Why Should Killing Animals For Disease Research?

Nowadays, it is very common for many people to kill animals for disease research. Animals have been used for several centuries in disease research. According to some estimates, the total scale of all research on vertebrates could be as high as 115,000,000 per year. Indeed, the practice of killing animals for disease research is now internationally seen as morally wrong. Therefore, using animals in disease research should be banned because it is cruel and inhumane, is no longer viable ways and can be replaced by alternative testing methods.

First, using animals in disease research should be banned because it is morally unacceptable to kill animals by cruel and inhumane ways. Although the method of killing animals for disease research has
This is because animals are very different from human. Consequently, the drugs passed animal testing are not necessarily safe for men and may be dangerous. According to Cruelty Free International in 2006, a new type of drug called a monoclonal antibody (TGN1412) was tested on human volunteers in a clinical trial at North ick Park hospital. Earlier tests on monkeys at 500 times the dose given to the humans failed to predict the severe side effects. All six of the young volunteers became seriously ill and nearly died; one later had to have his toes amputated. Researchers only later tested the drug using a simple ‘test tube’ method and found they could have predicted these dreadful results. As shown this example, people make animals poor models for human beings, for the huge difference between animals and human and get the only unreliable test result. Thus, killing animals is quite a meaningless way in disease
Today, more and more alternative testing methods that can replace the need for animals are developing in worldwide such as cell cultures, human tissues, computer models and volunteer studies. These alternative testing methods make more relevant result than using animals. For example, Cruelty Free International reports that crude skin allergy tests in guinea pigs only predict human reactions 72% of the time. However, a combination of chemistry and cell-based alternative methods has been shown to accurately predict human reactions 90% of the time. People have no excuse for using animals for disease research rather can get more efficient results in alternative testing. Hence, there is no longer needs for animals to be killed for disease research.

Supports of killing animals in disease research might say killing animals for disease research can significantly contribute to many life-saving cures and treatments for human beings. However, as stated previously, the result of animal testing is an untrustworthy indicator of how these new drugs react in the human body. For this reason, now alternative methods are sought instead of killing animals, for it can provide more accurate results. Hence, animal testing does not necessarily contribute to major advances in understanding and treating