Alternatives To Animal Testing (MLA)
Arthur Sabian
Professor Lang
English 101 MWF
10/26/2013
Alternatives to Animal Testing (MLA)
“Man is the only creature that consumes without producing. He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs, he is too weak to pull the plough, he cannot run fast enough to catch rabbits. Yet he is lord of all the animals.” George Orwell. And now today animals are being used to produce a variety of products varying from medicine, cosmetics, and even military weapons through animal testing. One can argue we are the lord of all animals due to us being a higher species making our life more valuable than theirs. I’m not disputing that one animals life is more valuable than a human, but how about ten animals, 100 animals, 1,000 animals, how about 19.5 million …show more content…
animals because that is the amount of animals killed per year in the U.S. according to the Animal Welfare Act. In vivo testing which is Latin for within life is another term for animal testing since people are experimenting on living things. The definition of animal testing is any sort of experimentation done on Animals. What this paper is arguing today is that animal testing is not justified because there are many alternatives to it. There are many forms of Animal Testing such as: cosmetic, medical, military, and for the sake of science which portray the immorality of testing on animals.
Using Animals for cosmetic testing is just morally wrong.
Cosmetic companies like L’Oreal are causing atrocities on animals such as scarring, burns, and blinding of animals not to mention death for something as trivial as make-up which is something only a portion of the population needs. Cosmetic testing companies are in essence poisoning animals hoping that they will not be chemically scarred and instead find a product safe for use by humans. Why test cosmetics on animals when there are many alternatives. Why measure how long it takes for a chemical to burn away a bunny’s eye while companies can instead test the chemical on a synthetic human eye. An article by C.Bauch states that there are “mechanisms for induction and elicitation of skin sensitization are complex, we propose the combination of in vitro assays into an integrated test battery which can lead to an effective non-animal strategy.” What Bauch is saying is that instead of using technology is now available to allow testing of cosmetic products on invitro assays which are synthesized organic cells instead of living animals. Right now there are many cosmetic products that are animal test free. Recently the European Union banned the sales of any cosmetic product tested on animals. Why hasn’t America done the same? It is just absurd to kill and torture animals for something trivial as cosmetics, at least with medicine it’s not as …show more content…
trivial.
Medical testing is a different story since scientists are testing drugs on Animals for the sake of saving human lives. However, is it justified that scientists infect animals with deadly diseases for the sake of humans causing wheelbarrows full of dead animals in front of testing cages while there are many alternative forms of testing medical related products. People do admit that in the past when science was not evolved enough that Animal Testing was necessary for the testing of medicine, and they did find cures and vaccines for diseases. However in this day and age there are many alternatives such as human tissue testing, the MIMIC system which creates a human immune system to test a variety of drugs on, MRI and other techniques can record the brain and see what tests will do to the brain through computer analyzing, human antibodies can be created through replicating human DNA, and micro dosing. All of these research methods have produced successful results. Recently a breakthrough happened when scientists were replicating human tissues by creating new stem cells that they found out that they can genetically modify the cells to hunt down and kill HIV cells according to UCLA news room. Animal testing for years have been trying to find a cure for aids and it’s amazing that a non-animal testing method finally found a breakthrough for disease. A major alternative to testing on animals would be human tissue testing or in vitro testing which is the testing of drugs on human tissues. Human tissue testing according to congressman Jim Moran and Dr.Paul A.Locke from Yale and Johns Hopkins who specilizes in enviromental health science claims that human tissue testing is more accurate and more cost effective then Animal Testing. Also with data provided by PETA only 2% of human diseases appear naturally in animals. Since the diseases we’re infecting animals with are not their natural diseases, it is highly likely that a cure for that disease may only work for animals and will have different effects on humans. This is evidenced by three drugs which had horrible side effects on humans: Zomax which caused fatal allergic reactions, Thalidomide which caused severe birth defects, and DES which caused cancerous tumors in the female reproductive organs. Remember all of these drugs were safe for animals yet bad for humans. Also animals are used to develop surgery techniques for upcoming medical students why give them living breathing things to carve up when instead the professor can give them synthetic human bodies. Logically if animal testing leads to cure and also non animal testing leads to a cure wouldn’t it be rational to take the path that doesn’t cause animals to die. An article by Bogdan Marinescu states that “a new institution has been established, with the aim to evaluate and certify the experiments.” This is a comforting thought that there is an institution to make sure animal testing is done humanely, however why do people need to test on animals with so many alternatives out there. Medical animal testing’s goal is to save lives, but military testing’s goal is to end lives.
At least with medical testing the goal is to save human lives with military testing the goal is to kill humans. Military testing done by the U.S. military is just cruel towards animals, they boiled animals alive, burned them, flung sheep at reflective plates to set off mines, shot cats in the head, exposed them to radiation, and project Atomic Ark which put many animals on a boat in the middle of the ocean and nuked them. About 342,000 animals die in US military testing with estimated costs being $225 million dollars per year this money is used for those experiments what a waste of the government’s money and resources, information provided by PETA. People might say PETA is a biased source, but these are statistics about the expenditures of the US government not their opinions. Where’s the humanity in military animal testing? The military are killing animals for the sake of developing weapons better suited to kill humans. There is no way for that to be justified don’t humans have enough weapons to kill each other the world doesn’t need anymore. Even though the military experiments are cruel, animal testing for the sake of science is equally as cruel.
