Humanity has a long history of experimentation on animals, especially in the medical and cosmetic professions. Many people argue that humanity would not be where it is today if it were not for its reliance on animal experimentation. It is nigh unto impossible to deny that animal testing has ever been useful, although the argument could certainly be made that such a method was not always necessary. However, with advancements in medical and scientific technology, animal testing is no longer a morally defensible practice.
First, animal experimentation is an abusive method. Insufficient regulation about procedures that can be done to animals allows for abusive experiments. Abuse can be defined as excessive cruelty (willfully subjecting others …show more content…
According to Matt Rossell, who formerly worked for Eliot Spindel, a medical researcher in the field of the effects of consumption of nicotine, pregnant monkeys were “subjected to multiple surgeries to implant nicotine pumps in their backs. . . and their babies are cut out of their wombs. . . to dissect their lungs (“Help End,” [1]). If that isn’t bad enough, Rossell continued by saying that he “‘witnessed some of the mothers post-surgery with the same signs of clinical depression that women suffer from after going through the emotional tragedy of losing a stillborn baby’" (“Help End,” [1]). Again, willingly forcing distress and pain on another being who is capable of feeling pain is cruel. The experiments were not even intended to study maternal depression, so forcing the animal mothers to experience excessive suffering is abusive. Spindel’s experiments are just one example of cruel treatment of animals in testing. Even more generally, “no experiment, no matter how painful or trivial, is prohibited [by the US government] – and pain-killers [sic] are not even required (“Animal Testing is Bad Science” [1]). Santa Clara University published an article which states that annually “An estimated eight million [animals] are used in painful experiments. Reports show that at least ten percent of these animals do not receive painkillers” (Andre, Velasquez [2]). Ten percent of eight million is a minimum of eight hundred-thousand animals who are not given painkillers during painful experiments, which is an excessive
First, animal experimentation is an abusive method. Insufficient regulation about procedures that can be done to animals allows for abusive experiments. Abuse can be defined as excessive cruelty (willfully subjecting others …show more content…
According to Matt Rossell, who formerly worked for Eliot Spindel, a medical researcher in the field of the effects of consumption of nicotine, pregnant monkeys were “subjected to multiple surgeries to implant nicotine pumps in their backs. . . and their babies are cut out of their wombs. . . to dissect their lungs (“Help End,” [1]). If that isn’t bad enough, Rossell continued by saying that he “‘witnessed some of the mothers post-surgery with the same signs of clinical depression that women suffer from after going through the emotional tragedy of losing a stillborn baby’" (“Help End,” [1]). Again, willingly forcing distress and pain on another being who is capable of feeling pain is cruel. The experiments were not even intended to study maternal depression, so forcing the animal mothers to experience excessive suffering is abusive. Spindel’s experiments are just one example of cruel treatment of animals in testing. Even more generally, “no experiment, no matter how painful or trivial, is prohibited [by the US government] – and pain-killers [sic] are not even required (“Animal Testing is Bad Science” [1]). Santa Clara University published an article which states that annually “An estimated eight million [animals] are used in painful experiments. Reports show that at least ten percent of these animals do not receive painkillers” (Andre, Velasquez [2]). Ten percent of eight million is a minimum of eight hundred-thousand animals who are not given painkillers during painful experiments, which is an excessive