In modern medicine, the efficacy and side effects of drugs, vaccines, and other general treatments are determined through clinical studies. More often than not, these clinical studies are performed with animals as the test subjects. Specifically, over 100 million animals are tested, including dogs, cats, monkeys, rodents, and birds (“11 Facts About Animal Testing” 1). Additionally, of these 100 million animals, most are horrendously treated and ultimately die without serving their sole purpose: to advance the studies of their testing. Therefore, testing on animals should supremely stop. Animals Tests do not reliably predict human outcomes. The Food and Drug Administration reports that 92 out of every 100 drugs that pass animal tests fail
…show more content…
For example, the discovery of insulin for diabetics was founded because of animal testing. In 1921, researchers managed to extract insulin and inject it into a diabetic dog, close to death, restoring it to health (“Medical Benefits” 2). Although the discovery of insulin was pioneering, most of the vaccines proven through animal testing were found when other testing options were not possible. As an alternative, in-vitro research is the study of an organisms cells’ outside of its normal biological context. Essentially, scientists have discovered a method of testing molecules in a controlled environment. A major success from in-vitro testing was the polio vaccine. Researchers spent decades infecting non-human primates with the disease, but failed to produce a vaccine. However, the key event that led directly to the vaccine was when researchers grew the virus in human cell cultures in-vitro. In an article, researchers from the Vanderbilt University Medical Center stated, “The phenotypes studied in animals are not truly identical to human disease but are limited representations of them. In most cases, animal studies do not assess the role of naturally occurring variation and its effects on phenotypes” (“Scientific Problems” 3). In conclusion, while animal testing did provide the world with some discoveries, it did so in an inhumane, wasteful way when other options, such as in-vitro were possible. Therefore, since such options are now feasible, animal testing should
For example, the discovery of insulin for diabetics was founded because of animal testing. In 1921, researchers managed to extract insulin and inject it into a diabetic dog, close to death, restoring it to health (“Medical Benefits” 2). Although the discovery of insulin was pioneering, most of the vaccines proven through animal testing were found when other testing options were not possible. As an alternative, in-vitro research is the study of an organisms cells’ outside of its normal biological context. Essentially, scientists have discovered a method of testing molecules in a controlled environment. A major success from in-vitro testing was the polio vaccine. Researchers spent decades infecting non-human primates with the disease, but failed to produce a vaccine. However, the key event that led directly to the vaccine was when researchers grew the virus in human cell cultures in-vitro. In an article, researchers from the Vanderbilt University Medical Center stated, “The phenotypes studied in animals are not truly identical to human disease but are limited representations of them. In most cases, animal studies do not assess the role of naturally occurring variation and its effects on phenotypes” (“Scientific Problems” 3). In conclusion, while animal testing did provide the world with some discoveries, it did so in an inhumane, wasteful way when other options, such as in-vitro were possible. Therefore, since such options are now feasible, animal testing should