animals may be only a little life which was forgotten. Some species were classified as animals disgusting. But what of the animals was back with an enormous value which allows humans to develop various medical science and help humans survived a disease. It would not be wrong to say that the success of these is what is derived from experimental animals. So, it is time we should look at the lives of animals as creatures that must bear the pain instead of
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.
This research is unfair and animals in this test don’t understand anything that is going to happen to them. Furthermore, animals “suffer painful procedures and isolations”(Source A) that really impacts the way scientists are saving human lives. However if we don’t stop animal testing, we could save lives but we won’t be helping the innocent animals the could be endangered and-and almost instinct. There are also alternatives that scientist could use to see if the product they have created could impact human lives. I think that if scientist test one cell organisms they could find the result of the experiment and see what could impact the entire body of a human or an
However, the animal groups are misrepresenting the data and taking the data completely out of context. The high failure rate means that the trials are working correctly to ensure potentially dangerous medicines or those that are ineffective do not make it onto the market. The animal trials help prevent many potentially dangerous medicines from reaching the human stage of testing, and could not be done any other way without placing human subjects at undue risk. However, several animal rights groups have spun these numbers and place them in their own context in order to make the number appear to back their
“Nine out of ten drugs that pass animal studies fails in humans” (Moore 2). Many patients in the world of medicine need drugs with low risk factors. Animal experiment is becoming a thing of the past and for good reasons. The experiments are no longer answering the scientists questions, but when the products does work on animals it is never going to be hundred percent for humans. Animal experimentation is wrong because animals can register pain just like humans, the medication is not reliable, and money is lost when it is ineffective.
So, using animals is really useless because just because a drug is safe for an animal does not mean it will necessarily be accurate and safe for humans. PISC scientist Gilly Stoddard says “it is unconscionable that animals are dying as a result of the failure to update testing guidelines.” (O’Driscoll 8) Animals should not be dying because humans are using them for inaccurate tests.
The “Chicago Four” are four beagles who were freed last April and adopted by families living in the Chicago area. The four dogs were released by an animal advocacy group called the Beagle Freedom Project. These dogs were able to leave behind a life that is still a reality for thousands of other animals today. According to CBS, research labs had over two thousand dogs in the Chicago area alone (Bellware). With millions of animals in testing, the controversy over whether or not animals should be used in experiments rises.
In contrast, Bekoff mentioned around 25 million of animal models are used in invasive research annually (Bekoff, 2012). Some people are not supporting animal testing due to the suffering of unwanted pains for animal models because they think it is cruel and inhumane acts. More importantly, some are against animal testing because animal testings are providing unreliable results which is endangered human lives. In comparison, the refinement, replacement and also reduction (3R) has been introduced which the amount of animal models use in animal testings were under control. Last but not least, animal testing is very important for medical research which provide a lot of advantages for the human and also animal itself in order to solve infectious diseases that are still transmitted all over the
Although it can show what is safe and unsafe for human use, the government should not allow testing on animals because it could make the human trial more high risk. Also it is inhumane and unfair to the animal. The total number of animals killed each year from testing is 19,500,000.
Others include prevention of harm to the reproduction system or metabolism. Many animals are used to administer or apply the testing substance. Mice, rats, guinea pigs and rabbits are most familiar. However, other studies have used dogs, pigs, birds, cats, monkeys or hamsters.
There is empirical evidence showing that animal “models” are not accurate and cannot be relied upon for safety testing and disease research, therefore medical experimentation on humans is more effective in clinical trials toward the discovery of cures for human diseases the medical experimentation on animals. When talking about testing on animals and not humans, the reality stands in the way of realizing that regulatory authorities are demanding to test on at least two different animal species before a drug is entered human trials. Even with today's testing standards, the scientists who found the morning sickness drug, would not likely have detected its crippling effects when they tested on rats and mice because humans are not two-pound
Once said by Ricky Gervais, “Warning: Wearing make-up that was tested by torturing a beautiful, innocent creature makes the world an uglier place.” Cosmetic animal testing has been around for close to 80 years due to safety regulations that were implied by government. If these were really safety regulations, wouldn’t someone think that it is not safe to test on animals? Animals are animals whereas humans are humans. Using rats, dogs, or rabbits as testing subjects for mascara, perfume, shampoo, etc. is not humane at all.
The anatomic, metabolic, and cellular differences between animals and people make animals poor models for human beings. Because animal tests are so unreliable, they make those human trials all the more risky. The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has noted that 95 percent of all drugs that are shown to be safe and effective in animal tests fail in human trials because they don't work or are dangerous. Here are some of the top cosmetics brands whose products are still tested on animals—and some cruelty-free brands that you should support instead: Avon, Benefit, Clinique, Estée Lauder, Makeup Forever, Maybelline, OPI, Victoria's Secret. Because animals as distant from humans as mice and rats share many physiological and genetic similarities with humans, animal experimentation can be tremendously helpful for furthering medical science.
However, those opposed to use animals for such experiments argue that the data obtained from them is often ambiguous, and the cruelty inflicted on these creatures does not justify any positive outcome that may result, in addition, the fact that other more accurate and cost-effective methods are available to test new medications and procedures further bolsters the argument that the continuation of this practice is
When animals pass an experiment, tests still only has an 8% chance of being completely safe for humans. Thalidomide, a sleeping pill from the 1950s, was tested on animals before its commercial release. It caused over 10,00 babies to be born with severe deformities. Another example is Vioxx, which was a pill used for arthritis. Before it was quickly pulled from the market, the drug caused over 27,000 cases of heart attacks and sudden cardiac deaths.
The results of these tests include a variety of skin and eye problems such as ulcers and blindness (Product Testing: Toxic and Tragic). Animals and humans do not respond in the same way. Less than two-percent of human illnesses