Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Alan Rosas
Ms. Moore
Period 2
16 December 2016
Ever since 500 B.C. in ancient Greece, many Physician-Scientists such as Aristotle and
Herophilus performed experiments on animals in order to discover their functions. Some of these
experiments included vivisection and dissection, and were conducted on human criminals and
also animals in ancient Rome and Alexandria. In the 19th century, public opposition to animal
experimentation arose when the increased adoption of domesticated animals grasped an interest
scientists found cures for human diseases. Sadly, many cures are being discovered by testing on
animals it causes an enormous amount of abuse and death. Since animal testing involves
substantial harm, this type of research should be limited in order to protect and prevent the
Many animal inhabitants in our country, which is the United States, are suffering through
the torture they encounter in animal testing. According to The Leading Source for Pros and Cons
of Controversial Issues, animals are being utilized in the most common experiments that
administer them to force feeding and inhalation, food and water privation, extended periods of
physical restraint, affliction of burns and other injuries to study the healing process, infliction of
Rosas 2
pain to study its effects and remedies, and killing by neck-breaking, decapitation, or other
means. Basically, The Leading Source for Pros and Cons of Controversial issues is saying that
the animals are being persecuted for animal experimentation. The Animal Legal Defense Fund
state In accordance to the FDA, which is the Food and Drug Administration, 92% of drugs
tested on animals declined to meet the standards for human use, and this rate is increasing not
improving. In making this comment, the Animal Legal Defense Fund argues that animal testing
should be limited, since most of the drug tests fail. In brief, a variety these nonhuman living
In the animal research facilities, animals should be provided with methods to avert a
numerous of innocent deaths. The Leading Source for Pros and Cons of Controversial Issues
view is that, artificial human skin, such as the technical available products EpiDerm and
ThinCert, is created from sheets of human skin cells produced in test tubes or plastic wells and
form more useful data than testing chemicals on animal skin. The Leading Source for Pros and
Cons of the Controversial Issues point is that models should be used to replace animals in these
experimental activities. The Animal Legal Defense Fund states, the Animal Welfare Act is a
federal law addresses the guidelines of care animals receive at research facilities, which
precludes roughly 95% of animals whom are tested with small protection for the rest. In other
words, this charitable organization believes utilizing the law is a great way to protect the
animals. As a result, there are several ways to develop in the prevention of the senseless demise
of many animals.
Animal investigations should continue, for it can deliver humans and animals from the
termination of their existences. According to the Leading Source for Pros and Cons of
Rosas 3
Controversial Issues, The California Biomedical Research Association made a statement that
states nearly every medical breakthrough in the last 100 years has derived precisely from
research utilizing animals. The Leading Source for Pros and Cons of Controversial Issues is
insisting that these activities remain because it has led to successful attacks opposed to disease.
In the National Center for Biotechnology Informations view, In order to improve the health
and welfare of humans and animals, research facilities utilize animals to accumulate basic
knowledge, that cannot be gained in other ways. Research directed on these living organisms
varies widely in its influence on the animal subjects themselves. The essence of the National
Center for Biotechnology Information argument is that animal testing is the only way to receive
knowledge about the health of both human and nonhumans. To conclude, the performance of
these experiments commits the ability to save the lives of both human beings and animals.
If the practice of analyzing animals was banned in the United States, it would negatively
impact the nonhuman species and humanity itself. The Leading Source for Pros and Cons of
Controversial Issues agrees when it writes If animals were not used for probations, millions of
them would have died from many diseases like rabies, distemper, tetanus, anthrax, and canine
parvovirus. The organizations point is that a numerous of kind of animal species will result in
death without any medical investigations. Understanding Animal Research institution states,
Many modern surgical procedures including hip replacement surgery, blood transfusions, and
kidney and heart transplants were all fulfilled in animals. The essence of the Understanding
Animal Research organizations argument is that without animal testing we humans would have
not been able to provide surgical treatment. To sum up, the prohibition of the animal
Animal testing should stop occurring because many animals are being harmed, killed, and
abused. Josie P. a teenager from Wisconsin, who participated in the National Writing Project of
2016 complains that animals are being mistreated in laboratories to test out new medical
products. She explains why scientists commit these actions and states that they require testing to
uncover new medical formulas to appropriately use on humans. Even though the investigations
on animals performed by many scientists is ethical, it can also be unethical for it causes most of
their deaths. In my perspective, its considered as animal cruelty for animals are tortured by
poisoning with drug injections and starving them to death. According to the Animal Legal
Defense Fund, In 2012, monkeys were boiled alive when sent via scalding-hot mechanical cage
washers, while other animals inflamed to decease in inferior laboratory situations. The Animal
Legal Defense Funds point is that animal testing should be confined because animals like
monkeys are suffering until death.Therefore, no matter how moral it is to conduct experiments
on animals at the same time its immoral by the maltreatment and murders that arise.
research should be restrained in order to defend and inhibit the elimination and restrict animal
torture to the minimal. In the United States, a variety of animals are encountering anguish via the
abuse they experience in animal examinations. At the research centers, where animals are tested,
the scientists should invent ways to prevent many innocent nonhuman deaths. If activities of
animal testing was restricted, it would only cause severe consequences to both human and
animals. Animal experimentation should stop continuing, for a numerous of animal species are
being misused, executed, and most significantly abused. For many centuries ever since 500 B.C.
animals have been tested by scientists which caused their deaths. We as the U.S citizens, should
Rosas 5
form a petition for the government to pass a law that limits animal testing in our country for the
Works Cited
"Animal Testing and the Law." Animal Legal Defense Fund. Animal Legal Defense Fund, 6 June
"Animal Testing." ProConorg Headlines. THE LEADING SOURCE FOR PROS & CONS OF
National Research Council (US) and Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on the Use of
P., Josie. "Animal Testing Should Stop Now." Animal Testing Should Stop Now. Letters to the
Understanding Animal Research. "About Us." Forty Reasons Why We Need Animals? N.p., 12