Vivisection: Necessity or Brutality?
Introduction/Explanation of Issues
From the ancient times of the Greek and Romans to modern society, experimenting on living organisms is a concept yet to be outdated. Rather than testing on people, animals have become the primary subjects who endeavor rigorous scientific experimenting; ultimately because it is inhumane to test on a person with such serve trials. Vivisectionists, scientists who conduct experimental trials on living creatures, defend their professions with medical breakthroughs that have saved nearly all of the human race. There are two main motives for experimenting animals: firstly, to analyze more information about the animal, and, secondly, to determine whether the substance at question …show more content…
It is because of these differences that testing on animals seems completely unreliable, and is argued to never guarantee an accurate response. After twenty years and millions of dollars spent on researching AIDS, an incurable condition that inhibits the body’s capability to fight infection, the resulting vaccine that was tested on chimpanzees failed on people (Testing 2017). Furthermore, evidence has proven that testing drugs on animals is practically meaningless for human’s research, and expresses successful rate of only 5-30% ( Testing 2017). Animal tests cannot predict a reliable result on a human body, for example, 150 human tests of a cure to reduce inflammation in extremely sick patients had been performed, and all failed in all cases (Animal Testing 2017). As a substitute, scientists have successfully made alternative models that mimic the human bodies reaction such as simulated eyes, human cells, human tissue, and in turn due away with some of the animal experiments being conducted.
The most significant result and reason for why animal texting is still being practiced is because of its contribution to a number of life-saving cures and treatments. For example, as polio began to spread across the globe, the polio vaccine was tried on animals and successfully reduced the spread of the disease from 350,000 cases (Animal Testing …show more content…
If a laboratory of bunnies are at stake to find a cure for cancer, I suppose I would be in favor of the experimentation, but because thousands of bunnies are dying so that first-world females can have luscious red lips and sparking eyelids, then I am in against such torture. In addition, any moral person would be against the typical animal abuse such as hitting or kicking a dog, but ultimately the pain inflicted on animals from experimentations is simply a different kind of abuse. I believe that experimenting on animals should be limited to only necessary medical research and not for commercial uses such as testing makeup, soap, lotion, etc. (The Truth about Animals Used for Experimentation 2017)
Conclusion
To further support animal testing, some argue it’s either us or them. What they neglect to realize is that we are them, and they are us. We cannot justify the killing of innocent lives who do not know any better when we, the most developed creatures to roam this earth, know better ourselves. Being in favor of animal testing does not make you evil and being against does not make you are ignorant, but after seeing both perspectives we must understand the need for a balance of both
Introduction/Explanation of Issues
From the ancient times of the Greek and Romans to modern society, experimenting on living organisms is a concept yet to be outdated. Rather than testing on people, animals have become the primary subjects who endeavor rigorous scientific experimenting; ultimately because it is inhumane to test on a person with such serve trials. Vivisectionists, scientists who conduct experimental trials on living creatures, defend their professions with medical breakthroughs that have saved nearly all of the human race. There are two main motives for experimenting animals: firstly, to analyze more information about the animal, and, secondly, to determine whether the substance at question …show more content…
It is because of these differences that testing on animals seems completely unreliable, and is argued to never guarantee an accurate response. After twenty years and millions of dollars spent on researching AIDS, an incurable condition that inhibits the body’s capability to fight infection, the resulting vaccine that was tested on chimpanzees failed on people (Testing 2017). Furthermore, evidence has proven that testing drugs on animals is practically meaningless for human’s research, and expresses successful rate of only 5-30% ( Testing 2017). Animal tests cannot predict a reliable result on a human body, for example, 150 human tests of a cure to reduce inflammation in extremely sick patients had been performed, and all failed in all cases (Animal Testing 2017). As a substitute, scientists have successfully made alternative models that mimic the human bodies reaction such as simulated eyes, human cells, human tissue, and in turn due away with some of the animal experiments being conducted.
The most significant result and reason for why animal texting is still being practiced is because of its contribution to a number of life-saving cures and treatments. For example, as polio began to spread across the globe, the polio vaccine was tried on animals and successfully reduced the spread of the disease from 350,000 cases (Animal Testing …show more content…
If a laboratory of bunnies are at stake to find a cure for cancer, I suppose I would be in favor of the experimentation, but because thousands of bunnies are dying so that first-world females can have luscious red lips and sparking eyelids, then I am in against such torture. In addition, any moral person would be against the typical animal abuse such as hitting or kicking a dog, but ultimately the pain inflicted on animals from experimentations is simply a different kind of abuse. I believe that experimenting on animals should be limited to only necessary medical research and not for commercial uses such as testing makeup, soap, lotion, etc. (The Truth about Animals Used for Experimentation 2017)
Conclusion
To further support animal testing, some argue it’s either us or them. What they neglect to realize is that we are them, and they are us. We cannot justify the killing of innocent lives who do not know any better when we, the most developed creatures to roam this earth, know better ourselves. Being in favor of animal testing does not make you evil and being against does not make you are ignorant, but after seeing both perspectives we must understand the need for a balance of both