Animal Testing for the sake of science is horrific.
Yes it may evolve science but these experiments leave atrocious results. Here’s a story about a sheep named dolly which was cloned. It was considered a success since they were able to create an exact genetic replicate, however due to genetic disease the clone died early. To use this story might not sound bad, but how about thinking of all the failed attempts before dolly all of the failed clones dead atrocious things that we created as humans. Another test would be the pit of despair where psychologist Harry Harlow took infant monkeys who bonded with their mothers and put them in caged pits with total isolation. The monkeys became clinically depressed and psychotic with none of them being treatable after the experiment was over. It is the same for other tests for the sake of science we might reach some sort of breakthrough but at what
cost.
Gandhi once said “the greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way animals are treated.” There are many forms of Animal Testing which portray the immorality of testing on animals such as: cosmetic, medical, military, and for the sake of science. Animal Testing is a cruel inhumane way of treating animals. Why scar and burn animals for cosmetics when there are alternatives? Why infect animals with deadly diseases when you can find cures through other successful means? Why butcher animals to develop military weapons which are used to kill other human beings when there are already many weapons in world? Why subject animals to cruel scientific experiments when there is always another way to devise the experiment? This essay is not saying for all people to become extreme animal lovers. No the essay is saying animal testing isn’t justified morally while there are many alternatives out there. With all the brutality’s done to animals in this nation through animal testing really shows that as a nation our moral progress is severely lacking.
Works Cited
Bauch, C. "Towards Animal Free Testing." Towards Animal Free Testing. Elsevier Ireland Ltd., n.d. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
Marinescu, Bogdan. "The Ethics of Animals Testing." Full Text Electronic Journals. Revista Românǎ De Bioeticǎ, 01 July 2010. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
"The Military 's War on Animals." PETA.org. PETA, n.d. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
Moran, Jim, and Paul A. Locke. "Less Testing on Animals, Better Science." Baltimore Sun. Baltimore Sun, 08 Apr. 2013. Web. 06 Nov. 2013.
Rivero, Enrique. "For News Media." UCLA Researchers Demonstrate That Stem Cells Can Be Engineered to Kill HIV / UCLA Newsroom. UCLA, 07 Dec. 2009. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
"U.S.C. Title 7 - AGRICULTURE." U.S.C. Title 7 - AGRICULTURE. USDA, n.d. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
Professor Lang
English 101 MWF
10/26/2013
Alternatives to Animal Testing (MLA)
“Man is the only creature that consumes without producing. He does not give milk, he does not lay eggs, he is too weak to pull the plough, he cannot run fast enough to catch rabbits. Yet he is lord of all the animals.” George Orwell. And now today animals are being used to produce a variety of products varying from medicine, cosmetics, and even military weapons through animal testing. One can argue we are the lord of all animals due to us being a higher species making our life more valuable than theirs. I’m not disputing that one animals life is more valuable than a human, but how about ten animals, 100 animals, 1,000 animals, how about 19.5 million …show more content…
animals because that is the amount of animals killed per year in the U.S. according to the Animal Welfare Act. In vivo testing which is Latin for within life is another term for animal testing since people are experimenting on living things. The definition of animal testing is any sort of experimentation done on Animals. What this paper is arguing today is that animal testing is not justified because there are many alternatives to it. There are many forms of Animal Testing such as: cosmetic, medical, military, and for the sake of science which portray the immorality of testing on animals.
Using Animals for cosmetic testing is just morally wrong.
Cosmetic companies like L’Oreal are causing atrocities on animals such as scarring, burns, and blinding of animals not to mention death for something as trivial as make-up which is something only a portion of the population needs. Cosmetic testing companies are in essence poisoning animals hoping that they will not be chemically scarred and instead find a product safe for use by humans. Why test cosmetics on animals when there are many alternatives. Why measure how long it takes for a chemical to burn away a bunny’s eye while companies can instead test the chemical on a synthetic human eye. An article by C.Bauch states that there are “mechanisms for induction and elicitation of skin sensitization are complex, we propose the combination of in vitro assays into an integrated test battery which can lead to an effective non-animal strategy.” What Bauch is saying is that instead of using technology is now available to allow testing of cosmetic products on invitro assays which are synthesized organic cells instead of living animals. Right now there are many cosmetic products that are animal test free. Recently the European Union banned the sales of any cosmetic product tested on animals. Why hasn’t America done the same? It is just absurd to kill and torture animals for something trivial as cosmetics, at least with medicine it’s not as …show more content…
trivial.
