Oliveira 1
Animals should not be used for scientific or commercial testing because animal testing is cruel and inhumane, alternate testing methods are available, and because humans and animals are every different from each other making animals very poor test subjects. Research on living animals has been practiced since at least 500 BC (Animal Testing Pro & Con). Scientist use animals for many different purposes. Animals are used to test the effectiveness and safety of new drugs before those drugs are given to people to treat illness and disease. Animals can also be used as test subjects for products like lipstick, eyeshadow, contact lens solution, and shampoo (Hayhurst, 26). Often these animals either die during the testing process or suffer …show more content…
Many methods have been developed to replace and reprieve animal testing. Three alternative testing options are; in vitro testing methods, in silico models, and studies done on human volunteers. (Alternatives to Testing.) The in vitro methods are tests that are used to diagnose diseases and monitor the status of patients using samples of cells, blood, or other tissues used from humans. (Alternatives to Testing.) In Silico models, advanced computer techniques are used to create virtual reconstructions of human molecular structures. (Animal Testing Pros & Cons.) Micro dosing is used in human volunteers and is the administration of small doses too small to create adverse reactions (Animal Testing Pros & Con.) These are just a few popular methods that can replace animal testing. These testing methods can produce more reliable results than animal testing and will someday hopefully replace animal testing for good. With so many other options available animals should not be used or hurt in experiments. Looking at the results of animal testing clearly shows that animals are poor test subjects because of the lack of comparison between them and …show more content…
Along with being inaccurate animal testing kills animals and is proven unreliable. In 2010, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported that 97,123 animals suffered pain during experiments and are not given any anesthesia for pain relief. These tests included 1,395 primates, 5,996 rabbits, 33,652 guinea pigs, and 48,015 hamsters (Animal Testing Pro & Con.) Other testing methods have proven to be
Oliveira 4 more humane, faster, cheaper, and more relevant to humans (Animal Testing 101.) Animals suffer extreme frustration, loneliness, and long to be free. After enduring a life of terror and pain almost all test subjects will be killed, if they do not die during the experiment (Animal Testing 101.) Animals do not deserve a life of suffering and pain just because humans might gain some knowledge about medicine or beauty products. With the number of effective alternatives that are available, animal testing should be put to an end. When it comes to the life, safety, and wellbeing of animals where do you
Animals should not be used for scientific or commercial testing because animal testing is cruel and inhumane, alternate testing methods are available, and because humans and animals are every different from each other making animals very poor test subjects. Research on living animals has been practiced since at least 500 BC (Animal Testing Pro & Con). Scientist use animals for many different purposes. Animals are used to test the effectiveness and safety of new drugs before those drugs are given to people to treat illness and disease. Animals can also be used as test subjects for products like lipstick, eyeshadow, contact lens solution, and shampoo (Hayhurst, 26). Often these animals either die during the testing process or suffer …show more content…
Many methods have been developed to replace and reprieve animal testing. Three alternative testing options are; in vitro testing methods, in silico models, and studies done on human volunteers. (Alternatives to Testing.) The in vitro methods are tests that are used to diagnose diseases and monitor the status of patients using samples of cells, blood, or other tissues used from humans. (Alternatives to Testing.) In Silico models, advanced computer techniques are used to create virtual reconstructions of human molecular structures. (Animal Testing Pros & Cons.) Micro dosing is used in human volunteers and is the administration of small doses too small to create adverse reactions (Animal Testing Pros & Con.) These are just a few popular methods that can replace animal testing. These testing methods can produce more reliable results than animal testing and will someday hopefully replace animal testing for good. With so many other options available animals should not be used or hurt in experiments. Looking at the results of animal testing clearly shows that animals are poor test subjects because of the lack of comparison between them and …show more content…
Along with being inaccurate animal testing kills animals and is proven unreliable. In 2010, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) reported that 97,123 animals suffered pain during experiments and are not given any anesthesia for pain relief. These tests included 1,395 primates, 5,996 rabbits, 33,652 guinea pigs, and 48,015 hamsters (Animal Testing Pro & Con.) Other testing methods have proven to be
Oliveira 4 more humane, faster, cheaper, and more relevant to humans (Animal Testing 101.) Animals suffer extreme frustration, loneliness, and long to be free. After enduring a life of terror and pain almost all test subjects will be killed, if they do not die during the experiment (Animal Testing 101.) Animals do not deserve a life of suffering and pain just because humans might gain some knowledge about medicine or beauty products. With the number of effective alternatives that are available, animal testing should be put to an end. When it comes to the life, safety, and wellbeing of animals where do you