Animal Testing, Research Paper Example

More than four million animals are killed and tortured each year due to their use in laboratory experiments (Ferdowsian & Beck 1). Generally, these animals are used to test the toxicity of substances or investigate the effect of human diseases in addition to possible solutions. However, many people believe that this practice is unethical because it is essentially destroying the lives of animals to support the lives of humans. These individuals believe that humans do not have the right to decide which lives are valuable and which are not. Animal testing is unethical because it allows animals to be treated in a cruel manner that is often unnecessary for the types of experiments being performed. Therefore, animal testing should be made illegal due to the unnecessary harm that it brings to animals, accompanied by a lack of clear benefit to humans.

Animals have been used to explore the nature of human disease in an attempt to eradicate these illnesses from humanity. However, in many cases, such attempts have been highly ineffective because animals do not always function as ideal disease models for human disease. HIV/AIDS is an example of a disease that scientists have used animals as models to study for decades. While scientists now have a better understanding of this virus, a lot of the work that contributed to these successes were in vitro, meaning that they were conducted outside of the body in test tubes. Although many animals have died either from the HIV infection in these experiments or have been put to death by scientists when their use was completed, there is still no cure or highly effective treatment for AIDS. Thus, it is important to consider the alternative approaches to AIDS prevention rather than those that use animals. Preventing the disease is the most effective way to protect human life, given the failures of biotechnology. Utilizing the funds that are now used to finance the death and torture of laboratory animals would therefore be better used to advocate for disease prevention and to conduct more effective experiments without the use of animals.

Outlawing animal research would lead to the development of better medical advances and superior technologies because human systems would be the primary focus of research instead. It is argued that cellular and clinical research would have been developed more carefully and respectfully through this means, rather than contribute the existing black hole of knowledge that is present from focusing exclusively on animal research. Animals used as models for research have body systems that are similar to humans, but not identical, leading to false conclusions occasionally being drawn from animal studies. For example, scientists against the use of animal research believe that disease specific mechanisms between the human and model organisms can occasionally differ (MacLeod 1). These professionals are also worried about the accuracy of such published studies because they may contain bias. Thus, it is important to consider that for animal research to work, it must be conducted in a manner that assumes differences between humans and the model organisms being used. In many cases, this is not possible, which prevents animal scientists from being able to gain reasonable results that allow for the existence of meaningful studies.

The issue of animal rights versus the need to use animals for research to save human life has become a legal matter as well as an ethical one. In particular, the medical research that deployed animals and humans in research at the beginning of the nineteenth century had led to litigation (Ferdowsian & Beck 1). Laws were put in place to prevent unethical research in humans, requiring that researchers and medical professionals apply the concepts of justice, beneficence, and respect in practice. By the same token, laws were established to protect animals used in research projects in the U.S. and Britain. As a consequence of these laws, scientists tend to prefer to use smaller model organisms due to the fear of litigation. Animal rights activists argue that the protections that were put in place for animals were not enough and it is apparent that it is unethical to experiment on animals, who have no legal or physical defense in our society. As long as there is a possibility to use animals for experiments, scientists will continue to do so despite the lack of evidence against their use. Thus, it is necessary to make their use illegal to put an end to this carnage.

Animal research fails to recognize the cognition and emotions of animals used in experiments. It is imperative to note that animal sentience is currently understood better now than it had been decades ago (Greek & Greek 9). It is essential to note that animals are able to perceive distress and pain. Furthermore, experimentation deprives animals of their fundamental psychological needs, causes an increase of diseases in these populations, and uses cruel invasive procedures. These are potential causes of harm that scientists overlook when dealing with animals in research. Many regulations are currently present in laboratories across the country to ensure that animals will be treated ethically, but there is a need to strengthen the enforcement of these laws (Macleod 1). As long as animals suffer harm, it is not appropriate to continue conducting animal testing and related research.

Animals experience pain and suffering in the same manner that humans experience these senses. Furthermore, humans and animals share physiological, neurological, anatomical, and genetic characteristics (Ferdowsian & Beck 1). As such, there are mounting concerns as to the implication of laws that seem to favor humans. Exerting pain on animals is therefore an infringement of animal rights because they share nearly the same genetic components as humans. Thus, if it is unethical to test on humans, it should also be considered unethical to test on animals. By relating animal suffering to our own suffering, it is easier to understand the reasons that animals testing should be banned and alternate methods of scientific exploration should replace this method instead.

Individuals that support the concept of animal testing in situation in which attempting to answer a given scientific research question will have an adverse impact on human populations or individuals. It is imperative to note that in such cases, laws uphold human principles to protect the populace at the expense of the scientific question. In contrast, animal research does not seem to follow a similar course. While it is necessary to uphold human ethics, it is also necessary to create a balance between human and animal rights. Just because it is unethical for humans to suffer does not mean that it is just for animals to suffer in their place. Thus, the reasoning that animals should be used in testing when human testing wouldn’t be plausible is flawed because animals will suffer the same torment as humans in this instance. It is therefore necessary to prevent their suffering and promote the disuse of animal testing at the local, state, and federal level.

In conclusion, generating advancements in medicine and knowledge of the safety of common products could be done without the use of animal testing. It is imperative that animal testing is removed from use because it deprives these test subjects of their right to life and emotional freedom. Human laws tend to favor ethical practices with regards to human life, but it is valuable to extend this understanding to practices using animals. However, for the same reason that it is not ethical to test on humans, it is not ethical to test on animals. To protect life, it is necessary to use alternative forms of testing. This will ensure that conducted research contributes to progress without doing harm to living things. Thus, I implore you to contact your local representatives and tell them to ban animal testing. Not only will this make medicine and products safer for your own use, you will be able to feel better knowing that your favorite products no longer cause the death and suffering of innocent animals. Animal testing is an activity of the past. Now that we no longer need to animal test, it is important for science to change with the times and ban this practice from use.

Works Cited

Ferdowsian, H. R. & Beck, N. Ethical and Scientific Considerations Regarding Animal Testing and Research. PLoS One 6.9(2001).

Greek, R. & Greek, J. Is the use of sentient animals in basic research justifiable? Philos Ethics & Humanitarian Medicine 5(2010): 14.

Macleod, M.R. Can Animal Models of Disease Reliably Inform Human Studies? PLOS Med 7.3(2010) : e1000245.

Mandal, J. & Parija, S. C. Ethics of involving animals in research. Trop Parasitol, 3.1(2013): 4–6.

Workman, P., Aboagye, E. O., Balkwill, F., Balmain, A., Bruder, G., Chaplin, D. J., Double, J. A., Everitt, J., Farningham, D. A. H., Glennie, M. J., Kelland, L. R., Robinson, V., Stratford, I. J., Tozer, G. M., Watson, S., Wedge, S. R., & Eccles, S. A. Guidelines for the welfare and use of animals in cancer research. British Journal of Cancer 02.11(2010): 1555–1577.