Ethics In Animal Testing

Great Essays
The Ethics on the Morality of Animal Research
In this paper I will discuss the wrongness of animal testing based on the falsification of the biological account of moral status. All sentient creatures, no matter what their biology, matter morally. Animals used in research labs for testing are sentient, therefore they have moral status. In Cohen’s paper, he describes the testing of animals for human benefit to be morally permissible because they do not have human membership (Cohen, p. 94) However, the more important relevance here is that humans and animals are more similar than stated, and that animals can feel pain and pleasure just as humans do. Cohen explains that the important differences in humans and animate life are the morally relevant
…show more content…
Proponents of animal research want to argue that the avoidance of animals’ pain is not worth the suffering that humans endure; specifically when some human suffering can be prevented or treated with research using animals. “If a clinical research program will result in some procedure that has significant increases in well-being, then some suffering is justified” (Monaghan on Clinical Research, slide 36). This idea is skewed in animal testing. Yes, some of animal research has gone to benefit many humans and animals, but the fail rate of experiments at the costs of animals’ lives is just as great (Engel 4). The cost-benefit analysis regarding animal research has no good answer. A big problem with trying to defend animal research with the explanation of increasing pleasure for the majority is that during the trial of experimentation we cannot know if the result will be a net increase in wellbeing (Monaghan on Clinical research, slide 37). There is pain and pleasure no matter what the situation, and in neither does pleasure overcome pain. Therefore, according to the sentience view, there is no good justification for animal …show more content…
This may seem absurd, but that is what all the objections point to. If sentience is true regarding the morality of animal research, then experimental testing on any creature with the ability to feel pain, including animals and humans, must be morally impermissible. We cannot accept animal testing without accepting the testing of other creatures that are able to feel the same as them, especially when the benefits do not trump the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    For most people there are two scenarios that come to mind when they hear animal testing. The first scenario is that scientist are torturing, neglecting and abusing the animals that are being tested on. The other scenario is that scientist are being ethical, take care of the animals and are creating life-saving medicines. This makes the use of animals in experiments a controversial topic; a topic that isn’t quite black and white when argued. There are different types of animal testing like, medical testing and cosmetic testing; one is more ethical than the other.…

    • 1560 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Data shows that testing on animals is not effective. It can often take research in the wrong direction. Examples, such as experiments proving that smoking both does and does not cause cancer, show how animal testing can be used to prove virtually any theory. Unlike the others, Carl Cohen’s piece, “Why animals have no rights”, is in favor of animal experimentation. He would refute Gluck’s claim that animal testing is morally wrong because he believes animals do not have rights.…

    • 1330 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    However, the applications of animal research to human medicine are limited and often useless. Dr. Aysha Akhtar identifies “three major conditions [that] …. explain why animal experimentation, regardless of the disease category studied, [fail] to reliably inform human health: (1) the effects of the laboratory environment and other variables on study outcomes, (2) disparities between animal models of disease and human diseases, and (3) species differences in physiology and genetics” (“The Flaws and Human Harms of Animal Experimentation”). These conditions are irresolvable hindrances to the advancement of human medicine; it would be more efficient and beneficial to humans to explore innovative technological alternatives that resemble human physiology more closely. In addition, the idea of sacrificing the welfare of animals to advance the welfare of humans is flawed in that it necessarily places more weight on the rights of humans, which violates the deontological view on the rights of sentient beings.…

    • 1221 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Also new effective medical treatments have been effectively developed because of animal experiments. However the tests that the animals are used are extremely painful and immoral. Although people are using animals to satisfy their own desires and do not consider the rights of animals that were sacrificed for animal experiment. People should know that the animals used in animal experimentation are worthier than the benefits that people can earn…

    • 961 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Although this is true, there is still the risk of a product working on animals and not on humans. Vlasak, a surgeon and leader of the North American Animal Liberation Press Office, says, “Half of the drugs that test as safe on animals turn out to not work or be safe in people, so you might as well flip a coin” (qtd. in Clemmitt 10). What is the point of testing on animals if there’s the risk of it not even working on humans? On a more moral based point, people of the opposing side think it’s alright to experiment on animals because they think animals are much more inferior to us.…

    • 1951 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Additionally, animals do not exhibit human diseases such as HIV, Alzheimer's disease and many more. Therefore, it sounds useless to think that testing drugs to these diseases using animals will give accurate results (Slattery & Cryan, 2012). Apart from this, using these animals as test subjects also greatly violates the animal rights, because animals just like humans have feelings and deserve to be treated right. However, if not for the use of these animals, the medicine world would be stagnant. However, the use of animals as testing subjects should be banned, because it greatly invades animals’ rights and puts the animals through a lot of pain and suffering.…

    • 958 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Animal Testing Facts

    • 1218 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Animal Testing “Ninety-two percent of experimental drugs that are safe and effective on animals fail in human clinical trials because they don’t work or are dangerous” (“Animal Experimentation Facts”). This statistic shows animal testing is too inaccurate to be used and animals are not the same as humans. Even though animals are much different than humans, there are people who think testing drugs on the animals the right thing. When a scientist is testing a new drug they will inject the animals; such as rats, fish, monkeys, etc. ; with diseases they wouldn’t naturally get and then giving them the certain drug they are testing for.…

    • 1218 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is considered very unethical to use a human as a test subject in an experiment even for biomedical research, so animals are used. By simply accepting the use of animals in tests over the option of using humans, we are considered Speciests. If humans viewed animals as equals or as valuable as humans, animals would not be used as test subjects. This is a prime example of Speciesism, because we favor the human population by protecting them from being used in biomedical research. The reasoning behind Speciesism seems to be that humans have deeper…

    • 716 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    This shows that getting research from animals for humans is not always approved by the human body, even if scientists say that animals have the same traits as humans. Animals are getting harmed as they are being tested on for research and it is very cruel because the outcome of the animal is dying and by the treatment that may not work on humans it is not worth it for the animals. As a matter of fact, Animal experimentation does not need to happen there is other alternatives that can replace…

    • 1523 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    So, the statement that is claimed before could not possibly be true if more animals are being killed than saved. To finish, animal testing is cruel and unreasonable. There are many other ways to stop the cruelty from spreading, yet not many people are willing to take the chance to stop it. Not much protection is put towards these animals. Stopping America from making animals distressful, locked up, and treated unfairly could make the country a much better place for humans and…

    • 1293 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays