There has always been an ongoing debate on the way that animals are treated. The discussion revolves around whether or not animals should have stricter laws protecting their rights. In today’s society, people feel that animals deserve the same rights as humans. I believe that animals should be protected more from the horrors of factory farms, entertainment, and testing labs. To do this animal welfare laws need to be revised so they set stricter standards that regulate how animals are treated and housed.
The Difference Between Animal Rights and Animal Welfare
Animal rights activist groups believe that there should be laws put into place to protect animal rights. Animal rights activists define the idea of animal rights should have the same rights …show more content…
The animal welfare movement is defined as animals are expected to be comfortable, safe, and have all the basic nourishment that they need to live. Also, when the slaughter of animals is necessary, law it is expected that it will be quick and the most humane way possible. I prefer animal welfare over animal rights because animals deserve to be comfortable in a safe environment, but in order for humans to also be safe, animals shouldn’t have the same rights as us. I do believe that animal welfare laws need to be revised and updated to set more limitations and restrictions of the living conditions and health of animals. Animals that are being farmed, being experimented on, and being exploited for the publics entertainment, live in awful conditions that barely pass animal welfare laws. Some don’t even pass the set regulations but they get over looked because they are “just animals”. Places that use animals for research and for the publics use, should at least be well cared for and comfortable during the …show more content…
It’s devastating the lives that these “subjects” or “models”, as scientists refer to them, have to live (Sylvia Engdahl). Animals are injected with human diseases so that scientists can inject them with cures to try and heal them. The problem with this method is that since most of these diseases don’t naturally occur in animals, the outcome of the drug cannot be accurate (Sylvia Engdahl). In Noah Berlatsky article, he also states that “Penicillin kills guinea pigs but is inactive in rabbits”. Penicillin was a major breakthrough in history and it completely changed the medical fields advances in medicine. It has been a major life saver for humans, but it was devastating in animal testing. Penicillin was devastating to animal testing because it didn’t have any of the same responses in animals as it did in humans. In the majority of the animals it was tested on it caused bad side effects and even death in some cases, yet to humans it has been a life saver. Berlatsky further provides that “Aspirin kills cats and can cause birth defects in rats, mice, guinea pigs, dogs, and monkeys.” Aspirin is often a household medicine and has been used for decades on humans. Aspirin doesn’t have these effects on humans, therefore animal testing was not reliable and many animals had to suffer because of it. Noah Berlatsky’s article gives many more examples of medicines that doctors prescribe us routinely and how the animal testing they did on it was
The Difference Between Animal Rights and Animal Welfare
Animal rights activist groups believe that there should be laws put into place to protect animal rights. Animal rights activists define the idea of animal rights should have the same rights …show more content…
The animal welfare movement is defined as animals are expected to be comfortable, safe, and have all the basic nourishment that they need to live. Also, when the slaughter of animals is necessary, law it is expected that it will be quick and the most humane way possible. I prefer animal welfare over animal rights because animals deserve to be comfortable in a safe environment, but in order for humans to also be safe, animals shouldn’t have the same rights as us. I do believe that animal welfare laws need to be revised and updated to set more limitations and restrictions of the living conditions and health of animals. Animals that are being farmed, being experimented on, and being exploited for the publics entertainment, live in awful conditions that barely pass animal welfare laws. Some don’t even pass the set regulations but they get over looked because they are “just animals”. Places that use animals for research and for the publics use, should at least be well cared for and comfortable during the …show more content…
It’s devastating the lives that these “subjects” or “models”, as scientists refer to them, have to live (Sylvia Engdahl). Animals are injected with human diseases so that scientists can inject them with cures to try and heal them. The problem with this method is that since most of these diseases don’t naturally occur in animals, the outcome of the drug cannot be accurate (Sylvia Engdahl). In Noah Berlatsky article, he also states that “Penicillin kills guinea pigs but is inactive in rabbits”. Penicillin was a major breakthrough in history and it completely changed the medical fields advances in medicine. It has been a major life saver for humans, but it was devastating in animal testing. Penicillin was devastating to animal testing because it didn’t have any of the same responses in animals as it did in humans. In the majority of the animals it was tested on it caused bad side effects and even death in some cases, yet to humans it has been a life saver. Berlatsky further provides that “Aspirin kills cats and can cause birth defects in rats, mice, guinea pigs, dogs, and monkeys.” Aspirin is often a household medicine and has been used for decades on humans. Aspirin doesn’t have these effects on humans, therefore animal testing was not reliable and many animals had to suffer because of it. Noah Berlatsky’s article gives many more examples of medicines that doctors prescribe us routinely and how the animal testing they did on it was