Scientist try to limit the harm caused in animals. The use of the three R’s which are Replacement, Reduction and Refinement. This method is just reducing animal testing. Animals and humans are biologically very similar to other mammals. So, until they find a better way of researching complex reactions in living animals will be necessary.
According to PETA’s article “Alternatives To Animal Testing”, other methods to test products would be in vitro, advanced computer- modeling techniques, and studies with human volunteers (PETA.org). Therefore, animal testing could end because researchers have other methods to test their products. Animal testing must end because it is cruel to animals, unreliable, and animals can suffer just like humans. There are several ways people can get involved to help end animal testing. One way would be to join the European Coalition to End Animal Experiment or the ECEAE.
Our argument is that we should support cloning of animals and endangered species. In my partner 's constructive speech, it brought up the fact that cloning animal models of diseases is very beneficial because then scientists can research about these diseases to make a treatment for it. Rather than using all this time for an animal to carry these diseases, in which that animal experiment may be unsuccessful. Therefore needing more time for another animal to carry that disease, which may take a very long time. Making cloning animals for diseases and making treatments for them effective.
Before he contact with this environment he don’t know how to fight. Now he is out of the wild and fight like a beast. In conclusion, one theme of this book is organisms will change their living styles based on the environment and London develops the theme by using simile and exaggeration. First,London use simile to compare the way the dogs fighting to the ways wolves fight. Secondly,London compare the way the dogs fighting to the ways wolves fight.
Is it ethically wrong to kill or injure an animal through scientific experimentation? The Care of animals should have an important chapter in the future of bioethics. Nonhuman animals have been tested in biomedical research. Scientists and researchers believe that animal testing has many benefits on different implementations, mainly for medical research as vaccines and the investigation of the cure of diseases. There have been essential advancements for the society.
Animals lives matter. Animals are an important aspect of life on earth. Animal testing can lead to animal extinction, decrease in certain species, and is all around not healthy for animals. Animals are tested on by cosmetic brands, household product brands and self care product and brands as well. Clorox, M.A.C Cosmetics, Johnson & Johnson, and many more popular brands test their products on animals.
For example chimpanzees share similar DNA with humans as well as mice which indicate that the products being tested on animals will likely be a success to humans too. Various life-saving treatments have been discovered from testing on animals and have especially served the medical field in a positive way. For example, reassuring the safety of drugs, the development of new medicine and improving health. In addition to all this these experiments it can be very expensive, have led to many animal deaths, and have gone against their rights. In conclusion, there should be a stop to animal testing because most of the time animal testing don’t meet the human standards and are being treated in a cruel and inhumane way.
Since the majority of animals used in biomedical research are killed during or after the experiments, and since many suffer during the studies, the lives and wellbeing of animals are routinely sacrificed for poor research that won’t even help find a treatment for humans. Paul Furlong, Professor of Clinical Neuroimaging at Aston University (UK), declares,"It 's very hard to create an animal model that even equates closely to what we 're trying to achieve in the human." Thomas Hartung, Professor of evidence-based toxicology at Johns Hopkins University, also joined in on the argument asking for alternatives to animal testing because "we are not 70 kg
The Animal Bill of Rights reveals both the good and bad aspects about the nature of humanity. For example, the companies in the cosmetic industry practice the Draize Test, which “involves applying a small amount of the substance under study to an animal’s eye or skin for several hours, and then observing whether or not irritation occurs over the following week or two. In most cases the animal subjects—usually albino rabbits bred for the lab—are put to death after the sometimes maiming and often painful test,” as stated the online article “Do Cosmetic Companies Still Test on Live Animals?” by Jim M. Because of the self-interest of people, animals have to undergo this kind of testing. The cruelty shown towards animals reveal the atrocious nature of mankind and the innocence of animals. Society felt compelled to act upon this and demanded for these regulations to change because of the thought that changes to this system would be morally
The practice has granted a new life to hopelessly ill patients, modified medicines and made the surgeries fruitfully creative. New alternatives to this practice are in making, but considering the rate at which doctors are fully developing them, the society is still years away from bringing up something that can totally eradicate the traditional animal experimentation. Just like every other scientific practices, animal experimentation, too, becomes a success only after many trials and errors, causing a loss of few innocent animal lives. However, those numbers do not seem as a burning concern when compared to other industries that depend on animals. According to statistics, food animals kill 56 billion animals in the USA which largely differed from the 25 million of animal experimentation (Laws and Regulations).