Medical testing is a different story since scientists are testing drugs on Animals for the sake of saving human lives. However, is it justified that scientists infect animals with deadly diseases for the sake of humans causing wheelbarrows full of dead animals in front of testing cages while there are many alternative forms of testing medical related products. People do admit that in the past when science was not evolved enough that Animal Testing was necessary for the testing of medicine, and they did find cures and vaccines for diseases. However in this day and age there are many alternatives such as human tissue testing, the MIMIC system which creates a human immune system to test a variety of drugs on, MRI and other techniques can record the brain and see what tests will do to the brain through computer analyzing, human antibodies can be created through replicating human DNA, and micro dosing. All of these research methods have produced successful results. Recently a breakthrough happened when scientists were replicating human tissues by creating new stem cells that they found out that they can genetically modify the cells to hunt down and kill HIV cells according to UCLA news room. Animal testing for years have been trying to find a cure for aids and it’s amazing that a non-animal testing method finally found a breakthrough for disease. A major alternative to testing on animals would be human tissue testing or in vitro testing which is the testing of drugs on human tissues. Human tissue testing according to congressman Jim Moran and Dr.Paul A.Locke from Yale and Johns Hopkins who specilizes in enviromental health science claims that human tissue testing is more accurate and more cost effective then Animal Testing. Also with data provided by PETA only 2% of human diseases appear naturally in animals. Since the diseases we’re infecting animals with are not their natural diseases, it is highly likely that a cure for that disease may only work for animals and will have different effects on humans. This is evidenced by three drugs which had horrible side effects on humans: Zomax which caused fatal allergic reactions, Thalidomide which caused severe birth defects, and DES which caused cancerous tumors in the female reproductive organs. Remember all of these drugs were safe for animals yet bad for humans. Also animals are used to develop surgery techniques for upcoming medical students why give them living breathing things to carve up when instead the professor can give them synthetic human bodies. Logically if animal testing leads to cure and also non animal testing leads to a cure wouldn’t it be rational to take the path that doesn’t cause animals to die. An article by Bogdan Marinescu states that “a new institution has been established, with the aim to evaluate and certify the experiments.” This is a comforting thought that there is an institution to make sure animal testing is done humanely, however why do people need to test on animals with so many alternatives out there. Medical animal testing’s goal is to save lives, but military testing’s goal is to end lives.
At least with medical testing the goal is to save human lives with military testing the goal is to kill humans. Military testing done by the U.S. military is just cruel towards animals, they boiled animals alive, burned them, flung sheep at reflective plates to set off mines, shot cats in the head, exposed them to radiation, and project Atomic Ark which put many animals on a boat in the middle of the ocean and nuked them. About 342,000 animals die in US military testing with estimated costs being $225 million dollars per year this money is used for those experiments what a waste of the government’s money and resources, information provided by PETA. People might say PETA is a biased source, but these are statistics about the expenditures of the US government not their opinions. Where’s the humanity in military animal testing? The military are killing animals for the sake of developing weapons better suited to kill humans. There is no way for that to be justified don’t humans have enough weapons to kill each other the world doesn’t need anymore. Even though the military experiments are cruel, animal testing for the sake of science is equally as cruel.
Animal Testing for the sake of science is horrific.
Yes it may evolve science but these experiments leave atrocious results. Here’s a story about a sheep named dolly which was cloned. It was considered a success since they were able to create an exact genetic replicate, however due to genetic disease the clone died early. To use this story might not sound bad, but how about thinking of all the failed attempts before dolly all of the failed clones dead atrocious things that we created as humans. Another test would be the pit of despair where psychologist Harry Harlow took infant monkeys who bonded with their mothers and put them in caged pits with total isolation. The monkeys became clinically depressed and psychotic with none of them being treatable after the experiment was over. It is the same for other tests for the sake of science we might reach some sort of breakthrough but at what
cost.
Gandhi once said “the greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way animals are treated.” There are many forms of Animal Testing which portray the immorality of testing on animals such as: cosmetic, medical, military, and for the sake of science. Animal Testing is a cruel inhumane way of treating animals. Why scar and burn animals for cosmetics when there are alternatives? Why infect animals with deadly diseases when you can find cures through other successful means? Why butcher animals to develop military weapons which are used to kill other human beings when there are already many weapons in world? Why subject animals to cruel scientific experiments when there is always another way to devise the experiment? This essay is not saying for all people to become extreme animal lovers. No the essay is saying animal testing isn’t justified morally while there are many alternatives out there. With all the brutality’s done to animals in this nation through animal testing really shows that as a nation our moral progress is severely lacking.
Works Cited
Bauch, C. "Towards Animal Free Testing." Towards Animal Free Testing. Elsevier Ireland Ltd., n.d. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
Marinescu, Bogdan. "The Ethics of Animals Testing." Full Text Electronic Journals. Revista Românǎ De Bioeticǎ, 01 July 2010. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
"The Military 's War on Animals." PETA.org. PETA, n.d. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
Moran, Jim, and Paul A. Locke. "Less Testing on Animals, Better Science." Baltimore Sun. Baltimore Sun, 08 Apr. 2013. Web. 06 Nov. 2013.
Rivero, Enrique. "For News Media." UCLA Researchers Demonstrate That Stem Cells Can Be Engineered to Kill HIV / UCLA Newsroom. UCLA, 07 Dec. 2009. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.
"U.S.C. Title 7 - AGRICULTURE." U.S.C. Title 7 - AGRICULTURE. USDA, n.d. Web. 04 Nov. 2013.