Imagine yourself naked being strapped to a cold hard table with blinding lights piercing through your corneas,being probed and severed open with foreign tools, and being deeply scrutinized by unfamiliar alien creatures whose only intentions are to dissect you until you are nothing. While animal testing may help some patients with cancer and other illnesses, many ads make false claims about the effectiveness of it; ultimately justifying and prolonging the merciless acts upon myriad of innocent animals. Such an ad stood out to me while scrolling on my Pinterest feed. It was published in 2009 by the Animal Research Development Organization. Animal testing may have helped the little boy, Caleb, in the ad with cancer, but tactfully didn’t recognize
…show more content…
Scientists have come up with moral techniques to reduce or even avoid animal testing. In the article, “Alternatives to Animal Testing” PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) explains more noble options like In Vitro testing, In Silico modeling, and human volunteering. The In Vitro method contains “human cells grown in a state-of-the-art system to mimic the structure and function of human organs and organ systems” (PETA). While using In Silico, computer models simulate human biology and the progression of developing diseases, making it easier to predict and study accurate results of how the human body will react. Also, humans can volunteer and safely contribute to many scientific studies, which is something animals can’t do. With that being said, animal testing is expensive! In just America, over 920,890 dollars are spent on individual tests (Humane Society International). This means that on a single rat, 920,890 dollars can spent on various experiments that may not even lead to answers. Four million animals are used for experimentation a year in only the UK. If calculated, that’s more than 3.6 billion dollars spent on testing a year for a single country; not to mention that over 16 billion dollars in U.S. taxpayer money is wasted annually on animal testing (PETA). In the article, “Costs of Animal and Non-Animal testing,” the Humane Society International explains that only 97,810 dollars are spent on individual tests while using alternative methods. That is an astonishingly low number considering that less animals are being killed or abused while getting more accurate results and cures to illnesses. Without that information in the ad, it leads readers to believe that animal testing is the only way to find cures for sicknesses. In fact, not only does the ad make
Scientists have come up with moral techniques to reduce or even avoid animal testing. In the article, “Alternatives to Animal Testing” PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) explains more noble options like In Vitro testing, In Silico modeling, and human volunteering. The In Vitro method contains “human cells grown in a state-of-the-art system to mimic the structure and function of human organs and organ systems” (PETA). While using In Silico, computer models simulate human biology and the progression of developing diseases, making it easier to predict and study accurate results of how the human body will react. Also, humans can volunteer and safely contribute to many scientific studies, which is something animals can’t do. With that being said, animal testing is expensive! In just America, over 920,890 dollars are spent on individual tests (Humane Society International). This means that on a single rat, 920,890 dollars can spent on various experiments that may not even lead to answers. Four million animals are used for experimentation a year in only the UK. If calculated, that’s more than 3.6 billion dollars spent on testing a year for a single country; not to mention that over 16 billion dollars in U.S. taxpayer money is wasted annually on animal testing (PETA). In the article, “Costs of Animal and Non-Animal testing,” the Humane Society International explains that only 97,810 dollars are spent on individual tests while using alternative methods. That is an astonishingly low number considering that less animals are being killed or abused while getting more accurate results and cures to illnesses. Without that information in the ad, it leads readers to believe that animal testing is the only way to find cures for sicknesses. In fact, not only does the ad make