The Ethicality Of Animal Testing

The ethicality of animal testing has been debated for decades, especially since the 1960's. The use of animals for scientific testing in no longer necessary in the modern world due to new advancements in medical technology, providing safer and cheaper alternate testing methods, and because of the lack of protection regarding animals used for testing. New technological advancements in medical sciences have created safer and cheaper methods rendering animal testing superannuated. The United States National Institute of Health, one of the largest animal researchers, spends nearly 16 billion dollars a year on animal testing(9). Alternative testing methods such as using human cells in a beaker could decrease their expenses three fold providing
funds to support other methods of research. Although the cost alone is reason enough to switch to using alternative methods, animal testing is also not reliable. Since animals' genes differ from humans, they will react differently to certain medicines. Some "substances that adversely affect animals will not affect humans and vice versa"(10), which can lead to harmful outcomes. IN the 1960's a drug call thalidomide was introduced to the market as a sedative for pregnant women after rigorous animal testing. However, this new medicine had awful affects on human babies although there had been no negative affects during animal testing(10). Animal testing is more expensive and less reliable than the safer alternatives that could be put in practice. The majority of animals used for medical testing are not guarunteed the necessary care needed.