Thousands of each species are killed every year against their will due to animal testing. Most people are under the misconception that animal experiments enhance human cures due to the media, experimenters, and universities which exaggerate animals’ potential and the role they have played in past medical advancements. Researching thoroughly on websites, books, articles and organizations, I will prove the common misconception that animals are needed for human advancement to be incorrect. Animal testing is proven to hurt humans directly and misleading animal experiments causes humans to throw away cures.
“Over 100 million animals are burned, crippled, poisoned and abused in US labs every year” (11 Facts About Animal Testing, 1) Not only does …show more content…
An editorial in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery describes how “tamoxifen, one of the most effective drugs against certain types of breast cancer”, would have been abandoned because it causes liver tumors in rats (Follow the Yellow Brick Road, 1). This was a problem that did not carry over to humans. The leukemia drug Gleevec was almost lost because it caused severe liver toxicity in dogs- but not in humans. Fortunately, manufacturers persisted with the development of this drug because it seemed so promising in human cell culture tests. Experiments on animals delayed the acceptance of cyclosporine, a drug widely and successfully used to treat autoimmune disorders and prevent organ transplant rejection. Of every five to 10,000 potential drugs tested in the lab, only about five pass on to clinical trials. Many don’t pass the animal tests because of species-specific results. Yet, many of these agents would likely have worked spectacularly and been safe in humans. Animals are completely unreliable as proven in the past, and there are plenty of alternatives being invented for testing medicines, cures, and cosmetics, such as human volunteers. A method called “microdosing” includes having humans react to a one-time drug dose, while observers watch how this effects their body even in the slightest. Microdosing helps replace certain tests on animals and help screen out drug components that won’t work in humans so …show more content…
The only U.S. law that governs the use of animals in laboratories- the Animal Welfare Act- unfortunately allows animals to be burned, shocked, poisoned, isolated, starved, forcibly restrained, addicted to drugs, and brain-damaged(U.S Law and Animal Experimentation: A Critical Primer). No experiment, no matter how painful or trivial, is prohibited, and pain-killers aren’t required under this law. Thankfully, this law is working to be changed to put animal testing to rest all together. Arguers may say that animals are the only way we can test medicines and cures. However, synthetic skin is now being used instead of animals, which leaves no excuse to hurt animals.
All suffering is undesirable, whether it be humans or animals. Animal testing is proven to be unreliable in relation to human advancement in more than one way, and animal testing will end. There is no logical reason to support animal testing, it is more expensive to test on animals, which is a waste of government money and it is more unreliable than alternatives. Discriminating against animals because they do not have the cognitive ability, language, or moral judgement that humans do is no excuse for holding them against their will for human benefit. Animals suffer just like us humans do, and it is
“Over 100 million animals are burned, crippled, poisoned and abused in US labs every year” (11 Facts About Animal Testing, 1) Not only does …show more content…
An editorial in Nature Reviews Drug Discovery describes how “tamoxifen, one of the most effective drugs against certain types of breast cancer”, would have been abandoned because it causes liver tumors in rats (Follow the Yellow Brick Road, 1). This was a problem that did not carry over to humans. The leukemia drug Gleevec was almost lost because it caused severe liver toxicity in dogs- but not in humans. Fortunately, manufacturers persisted with the development of this drug because it seemed so promising in human cell culture tests. Experiments on animals delayed the acceptance of cyclosporine, a drug widely and successfully used to treat autoimmune disorders and prevent organ transplant rejection. Of every five to 10,000 potential drugs tested in the lab, only about five pass on to clinical trials. Many don’t pass the animal tests because of species-specific results. Yet, many of these agents would likely have worked spectacularly and been safe in humans. Animals are completely unreliable as proven in the past, and there are plenty of alternatives being invented for testing medicines, cures, and cosmetics, such as human volunteers. A method called “microdosing” includes having humans react to a one-time drug dose, while observers watch how this effects their body even in the slightest. Microdosing helps replace certain tests on animals and help screen out drug components that won’t work in humans so …show more content…
The only U.S. law that governs the use of animals in laboratories- the Animal Welfare Act- unfortunately allows animals to be burned, shocked, poisoned, isolated, starved, forcibly restrained, addicted to drugs, and brain-damaged(U.S Law and Animal Experimentation: A Critical Primer). No experiment, no matter how painful or trivial, is prohibited, and pain-killers aren’t required under this law. Thankfully, this law is working to be changed to put animal testing to rest all together. Arguers may say that animals are the only way we can test medicines and cures. However, synthetic skin is now being used instead of animals, which leaves no excuse to hurt animals.
All suffering is undesirable, whether it be humans or animals. Animal testing is proven to be unreliable in relation to human advancement in more than one way, and animal testing will end. There is no logical reason to support animal testing, it is more expensive to test on animals, which is a waste of government money and it is more unreliable than alternatives. Discriminating against animals because they do not have the cognitive ability, language, or moral judgement that humans do is no excuse for holding them against their will for human benefit. Animals suffer just like us humans do, and it is