No body denies animal testing has been conducted for centuries; this may make some people believe that it ok and there is nothing wrong with it. Just because something has been done by people doesn’t make it ok. Testing has been dated back to the Ancient Greeks and Romans using vivisection on animals. Vivisection is cutting a animal open while it is still alive for experimental purposes such as testing products. In the 17th century a philosopher Rene Descartes proposed a new philosophy that animals didn’t feeling or understand anything because of this many people believed that animal testing was morally ok because the animal didn’t suffer. Then came another philosopher named Francois-Maire Arouet de Voltarie who proved that animal were beings that could feel. This was founded by a vivisection that proved that animals had organs of feeling. For the next two centuries philosophers went back and forth on moral issues involving vivisection. The start of organized groups to stop animal cruelty starts in the 19th century. Finally a law was passed in the 1890’s that stopped painful animal testing for teaching and showing already accepted facts. One of the first things that were done to show the public what was happening was Mark Twain’s story called “A Dog Tales”. Twain’s story was a protest to animal cruelty and was written in the eyes of a dog. There were many acts that were passed during the 20th century that would change the rules for testing of products. One of the most famous one that is still followed today with a few changes is known at the time as The Pure Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. This act would make sure that products were safe for humans to use because so many people died from medicines, food and cosmetics. This act would make animal testing more prominent. So after this there was another act passed called the Animal Welfare Act. This protected the welfare of animals. It ensured that researcher would minimizes animal pain and distress whenever possible using humane euthanasia (Evans).
Certainly, with so many new products and advances in old ones being done, someone has to ensure they are safe for human use. This is where animals come into play. “More than 100 million animals every year suffer and die in cruel chemical, drug, food and cosmetic tests, biology lessons, medical training exercises, and curiosity driven medical experiments”(PETA). How can people just sit back and let this happen if these facts are known and not hidden from the public? There are so many different kinds of tests being done on animals every day. Many are done to ensure the safety of a human. Many animals are injected with a disease that normally wouldn’t happen to that species so they can see if what there testing works or to see the way the disease works and hope it works the same way in a human. There are many fields of work that use animals the most, including: psychology, military, and space. These three fields are also known to be crueler than other field. This may be why they choose animals over human volunteers because they can treat and do things that no human would ever allow. Another thing animals are very commonly used for is dissection in schools. “A reasonable estimate is that about six million vertebrate animals are dissected yearly in U.S. high schools alone, with an additional, unknown number used in colleges and middle and elementary schools. The number of invertebrate animals dissected is probably comparable to that of vertebrates” (Animal). While most of these animals are dead when they are being dissected they are treated horribly before they are killed. Surely products do need to be tested but are these the right ways?
Undoubtedly some people believe that animal testing should be outlawed all together. This is just not realistic but it does make you wonder what would happen if it was. Some believe it would cause more harm than good. From history you can tell that when something is outlawed it never fully stops. Animal testing would still be done in underground locations but this time there are no longer regulations on how to treat the animals, which means the animals would be treated like objects not beings. Stopping testing on animals could also cause human deaths because testing isn’t being done on new products but I think it would just encourage for scientist to find and use new alternatives. Surely millions of animals would be saved and not treated with horrible circumstances but there is also an advantage when it comes to spending. There would be a lot of money saved and not in the sense of the spending on testing but all the money spent trying to stop animal testing. With all the advantages of non-animal testing there does come some concern. “Disadvantages to non-animal methods are that it is very difficult to mimic an integrated living system, and the range of historical data available for animal tests does not yet exist for in vitro methods and computer analyses”(Welsh58). Over time these problems can be worked out but in the meantime there are many animals everyday being saved because of new alternatives. While I was interviewing a woman who has deeply involved and fought for animal rights, “If animals shouldn’t be used for testing purposes then how do you suppose we get certain tests done on new products that could possible harm humans if not tested?” She replied with “ Human volunteers would be one alternative that could stop a small amount of animal testing. This does not mean to have people volunteer for experiments that could kill them. Many people would do experiment for science.” I agree with her but I do know this won’t solve the problem but it will make a difference and every little thing could help.
Of course there are many reasons why people believe animal testing should be stopped. If there are alternatives that don’t hurt animals then why would we keep using the harmful ways? There is the moral aspect where everything deserves the right to live and not to live in a state of fear. Another reason many people are against animal testing is that it isn’t always reliable. There has been so many drugs that were passed in the United States that had to be recalled because of side affect. Many companies will even look over many errors done during experiments. If we can’t guarantee that the test won’t show any kind of result then why do it? Animals can’t stand up for they can’t tell you they don’t want to do something but no being wants to be tortured or even killed. To every con there is a pro. Chimpanzees are know to have 99% percent of the same genes as humans, so much experiments done on them would show how it would affect a human and maybe safe a life. How is to say whose life is more important though. Every being should have a chance to live and not treated badly just for the name of science especially if there are alternatives.
Being there are a prominent amount of alternatives to animal testing that are less cruel and should be used. Some of them include: modification of animal tests, skin irritation testing, measurement of PH, in vitro methods, computers and tier testing. “Regulatory agencies in the United States and in Europe recently approved another sort of replacement test. This involves the use of a "synthetic skin," called Corrositex, which can be used in place of animals to test chemicals for skin corrositivity--that is, to see whether a substance will corrode or burn the skin”(Alternatives).
This would be a great alternative because no one is harmed in it and the testing of the product is still being done to insure its safety. Computer research can replace all the dissection done in school very easily. This would be done by doing a using a dissection model on a computer or you can even use a plastic model instead of use millions real animals. Medical students are even starting to use some of these alternatives. There is also the use of human tester which are very commonly used for cosmetics. Tier testing could really stop the use of many animals or make sure animals won’t get hurt. “The common approach to tier testing for eye irritancy is to measure the substance’s pH, then to conduct cell toxicity studies with cultures, and finally to do limited in vivo tests to test the results predicted from the first two steps. At each stage, the test material can strike out if it exhibits certain criteria” (Welsh76). When it comes to the long term effects of drugs in vitro methods could be a great alternative. In vitro method tests for certain aspects that cant normally be seen by using cells and tissues in a culture. It is even thought that this method is more accurate then animal use. There is no justified to use animals as a testing source in the 21st century. We have so many safer humane ways of testing animals, it is not the 18th century anymore and we have no excuse for what we are doing to are animals when there are alternatives out there.
“Indeed, animal research in antiquated and cruel, often impeding discovery. In numerous cases, important findings have been or could have been made without the use of animals. People should not have to choose between inflicting pain and suffering on animals and finding medical cures. New technologies, alternatives, and clinical and epidemiological studies in humans can provide us better, more relevant answers without causing animal suffering”(Animals). There is no reason for 100 million animals to suffer and die every year for our own health when there are so many alternatives to animal testing. As Sir Aurobindo (who was a freedom fighter) stated “Life is life - whether in a cat, or dog or man. There is no difference there between a cat or a man. The idea of difference is a human conception for man's own advantage.”
No comments:
Post a Comment