Animal Experimentation: a Necessity
Animal Experimentation: A Necessity
“Since more than 1.4 million mammals other than rats and mice were used in research, and since mice and rats probably make up 90% of the animals in labs, we can guess that about 14 million rats and mice were used in research in 2002” (“11 Facts About Animal Testing”). One might assume 14 million is a lot of animals put to torture, but has one thought about what benefits come forth from the testing done? Has one thought that the animals being used are to gain valuable biological information rather than observing the animals being tortured for amusement? While animal testing may seem unethical and inhumane, the practice should further continue due to the benefits contributed to one’s life. Animal experimentation is a necessity in the studies of medical research. Many say that there should be an alternative to finding cures other than testing on innocent animals, but what are the alternatives? Computers and virtual testing cannot analyze accurate results. As stated by David Hubel, the 1981 Nobel Price winner in medicine, “You can’t train a heart surgeon on a computer, and to study a brain, you need a brain; a man-made machine is no substitute.”
(Hurley Ed.). Other methods for obtaining medical information would include testing on humans, but such method would be considered “much more inhumane”(“Animal Testing”). Human testing would only violate human rights, “animal research was designed to be—and is—a crucial human rights protection” (Smith). If one does not approve testing on animals, why would one approve testing on humans? “Animals are easily bred, and maintained safely in controlled labs. The costs of testing humans would be extremely high” (“Animal Testing”). Also “testing drugs on humans take much longer time to conclude the results to the difference in length of life for lab animals and humans.” (“Animal Testing”). On the other hand, “to ban experimentation would be to paralyze modern medicine, to perpetuate human
“Since more than 1.4 million mammals other than rats and mice were used in research, and since mice and rats probably make up 90% of the animals in labs, we can guess that about 14 million rats and mice were used in research in 2002” (“11 Facts About Animal Testing”). One might assume 14 million is a lot of animals put to torture, but has one thought about what benefits come forth from the testing done? Has one thought that the animals being used are to gain valuable biological information rather than observing the animals being tortured for amusement? While animal testing may seem unethical and inhumane, the practice should further continue due to the benefits contributed to one’s life. Animal experimentation is a necessity in the studies of medical research. Many say that there should be an alternative to finding cures other than testing on innocent animals, but what are the alternatives? Computers and virtual testing cannot analyze accurate results. As stated by David Hubel, the 1981 Nobel Price winner in medicine, “You can’t train a heart surgeon on a computer, and to study a brain, you need a brain; a man-made machine is no substitute.”
(Hurley Ed.). Other methods for obtaining medical information would include testing on humans, but such method would be considered “much more inhumane”(“Animal Testing”). Human testing would only violate human rights, “animal research was designed to be—and is—a crucial human rights protection” (Smith). If one does not approve testing on animals, why would one approve testing on humans? “Animals are easily bred, and maintained safely in controlled labs. The costs of testing humans would be extremely high” (“Animal Testing”). Also “testing drugs on humans take much longer time to conclude the results to the difference in length of life for lab animals and humans.” (“Animal Testing”). On the other hand, “to ban experimentation would be to paralyze modern medicine, to perpetuate human
Bibliography: "11 Facts about Animal Testing.", Do Something.org., Do Something.org. 03 May, 2007. Web. 21 April, 2010. “Animal experimentation.”, BBC., BBC. 19 October, 2009. Web. 10 April, 2010. “Animal Testing.”. WriteFix, WriteFix. 15 January, 2006. Web. 03 April, 2010. Dixon, Thomas. “Animal Experimentation.”. International Debate Education Association. 31 December, 1969. Web. 3 April, 2010. Hurley, Jennifer A. Ed. "Opposing Viewpoints Digests: Animal Rights.", Gale Cengage Learning., San Diego: Greenhaven Press, 1999., Print. Ricken, Jeffrey Dr. Personal interview by Jubin P. Shah. 10 April, 2010. Smith, Wesley J., “New Medical Products Must be Tested in Living Organisms.”, Opposing Views, Opposing Views. Web. 01 April, 2010.