1.

PRO:
Animal testing is unethical, unnecessary and unreliable:
According to Humane Society International, animals used in experiments are
commonly subected to !orce !eeding, !orced inhalation, !ood and "ater
depri#ation, prolonged periods o! physical restraint, the in!liction o! burns
and other "ounds to study the healing process, the in!liction o! pain to study
its e!!ects and remedies, and $%illing by carbon dioxide asphyxiation, nec%&
brea%ing, decapitation, or other means.$
At a !ederally !unded research center in 'ouisiana, some o! the primates
housed there "ere su!!ering such se#ere psychological stress that they
engaged in sel!&mutilation, $tearing gaping "ounds into their arms and legs.$
(ideo !ootage sho"s in!ant chimps screaming as they are !orcibly remo#ed
!rom their mothers, in!ant primates a"a%e and alert during pain!ul
experiments, and chimpan)ees being intimidated and shot "ith a dart gun.
Our reasons !or belie#ing that our !ello" humans are capable o!
experiencing !eelings li%e oursel#es can surely only be that they resemble us
both in appearance and beha#iour *"e cannot read their minds+. ,hus any
animal sharing our anatomical, physiological, and beha#ioural
characteristics is surely li%ely to ha#e !eelings li%e us.I! animals can !eel
"hat "e !eel, and su!!er as "e su!!er, then to discriminate merely on the
arbitrary di!!erence o! belonging to a di!!erent species, is analogous to
discriminating on the basis o! any other morally arbitrary characteristic, such
as race or sex. -iscriminating against animals because they do not ha#e the
cogniti#e ability, language, or moral udgment that humans do is no more
usti!iable than discriminating against human beings "ith se#ere mental
impairments. As .nglish philosopher /eremy 0entham "rote in the 1122s,
$,he 3uestion is not, 4an they reason5 nor, 4an they tal%5 but, 4an they
su!!er5$ 6778
.#en i! they are not made to su!!er as part o! the experiment, the #ast
maority o! animals used, must be %illed at the conclusion o! the experiment.
9ith 11: million animals being used in the status 3uo this is no small issue.
.#en i! "e "ere to #astly reduce animal experimentation, releasing
domesticated animals into the "ild, "ould be a death sentence, and it hardly
seems realistic to thin% that many beha#iourally abnormal animals, o!ten
mice or rats, might be readily mo#eable into the pet trade.
,here is no e#idence that animal experiments "ere essential in ma%ing
maor medical ad#ances, and i! enough money and resources "ere de#oted
to animal&!ree alternati#es, other solutions "ould be !ound.
,he anatomic, metabolic, and cellular di!!erences bet"een animals and
people ma%e animals poor models !or human beings. 6:;8 Paul <urlong,
Pro!essor o! 4linical =euroimaging at Aston >ni#ersity *>?+, states that
$it@s #ery hard to create an animal model that e#en e3uates closely to "hat
"e@re trying to achie#e in the human.$ 6:A8 ,homas Hartung, Pro!essor o!
e#idence&based toxicology at /ohns Hop%ins >ni#ersity, argues !or
alternati#es to animal testing because $"e are not 12 %g rats.$
,he 1B:2s sleeping pill thalidomide, "hich caused 12,222 babies to be born
"ith se#ere de!ormities, "as tested on animals prior to its commercial
release. 6:8 'ater tests on pregnant mice, rats, guinea pigs, cats, and hamsters
did not result in birth de!ects unless the drug "as administered at extremely
high doses.
Animal tests do not reliably predict results in human beings. BCD o! drugs
that pass animal tests !ail in human clinical trials.
Eost experiments in#ol#ing animals are !la"ed, "asting the li#es o! the
animal subects. Since the maority o! animals used in biomedical research
are %illed during or a!ter the experiments, and since many su!!er during the
studies, the li#es and "ellbeing o! animals are routinely sacri!iced !or poor
research.
4O=: Animal testing has contributed to many li!esa#ing cures and treatments.
,he 4ali!ornia 0iomedical Research Association states that nearly e#ery
medical brea%through in the last 122 years has resulted directly !rom
research using animals.
.xperiments in "hich dogs had their pancreases remo#ed led directly to
the disco#ery o! insulin, critical to sa#ing the li#es o! diabetics. ,he polio
#accine, tested on animals, reduced the global occurrence o! the disease
!rom A:2,222 cases in 1BFF to ;;A cases in ;21;. Animal research has also
contributed to maor ad#ances in understanding and treating conditions such
as breast cancer, brain inury, childhood leu%emia, cystic !ibrosis, malaria,
multiple sclerosis, tuberculosis, and many others, and "as instrumental in
the de#elopment o! pacema%ers, cardiac #al#e substitutes, and anesthetics.
4hris Abee, -irector o! the >ni#ersity o! ,exas E.-. Anderson 4ancer
4enter@s animal research !acility, states that $"e "ouldn@t ha#e a #accine !or
hepatitis 0 "ithout chimpan)ees,$ and says that the use o! chimps is $our
best hope$ !or !inding a #accine !or Hepatitis 4, a disease that %ills 1:,222
people e#ery year in the >nited States.
Animals themsel#es bene!it !rom the results o! animal testing. I! #accines
"ere not tested on animals, millions o! animals "ould ha#e died !rom rabies,
distemper, !eline leu%emia, in!ectious hepatitis #irus, tetanus, anthrax,
and canine par#o #irus. ,reatments !or animals de#eloped using animal
testing also include pacema%ers !or heart disease and remedies !or glaucoma
and hip dysplasia. Animal testing has also been instrumental in sa#ing
endangered species !rom extinction, including the blac%&!ooted !erret, the
4ali!ornia condor and the tamarins o! 0ra)il. ?oalas, ra#aged by an
epidemic o! sexually transmitted chlamydia and no" classi!ied as
endangered in some regions o! Australia, are being tested "ith ne"
chlamydia #accines that may stall the animal@s disappearance.
Animals o!ten ma%e better research subects than human beings because o!
their shorter li!e cycles. 'aboratory mice, !or example, li#e !or only t"o to
three years, so researchers can study the e!!ects o! treatments or genetic
manipulation o#er a "hole li!espan, or across se#eral generations, "hich
"ould be in!easible using human subects. Eice and rats are particularly
"ell&suited to long&term cancer research, partly because o! their short
li!espans.
G A!ter the e!!ects, side e!!ects and more complex interactions o! a drug
ha#e been con!irmed using animal and non&animal testing, it "ill usually
pass to "hat is called a phase I clinical trial & tests on human #olunteers to
con!irm ho" the drug "ill interact "ith human physiology and "hat dosages
it should be administered in. ,he ris% o! a human #olunteer in#ol#ed in a
phase I trial being harmed is extremely small, but only because animal tests,
along "ith non&animal screening methods are a highly e!!ecti#e "ay o!
ensuring that dangerous no#el drugs are not administered to humans.
Research into no#el compounds "ould not be possible "ithout either animal
testing, or tremendous ris% to human subects, "ith ine#itable su!!ering and
death on the part o! the trial #olunteers on some occasions. It is di!!icult to
belie#e that in such circumstances anyone "ould #olunteer, and that e#en i!
they did, pharmaceutical companies "ould be "illing to ris% the potential
legal conse3uences o! administering a substance to them they %ne"
relati#ely little about. In short, de#elopment o! no#el drugs re3uires animal
experimentation, and "ould be impossible under the proposition@s policy.