Melissa Puentes
Ms. Vinson
English 4 DC- Period 7
April 4, 2015
Animal Experimentation When one speaks of animal testing, what is the first thing that comes to mind? Do you agree or disagree with the use of animals for human purpose? Animal testing has been a long heated topic for many years. Many claim that it is for the better good and it’s justified, while others say that it can be replaced and is cruel and unjust. Animal testing, or animal experimentation, is the use of animals to test or prove a hypothesis. Although usually referred to as only testing for science and cosmetics, animal testing is also used for pure studying of the animal and its capabilities. When it comes to the issue of animal testing, most of us will readily agree …show more content…
stood for. Procter & Gamble is company that has a variety of consumer goods including personal care, cleaning supplies, pet food, and food and beverages for human consumption. On the official P&G website they have a page specifically dedicated to inform the public of their strive for the end of animal testing. P&G states that "At P&G, we believe that eliminating animal testing is the right thing to do. We do not test our products or ingredients on animals anywhere in the world unless required by law... We’ve developed over 50 alternative, non-animal testing methods, and have invested more than $370 million in finding alternatives." Procter & Gamble is informing us that although they do test on animals, they only do so when it is required and even then they are still trying to find alternatives to end animal testing. Through further research I came across an interesting article on a website called Natural news that was giving the public examples of what Procter & Gamble was doing behind the scene. According to the quote from Naturalnews, "Laboratory workers place the animals in restraining devices so they cannot struggle while the workers apply the chemicals, which burn into the animals' eyes and skin," says P&GKills.com. "P&G 'scientists' do not sedate the animals or give them painkillers. Animals sometimes break their necks or backs attempting to escape the pain. Those that survive are used in yet additional painful tests ... until they are finally killed.” Although there is no direct proof coming from an actual scientist that works for the company they claim that Procter & Gamble is not taking precaution to ensure that the animals well being is put into consideration. Many people are either defending the good side, saying that they are only using animal testing when required and are looking for
Ms. Vinson
English 4 DC- Period 7
April 4, 2015
Animal Experimentation When one speaks of animal testing, what is the first thing that comes to mind? Do you agree or disagree with the use of animals for human purpose? Animal testing has been a long heated topic for many years. Many claim that it is for the better good and it’s justified, while others say that it can be replaced and is cruel and unjust. Animal testing, or animal experimentation, is the use of animals to test or prove a hypothesis. Although usually referred to as only testing for science and cosmetics, animal testing is also used for pure studying of the animal and its capabilities. When it comes to the issue of animal testing, most of us will readily agree …show more content…
stood for. Procter & Gamble is company that has a variety of consumer goods including personal care, cleaning supplies, pet food, and food and beverages for human consumption. On the official P&G website they have a page specifically dedicated to inform the public of their strive for the end of animal testing. P&G states that "At P&G, we believe that eliminating animal testing is the right thing to do. We do not test our products or ingredients on animals anywhere in the world unless required by law... We’ve developed over 50 alternative, non-animal testing methods, and have invested more than $370 million in finding alternatives." Procter & Gamble is informing us that although they do test on animals, they only do so when it is required and even then they are still trying to find alternatives to end animal testing. Through further research I came across an interesting article on a website called Natural news that was giving the public examples of what Procter & Gamble was doing behind the scene. According to the quote from Naturalnews, "Laboratory workers place the animals in restraining devices so they cannot struggle while the workers apply the chemicals, which burn into the animals' eyes and skin," says P&GKills.com. "P&G 'scientists' do not sedate the animals or give them painkillers. Animals sometimes break their necks or backs attempting to escape the pain. Those that survive are used in yet additional painful tests ... until they are finally killed.” Although there is no direct proof coming from an actual scientist that works for the company they claim that Procter & Gamble is not taking precaution to ensure that the animals well being is put into consideration. Many people are either defending the good side, saying that they are only using animal testing when required and are looking for