Animal testing is a type of research that has been going on for hundreds of years dating back to the ancient Greeks. It is used in many different ways, but mainly to prevent harm from being brought upon humans. The prevention of pain and death of humans sounds great, but why are there so many people that are against animal testing?
Animal testing is used in several areas of research. The three main areas are pure research, drug testing, and the testing of cosmetics. “Basic or pure research aims to increase knowledge about the way organisms behave, develop, and function biologically.” Pure research investigates many topics including memory, social behavior, evolution, genetics, and how animals develop normally and abnormally. Drug testing is used to test pharmaceutical drugs on animals before the dugs are distributed to the public for use. Cosmetic testing includes the testing of a final product or their ingredients either individually or combined. This testing is the most controversial and is banned in Europe.
In the history of animal testing, many good things have come from it. The US Foundation for Biomedical Research says that “animal research has played a vital role in virtually every major medical advance of the last century – for both human and animal health.” It was used in the development of penicillin, organ transplants, and was used in the creation of a vaccine for polio. Despite all these good medical advances, people are still against it.
There are some misconceptions about animal testing. Many people believe that dogs, cats, and monkeys are the main animals used in research, but in fact, about 90 percent of animals used are rats and mice. Only .1 percent of animals used are primates, and only .4 percent are cats and dogs. People also believe that stray animals are picked up off the street and thrown into labs for testing. Not only is that not done, but it is also illegal. Most of the animals used in research are born and raised for research. They are not taken out of the wild, and their only purpose is to better the human race and sometimes other animals. Many people believe that since there has been a huge expansion in biomedical research, more animals are being used every year. This is also untrue, and it is the exact opposite. In the past 20 years the number of animals used for testing has been cut in half. This decrease in animals used is due to the refining of methods and the finding of alternatives. Only 10 percent of all biomedical research includes animals.
The people that oppose the testing of animals have some good points. They question how ethical it is, the treatment of the animals, the actual experiments, and the different reasons for which the research is conducted. The ethical argument is the main one of the opposition. They argue that if humans are not willing to undergo the testing, how can they force animals to take their place? Initially we didn’t think that animals were able to feel pain so this argument didn’t exist. But, we now know that animals are able to feel pain, so this becomes a valid argument. Even though animals do feel pain in the same way as humans, have similar central nervous system pathways, and similar pain receptors, non-human subject suffer less due to their incapability to remember and anticipate pain. Many people believe that animals that are used for testing are treated very poorly and abused. Several undercover investigations have proved that abuse does occur. Some animal research doesn’t even benefit society. Some research is done in order for some people to receive their Ph.D., funding, or academic tenure. The argument of “bad science” is also a big one. They argue that sometimes when the testing is done the experiments are set up in order to get a desired outcome and that some drugs have different effects on humans than on non-human subjects.
People in opposition to animal testing believe there are alternatives to the cruel testing that animals undergo. Some alternatives include “lab-grown cells and organs, improved test methods, and human clinical tests.” The lab-grown cells are already being used as an alternative in the cosmetic field. Instead of testing their products on animals, they are using donated retinas to see if eye irritation occurs, and skin to see if there is any irritation. In-home pregnancy tests are a result of improved test methods, and it no longer requires a trip to the doctor and the killing of an animal.
The supporters of animal testing have some good points too. They argue that it would be unethical to induce humans to the same test that animals are currently being exposed to. It would also be unethical to release drugs to the public without knowing the possible side effects that the drugs could have. Another argument is that there is no alternative to animals due to their similarity to humans. Several generations can be studied in a relatively short time due to the life span and reproduction span of some animals. Some organizations argue for the three R’s in animal testing. Replace animal test subject for some alternative whenever possible, Reduce the number of animals used in a particular test, and finally Refine the experiments so that they are more humane.
Animal testing has proven it usefulness over the years. It has led to some great findings that have saved many human lives. One of the first significant advances due to animal research was the use of insulin from cows in diabetes patients. To discover this, researchers performed a lot of tests on dogs and rabbits. These techniques have led to advances which have saved millions of lives. Animal research also benefits animals too. In the 1920’s there was a disease in Britain called canine distemper. It was caused by a virus and very easily spread. Over 200,000 puppies died every year from it. As research for a vaccine began, many organizations opposed it and almost prevented the research. A vaccine was found and the disease cured. Animals are also used in cancer research. They were used to develop techniques such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy. One of the side effects of these treatments was nausea, and that has been prevented by research done with ferrets. Since there have been so many advances made by animal research “it is difficult to think of any major advance in vaccinations, drug therapy, transplant surgery, surgical procedures and many other fields of medicine that have been made without the use of animal research.
With all these advancements I don’t know how so many people could be against it. I am sure that if an animal activist had one of these diseases and was going to die, unless if they would undergo a treatment that was developed from animal research, they would accept the treatment. I am also sure that animal activists believe that human life is more significant than the life of a rodent. More animals die from being put to sleep and from pest control than in animal research. Why don’t they argue against pest control and anesthetization? The killing of household pests and unwanted dogs and cats does nothing to benefit society compared to the benefits that society reeks from animal testing. Also the number of animals used for research is nothing compared to the number of animals used for food. What is the difference? Both types are raised for one thing, to benefit humans. I don’t see numerous articles about people eating meat, but there is a countless number of people arguing about animal research. People approximately eat “600 chickens, 30 sheep, 30 pigs, and 5 cows in their lifetime, but only 3 mice and 1 rat” would be used per person in a lifetime due to animal research. That number seams so insignificant, I can’t understand why so many people are arguing against it.
After researching the subject of animal testing and animal research, I have decided that I support it. There is a lot of good that comes from the research and that outweighs the deaths of some rodents. Animal testing could be better though. The government should try to enforce the “three R’s”, replace, reduce, and refine. That would limit the number of pointless deaths, but hopefully it would not limit the amount of good research and the number of lives saved. There are a lot of good arguments against animal testing, but I personally can not overlook the good that is coming from it. I understand that sometimes the animals are mistreated and abused, but that can and should be regulated. Hopefully animal testing will make the world a better place.
References
Animal Land. Retrieved June 17, 2006.
http://www.animaland.org/asp/realissues/testing.asp
Animal Testing. Retrieved June 18, 2006
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Animal_testing
Arguments for animal testing. Retrieved June 17, 2006.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/teachers/citizenship_11_14/subject_areas/hum an_rights/newsid_3430000/3430169.stm
Personal-Care Products – An Easy Call on Animal Testing. Retrieved June 18, 2006.
http://www.grinningplanet.com/2004/10-12/cosmetics-animal-testing-
article.htm
The Necessity of Animal Research. Retrieved June 18, 2006.
http://www.bret.org.uk/num2.htm
Without Feathers. Retrieved June 17, 2006.
http://www.without-feathers.com/writings/prose/why-animal-testing-is-
unethical.php
