Why Is Animal Testing Cruel And Inhumane?
“The question is not, “Can they reason?” nor, “Can they talk?” but, “Can they suffer?” – Jeremy Betham. According to People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), over 100 million animals including mice, rats, frogs, dogs and cats are killed in laboratories for testing purposes. Animal testing has been a controversial subject for years now. Some believe that cosmetics, medicines, and health care products should be tested on animals to ensure their safety; on the other hand many believe that testing on animals is cruel and inhumane. Not only has our knowledge and technology advanced to the point where there are many alternative methods of testing, but animals are very different from human beings, therefore making poor test subjects.
There are scientist and many people from the general public who believe animal testing is necessary to ensure the safety of chemicals, cosmetics and …show more content…
health care products. Now, though this might be a reasonable concern, it does not make it a good reason. “But how can cosmetics and other products ensure safety without animal testing?” easy. Companies can ensure the safety of their products by choosing to create them using the thousands of ingredients that have a long history of safe use. Neither the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nor the U.S. consumer product safety commission requires that cosmetics or household products be tested on animals. There is sufficient existing safety data, as well as in vitro alternatives, to make animal testing a thing of the past.
Our technology and knowledge has advanced during the past decades giving us many alternative methods of testing without the use of animals. The In Vitro method, which is tests using human cells and tissues and In silico models, which are advanced computer-modeling techniques; these and other non-animal testing methods usually take less time and money to complete. According to the Humane Society International, an “unscheduled DNA synthesis” animal test costs $32,000, while the in vitro alternative costs $11,000. A “rat photo-toxicity test” costs $11,500 whereas the non-animal equivalent costs $1,300. With all of the already existing data and our rapid advancements in technology, animal testing has become unnecessary.
In addition, animals are very different from human beings therefore make very poor test subjects.
“We are not 70 kg rats”–John Hopkins Professor of evidence based toxicology. The cellular differences between animals and people are what make animals poor models for human beings. In a lot of instances drugs that pass animal tests are not necessarily safe, The 1950’s sleeping pill Thalidomine was considered safe after tested on animals but caused tremendous deformities in newborns. Another example would be the animal tests of the arthritis drug that had a positive and safe result when tested on mice but caused more than twenty-seven thousand heart attacks before being pulled from the market. “It is very hard to create an animal model that even equates closely to what we are trying to achieve in the human.”–Paul Furlong Professor of Clinical Neuroimaging at Aston University. Most of these experiments involving animals are not accurate enough therefore not safe for humans. We are only wasting the lives of animal subjects, which then make the unnecessary of animals just cruel and
inhumane.
Often, animals used in experiments are subjected to forced inhalation and feeding, sometimes even food and water deprivation occur along with physical restraint. The infliction of burns to study the healing process is often used by researchers as well. Animal testing is just plain cruel and inhumane; consider the Draize eye test used by cosmetics companies to evaluate irritation caused by their products. This test involves rabbits being retrained with their eyelids open by clips, sometimes for days, so they cannot blink away the product being tested. Animal testing supporters say that animal research is highly regulated, with laws that protect animals from mistreatment, but the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) does not protect many of animals used by researchers in experiments. The AWA does not cover rats, mice, fish, or birds, which compose a large amount of the animals used in research. It is inhumane, it is unethical and flat out cruel to keep testing on animals; they suffer just like humans do.
In conclusion, it is up to us to put an end to animal testing. This method of research is cruel, it is unreliable since humans are not animals and it is unnecessary since we have so many other alternatives methods. We know that non-animal test methods exist right now and that these tests are more accurate in predicting toxicity than cruel tests on animals. The people, the consumers, we have the power to change this. We can begin to prevent future animal testing by buying only from cruelty-free companies, and by spreading awareness on this important topic. Animals may not have a voice, but they do feel pain.
There are scientist and many people from the general public who believe animal testing is necessary to ensure the safety of chemicals, cosmetics and …show more content…
health care products. Now, though this might be a reasonable concern, it does not make it a good reason. “But how can cosmetics and other products ensure safety without animal testing?” easy. Companies can ensure the safety of their products by choosing to create them using the thousands of ingredients that have a long history of safe use. Neither the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) nor the U.S. consumer product safety commission requires that cosmetics or household products be tested on animals. There is sufficient existing safety data, as well as in vitro alternatives, to make animal testing a thing of the past.
Our technology and knowledge has advanced during the past decades giving us many alternative methods of testing without the use of animals. The In Vitro method, which is tests using human cells and tissues and In silico models, which are advanced computer-modeling techniques; these and other non-animal testing methods usually take less time and money to complete. According to the Humane Society International, an “unscheduled DNA synthesis” animal test costs $32,000, while the in vitro alternative costs $11,000. A “rat photo-toxicity test” costs $11,500 whereas the non-animal equivalent costs $1,300. With all of the already existing data and our rapid advancements in technology, animal testing has become unnecessary.
In addition, animals are very different from human beings therefore make very poor test subjects.
“We are not 70 kg rats”–John Hopkins Professor of evidence based toxicology. The cellular differences between animals and people are what make animals poor models for human beings. In a lot of instances drugs that pass animal tests are not necessarily safe, The 1950’s sleeping pill Thalidomine was considered safe after tested on animals but caused tremendous deformities in newborns. Another example would be the animal tests of the arthritis drug that had a positive and safe result when tested on mice but caused more than twenty-seven thousand heart attacks before being pulled from the market. “It is very hard to create an animal model that even equates closely to what we are trying to achieve in the human.”–Paul Furlong Professor of Clinical Neuroimaging at Aston University. Most of these experiments involving animals are not accurate enough therefore not safe for humans. We are only wasting the lives of animal subjects, which then make the unnecessary of animals just cruel and
inhumane.
Often, animals used in experiments are subjected to forced inhalation and feeding, sometimes even food and water deprivation occur along with physical restraint. The infliction of burns to study the healing process is often used by researchers as well. Animal testing is just plain cruel and inhumane; consider the Draize eye test used by cosmetics companies to evaluate irritation caused by their products. This test involves rabbits being retrained with their eyelids open by clips, sometimes for days, so they cannot blink away the product being tested. Animal testing supporters say that animal research is highly regulated, with laws that protect animals from mistreatment, but the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) does not protect many of animals used by researchers in experiments. The AWA does not cover rats, mice, fish, or birds, which compose a large amount of the animals used in research. It is inhumane, it is unethical and flat out cruel to keep testing on animals; they suffer just like humans do.
In conclusion, it is up to us to put an end to animal testing. This method of research is cruel, it is unreliable since humans are not animals and it is unnecessary since we have so many other alternatives methods. We know that non-animal test methods exist right now and that these tests are more accurate in predicting toxicity than cruel tests on animals. The people, the consumers, we have the power to change this. We can begin to prevent future animal testing by buying only from cruelty-free companies, and by spreading awareness on this important topic. Animals may not have a voice, but they do feel pain.