Animal Testing: Pros & Cons Examined - Research Paper

Introduction

The use of living animals in research and experimentation has been done since 500 BC. Animal testing is regulating db. the Federal animal welfare act in the US. The federal law was passed in 1966 and later amended in 1985.it not only regulates the transportation and housing for the animals used in research but also the experiments themselves ("Animal Testing - Pros & Cons - Procon.Org"). A majority of Americans (52%) are also currently opposing the same. This paper discusses some of the reasons as to why animals ought not to be used in animal research.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Violation of Animal Rights in Research: Ethical Considerations

In research, animal rights are often violated. According to Tom Regan, Animals do have a basic right to moral treatment. The intrinsic value of animals is never respected when they are used as mere tools for research (Chief). Since animals and humans Have many similarities in aspects such as the way they feel, behave, experience pain, and think, they ought to be treated in respect just as humans are. Reagan states that since animals cannot sacrifice themselves willingly and decisions made for them, they cannot vocalize their own preferences and choices, it is against their rights. Therefore, experimentation of animals should be a minister since it violates animal rights.

Unreliability of Animal Experimentation: Limitations and Differences from Human Diseases

The use of animal experimentation is often unreliable. Many of the human diseases, animals do not get. These diseases include many types of cancer, HIV, major types of heart diseases, etc. Rd. Richard Klaussner states that these animals react in different ways to artificial induction and diseases of the diseases that naturally occur to humans ("Save The Animals: Stop Animal Testing"). In the US, approximately 26 million animals are used in scientific research annually, and this brings the need to design other ways to carry out scientific experiments other than the use of animals ("Save The Animals: Stop Animal Testing").

Viable Alternatives to Animal Experimentation: The Principle of 'the Three Rs'

There are many viable alternative ways that can be used instead of animal experimentation. Though it might not be possible to remove animals completely in the lab, the researchers can use the principle of 'the three Rs' to minimize the harm on animals ("Should Animals Be Used In Research?"). These are; Replace, which means replacing animals with other experimental tools where possible. Such techniques include; computer modeling, cell culture, and human volunteers. Reduce, which improves experimental techniques and sharing information with other researchers so that the same experiments are not being done by many people by reducing the animals used in research. Refine the use of possible refine features, which will be improving medical care and living conditions. This helps to minimize any stress or pain caused to the animals. The use of this principle can help save many animals' lives and the pain and agony that comes forthwith with the use of animals.

Pain and Suffering in Experimental Animals: The Moral Dilemma

The pain and suffering that are subjected to the experimental animals are not worth any possible benefits to humans. When animals are used for product toxify testing or laboratory research, they are subjected to pain and frequently deadly experiments. For example, Draize test, where the substance being tested is placed in the eyes an animal; then the animal is monitored for damage to the cornea and other tissues in the eye, this test is very painful for the animal and often results to blindness, scarring and death ("Should Animals Be Used In Research?"). Another dangerous test is the LD50 test, which is used to test the dosage of a substance that is necessary to cause death in fifty percent of the animal subjects within a certain amount of time. In this test, the researchers hook the animals up to tubes that pump huge amounts of the test product into their stomach until they die. Hence, animal experimentation subjects them to agonizing pain, suffering, and pain, and thus, it should be abolished.

Waste and Cost in Animal Testing: Unused Items and Financial Burdens

Some of the items used I animals in scientific research that are teste are never used. Animal testing usually provides safety benefits for new products, but one of the items used are never used. This means that the animals sacrifice their lives to determine the safety of products that end up unused (Vasbinder and Locke 261-265). There is no societal benefit for animals suffering in testing items that might never be used. Animal testing can usually be an expensive practice. Caring for these animals to be used in scientific research often requires a big investment. Research by pet finder shows that the total cost of caring for a dog is over $9.000 in a year (Vasbinder and Locke 261-265). Combined with the multiple operational laboratory costs, this can make the scientific research to be very expensive.

The Reliability Debate: Animal Research vs. Human Applications

Most of the facilities involved in animal research do not conform to animal welfare laws. About 4% of the animals used I scientific experimentation are covered by animal welfare laws meaning more than 20 million animals are in the risk of neglect and abuse in the name of research. Some of these facilities are governed by self-appointed committees, which means direct inspection of the facilities; thus, compliance with these laws is minimized ("Animal Testing - Pros & Cons - Procon.Org"). Animal testing might not offer valid results in experimentation since the animal structure I very different from that of the human. This shows that animal research might be unreliable though animal scientists claim otherwise.

Conclusion

To conclude, animals should not be the only method of research. Though the use of living tissue is more reliable than computer simulations, the use of animals should not be the only alternative in scientific research. This form if research puts animals at risk. It should be minimized, and when used, animal research should follow al stipulated animal welfare laws.

Works Cited

"Animal Testing - Pros & Cons - Procon.Org." Animal Testing. N.p., 2019. Web. 18 Nov. 2019. https://vittana.org/14-pros-and-cons-of-animal-research

Chief, Editor. "14 Pros And Cons Of Animal Research." Vittana.org. N.p., 2019. Web. 18 Nov. 2019. https://animal-testing.procon.org

"Save The Animals: Stop Animal Testing." Lonestar.edu. N.p., 2019. Web. 18 Nov. 2019. http://www.lonestar.edu/stopanimaltesting.htm

"Should Animals Be Used In Research?." Yourgenome.org. N.p., 2019. Web. 18 Nov. 2019. https://www.yourgenome.org/debates/should-animals-be-used-in-research

Vasbinder, Mary Ann, and Paul Locke. "Introduction: Global Laws, Regulations, And Standards For Animals In Research." ILAR Journal 57.3 (2017): 261-265. Web. https://academic.oup.com/ilarjournal/article/57/3/261/3796