Animal Testing

26 million animals are used in testing a year in the US.

Animal testing: the use of non-human animals in research and development projects, esp. for purposes of determining the safety of substances such as foods or drugs. Therefore, I believe that animal testing should be banned in the US. Animal lives are no less valuable than a human’s. While we can all agree that there is a big difference between animals and humans that difference should not mean that the animal should sacrifice their life to benefit a human we should have an alternative.

We Will Write a Custom Case Study Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

First of all animal lives are no less valuable than humans. Like humans, animals protect their offspring. “In tests of potential carcinogens, subjects are given a substance every day for 2 years. Others tests involve killing pregnant animals and testing their fetuses.” This means, the mothers that are caring their precious baby our forced to go into a procedure and getting their baby stripped from them without it fully developed and not getting a say or fight.

So we shouldn’t treat them like they don’t matter because they have feelings and they are mothers and fathers too. In 2009 the humane society in the US found three hundred thirty-eight violations of the AWA (Animal Welfare Act) at a research center in Louisiana. Keeping animals in bad conditions is wrong it’s just like keeping humans in those conditions. Some animals that lack of environmental enrichment start developing neurotic type behaviors such as incessantly spinning in circles, rocking back and forth, pulling out their own fur, and even biting themselves. These animals are going crazy from being away from the outdoors and not being able to enjoy the nature that has been created and never being able to feel the wind on their face and the glorious aroma of the outdoors after the rain has fallen.

Animals have the right to be free and live their own lives like us. So their lives are just as valuable and matters just like us. Another reason is they are not humans. Even though they could be 99.9% close to humans, they are not. In the 1950s the sleeping pill called thalidomide caused birth defects in ten thousands babies.

Later on, they tested it on rodents, but no defects. This is a great example of why animals aren’t humans because if the drug works on animals has a ninety percent chance of working on them, that doesn’t necessarily mean it will work on us. “They believe that because we share similar biological processes, data obtained from animal models can be extrapolated and applied to human conditions. Although this methodology has become the norm in research labs around the world, a closer look at the data makes it clear that species who share close evolutionary relationships or anatomical similarities do not necessarily undergo the same biochemical mechanisms or physiological responses”. Just because the animal might share some similarities with us doesn’t mean the experimental drug will work on us because humans share a lot of differences that can interfere with the the drug.

“Most drugs that pass animal tests fail in the human clinical trials”. We need to stop relying on animal testing for human medical purpose firstly we don’t get a good accuracy, second not all the drugs work on us if they work on them, and third what did animals do to deserve this awful, brutal, painful, and murderous experiments. Just because they share similar variables doesn’t mean the product will work on us. So are there alternatives to animal testing? Yes, there are many, however I’m only going to focus on three. In 2014 about fourteen point eight percent (forty-six point seven million) people lived in poverty. One option would involve paying those in poverty to test out new drugs and medical procedures.

Not only would we assist the poor by providing them a continuous wage we would also develop advancement in the medical field that is more congruent to the human body making it more reliable all without wasting the lives of animals. Computer models, such as virtual reconstructions of human molecular structures, can predict the toxicity of substances without invasive experiments on animals. This is option two, using computer generated models without harming animals in the process. It’s a great tool for scientist who are using animal testing. It finds different and less harmful ways to find cures and other medical needs in the process. Around three thousandpeople are sentenced to death row in 2015.

Option 3, since the prisoners are already going to be penalized to death why don’t they died for, a) they die knowing it was for a good cause, b) because instead of being shot with a lethal injection, they get something that will help a women with cancer or someone with a horrible disease, c) because we won’t be using animals. They can use canchimpanzees, since they are the closest species to humans. Nevertheless, my point still stands because they are not an exact match, so many different complications can happen to the ending product even though they work on the chimps. Others will say that the testing finds lifesaving cures. Even though the testing might find cures, it’s still using animal lives instead of easier, safer, and nonthreatening alternatives. However people will argue that it’s essential to finding new cures.

I agree research is important, but not using animals to find it, instead looking for inexpensive new ways for finding cures. There are many ways for animal testing that should be used and idolized in the animal testing world. In conclusion animal testing is cruel, expensive, and inhumane way to finding cures and should be banned in the US. Will we benefit more by banning or looking for new alternatives in animal testing?