Animal Testing
“ If you want to test cosmetics, why do it on some poor animal who hasn 't done anything”(Ellen Degeneres). Animal testing has been a problem for many years. Companies use animals such as rabbits, mice, and hamsters to test their cosmetic products. Over the last century the number of tests that are being used on animals has increased an enormous amount. During the 1990s, testing on animals was publicized and many more people became aware of it. People became angry at the companies that were doing such harmful things to these animals. In 1998 animal testing was banned in Britain. In the United States, there are still companies that are performing these tests on helpless animals. They use and test chemicals on these animals various …show more content…
The New England Anti-Vivisection Society states, “Some alternatives to the use of animals in testing are in vitro (test tube) test methods and models based on human cell and tissue cultures” (“Alternatives in Testing” par. 1). Neavs is explaining that there are other methods in testing these products instead of testing them on animals. It helps people realize that animal testing is not the only way that companies can test their products. Due to there being more than one way to test these products, companies need to start trying out these alternative methods instead of harming helpless animals. Dr. Elias Zerhouni states,” The problem is that animal testing hasn’t worked, and it’s time we stopped dancing around the problem. … We need to refocus and adapt new methodologies for use in humans” (“Alternatives to Animal Testing” par. 1). Dr. Elias Zerhouni is explaining that even the doctors are realizing that the testing of animals isn’t a helpful way to test the chemicals of these products. More scientist and companies need to find other ways to see how the products may affect the people that will use that product. Dr. Zerhouni and many others …show more content…
The California Biomedical Research Association states, “Chimpanzees share more than 99% of DNA with humans and mice share more than 98% of DNA with humans, therefore, animals are susceptible to many of the same health problems as humans”(“Why Are Animals Necessary in Biomedical Research” par.2).What the CBRA is saying is that because humans and animals share so much DNA then it is okay to test on animals to see the different reactions that may happen in humans. Due to the human biological makeup being similar to an animal 's makeup, scientist will see the reactions that could be caused by these products. Using animals for testing is a good thing and it has helped fix problems in the products that may have caused harm to humans and therefore is okay to test products on animals. What this argument fails to consider is the fact that human bodies are very different compared to animal bodies. Human bodies are can become much more affected by different chemicals that may be in these products, so testing them on animals is completely illogical because scientist may never truly see the effect that those products may have on humans. Testing on animals is an ineffective way to test products because it yields unreliable results. The scientist can never fully get a proper understanding on the effects of these products by testing them on animals. The animal’s body can not show
“ If you want to test cosmetics, why do it on some poor animal who hasn 't done anything”(Ellen Degeneres). Animal testing has been a problem for many years. Companies use animals such as rabbits, mice, and hamsters to test their cosmetic products. Over the last century the number of tests that are being used on animals has increased an enormous amount. During the 1990s, testing on animals was publicized and many more people became aware of it. People became angry at the companies that were doing such harmful things to these animals. In 1998 animal testing was banned in Britain. In the United States, there are still companies that are performing these tests on helpless animals. They use and test chemicals on these animals various …show more content…
The New England Anti-Vivisection Society states, “Some alternatives to the use of animals in testing are in vitro (test tube) test methods and models based on human cell and tissue cultures” (“Alternatives in Testing” par. 1). Neavs is explaining that there are other methods in testing these products instead of testing them on animals. It helps people realize that animal testing is not the only way that companies can test their products. Due to there being more than one way to test these products, companies need to start trying out these alternative methods instead of harming helpless animals. Dr. Elias Zerhouni states,” The problem is that animal testing hasn’t worked, and it’s time we stopped dancing around the problem. … We need to refocus and adapt new methodologies for use in humans” (“Alternatives to Animal Testing” par. 1). Dr. Elias Zerhouni is explaining that even the doctors are realizing that the testing of animals isn’t a helpful way to test the chemicals of these products. More scientist and companies need to find other ways to see how the products may affect the people that will use that product. Dr. Zerhouni and many others …show more content…
The California Biomedical Research Association states, “Chimpanzees share more than 99% of DNA with humans and mice share more than 98% of DNA with humans, therefore, animals are susceptible to many of the same health problems as humans”(“Why Are Animals Necessary in Biomedical Research” par.2).What the CBRA is saying is that because humans and animals share so much DNA then it is okay to test on animals to see the different reactions that may happen in humans. Due to the human biological makeup being similar to an animal 's makeup, scientist will see the reactions that could be caused by these products. Using animals for testing is a good thing and it has helped fix problems in the products that may have caused harm to humans and therefore is okay to test products on animals. What this argument fails to consider is the fact that human bodies are very different compared to animal bodies. Human bodies are can become much more affected by different chemicals that may be in these products, so testing them on animals is completely illogical because scientist may never truly see the effect that those products may have on humans. Testing on animals is an ineffective way to test products because it yields unreliable results. The scientist can never fully get a proper understanding on the effects of these products by testing them on animals. The animal’s body can not show