Animal Testing Speaking And Listening

Animal testing- George Hart

Animal experiments are widely used to develop new medicines and to test the safety of other products. Many of these experiments cause pain to the animals involved, and reduce their quality of life in other ways. The scientists are obviously unaware of the strength of the public feeling about the subject; they may find themselves in hot water. It is morally wrong to cause animals to suffer; experimenting on animals produces serious moral problems.

Some people think that some animals being lost are not a huge sacrifice to the world and it gives humanity a huge benefit. To be able to ensure products are safe and available to purchase across the world for our benefit and make our economy stronger. Animal testing has also increased the number of survival rates of certain diseases, Herceptin – a humanised mouse protein – has helped to increase the survival rate of those with breast cancer; it could not have been attained without animal research in mice. Besides the animal defects, Animal research has helped develop modern vaccines including those against Polio, TB, and Meningitis, recently, the human papillomavirus (HPV) which has been linked to cervical cancer.

Animals are used as subjects, the latter due to the loss of a human, in many eyes, is much more of a loss to the world. We share 95% of human genes with a mouse, making them an effective model for the human body. Animals and humans are very similar; we have the same organ systems performing the same tasks in similarly the same way. Modern surgical techniques including hip replacement surgery, kidney transplants, heart transplants and blood transfusions were all perfected in animals, without the use of animal testing we would not be where we are today. Some might argue that these are exceptional reasons to continue with animal research.
Moral beliefs are the main cause of dispute for many people. Due to the feeling that many side-effects of some beauty products are very severe and sickening to comprehend. People argue that animal testing may only be allowed if the side-effects are kept to a minimum and the animals are kept alive and well.

These benefits may be a huge benefit to our quality of life I argue that animal testing has many faults and downfalls that have not yet been perfected and the innocent, acquitted and guiltless beings suffer for our careless needs which others differentiate from each other. I believe that animal testing is wrong and needs to be stopped now!

Morally, animal testing is often extremely cruel and completely unnecessary. For example, undercover investigations from a laboratory in which dogs were being force-fed weed killer are truly barbaric. Allegedly, this was to see how toxic the weed killer was. However, it had already been tested on humans, and the dogs were being given 50 times what had been established as a dangerous dose for humans - what possible reason could there have been for this? It is nothing short of torture, just like pouring shampoo into an animal's eyes just to see what happens, I find these sorts of things utterly repugnant. Some tests are unnecessary and there is no reason for it, punishing helpless beautiful creatures for the sake of us beings, what is their point?
I think that brutally destroying an animal’s way of life is sinful and something needs to be done about this. There are ways that this animal cruelty in labs can be stopped for a similar price. The lack of ethical self-examination is common and generally involves denial and avoidance of animal suffering, resulting in dehumanisation of researcher’s and the ethical degrading of their research subjects.

Poisoning, shocking, burning, and killing animals is all in a day’s work for vivisectors. If these atrocious acts were committed outside laboratories, they would be felonies. But animals suffer and die every day in laboratories with little or no protection from cruelty. It’s unethical to sentence 100 million animals, living and breathing to life in a laboratory cage and intentionally cause them pain, loneliness, and fear.

Forward-thinking scientists have developed humane, modern, and effective non-animal research methods, including human-based micro dosing, in vitro technology, human-patient simulators, and sophisticated computer modelling, that are cheaper, faster, and more accurate than animal tests. So now scientists are just choosing to test on animals instead of using more effective methods without using animals, which more importantly if safe on humans as well. This means that now scientists do it to save money or just doing it for fun. I would like to think they are doing it to save money but there are sick minded people in the world somewhere. Think would these people be in the animal testing laboratories. This is the start of the solution and the government needs to be willing to sort the problems out. It’s not going to cost the economy much more and the animal will be saved forever.
They could be.
Overall animal testing is unethical, sometimes I think people just don’t have these ethics that I have.

Why do you think that scientists still test drugs on animals even though it harms and possibly kills them?
The major positive for animal testing is that it aids researchers in finding drugs and treatments to improve health and medicine. Many medical treatments have been made possible by animal testing, including cancer and HIV drugs, insulin, antibiotics, vaccines and many more.
Animal testing is vital for improving human health and it is also why the scientific community and many members of the public support its use. In fact, there are also individuals who are against animal testing for cosmetics but still support animal testing for medicine and the development of new drugs for disease. This is why I think they still continue to test on animals.

Why is it important to conduct product safety tests on animals when "cruelty-free" products are available?
Companies that claim they conduct no animal testing either contract testing to an outside laboratory or use compounds known to be safe through previous animal testing.
It is important to remember the circumstances that led to safety testing of all new consumer ingredients and products, particularly cosmetics. As recently as several decades ago, consumers were subjected to products that were not adequately tested prior to use, resulting in reports of permanent harm, including blindness. Product safety testing ensures that products are safe when used as directed and provides scientific data for poison control centres and emergency room physicians in the event a product is misused. Adequate testing of products is both a moral and legal obligation to the public. The use of animals in product safety testing provides a whole, living system that can reflect how certain substances will react in or on the body. The term "cruelty-free" is often misused and misunderstood. Companies that claim they conduct no animal testing either contract testing to an outside laboratory or use compounds known to be safe through previous animal testing.
What happens to animals once an experiment is completed?
The majority of animals under study must be euthanized in order to obtain tissue for pathological evaluation and for use in in vitro tests. Euthanasia is the act of inducing a humane death. The American Veterinary Medical Association publishes euthanasia methods considered acceptable. Those animals involved in experiments that do not require tissue for pathological evaluation may take part in additional experiments. However, except in rare circumstances, federal regulations do not allow an animal to be used in more than one major surgical procedure. I think that euthanizing an animal is ethically and morally wrong, people I believe they should find a way to either treat the animals after testing or to stop animal testing altogether.