ANIMAL TESTING

There are many pros and cons toward practice of animal testing.
Unfortunately, neither seem to satisfy everyone including the public,
government and scientists. To begin with, thousands of lives are receiving the
benefits every day thanks to medical drugs and treatments developed from
experiments. In contrast, some animal rights campaigners are calling for
animal testing ban for the sake of cruelty. In addition, many of these animals
received tests for substances that will never actually see approval or public
consumption and use. A question then may arise: Should animals be used for
laboratory test?
Those who are in favor of animal testing say that is vital to improve human
health. In fact, there are also individuals who are against but still support
animal testing for medicine and the development. Animals used in research
have provided vital information for numbers of illnesses including addiction,
anxiety disorders, phobias, incontinence, and more[1]. The California
Biomedical

Research

Association

states

that

nearly

every

medical

breakthrough in the last 100 years has resulted directly from research using
animals [2]. More important, animal testing has contributed to several lifesaving cures and treatments.
In addition, people who are in favor say that there is no adequate
alternative to testing on a living, whole-body system. Living systems like
human beings are extremely complex. Evaluating a drug for side effects
requires a circulatory system to carry the medicine to different organs.

Additionally, conditions such as blindness and high blood pressure cannot be

studied in tissue cultures [3]. Furthermore, even the most powerful
supercomputers are unable to simulate the workings of complex organs such
as the brain.
On the other hand, people who are against animal testing say that animal
testing is cruel and inhumane. According to Humane Society International,
animals used in experiments are commonly subjected to force feeding, forced
inhalation, food and water deprivation, prolonged periods of physical restraint,
and more [4]. Animals suffer a big amount of pain during experiments while
being given no anesthesia for relief. In addition to this, the infliction of different
types of wounds is necessary to study the healing process. The commonly
used LD50 (lethal dose 50) test involves finding out which dose of a chemical
will kill 50% of the animals being used in the experiment [5].
Personally, I am in the middle, neither in favor nor against of animal
testing. Animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to
test the safety of other products. On the other hand, many of these
experiments cause pain to the animals involved or reduce their quality of life
in other ways. I think is morally wrong to cause animals suffering to that
extend, and this experiments should be made as humane as possible. In
conclusion, it is wrong to use animals if alternative testing methods would
produce equally valid results.

References:
[1] http://animalresearch.thehastingscenter.org
Nov. 24, 2014, 11:30a.m
[2] http://www.articlemyriad.com/argument-favor-animal-research-benefits/
Nov. 25, 2014, 12:05p.m
[3] http://www.articlemyriad.com/argument-favor-animal-research-benefits/
Nov. 25, 2014, 12:50p.m
[4] http://www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/using-animals-testing-pros-versus-cons.html
Nov. 26, 2014, 10:40p.m
[5] http://www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/using-animals-testing-pros-versus-cons.html
Nov. 26, 2014, 11:50p.m