The Pros And Cons Of Animal Experimentation

Everyone knows that in order for scientists to find a medicine, they have to test on animals before the scientists can test on humans. This fact was proven by the cures scientists found throughout the years of experimentation. In the greek area animal experimentation was started and was for the same reason as for this modern era because of helping people have a cure. Animal testing quickly evolved throughout the years and with the more time spent with animal experimentation the more cures that could be encountered. Vaccines include for polio, hepatitis and many more viruses. Testing on animals for medical reasons has been a vital part in our economy and also socially. However, nowadays Animal experimentation has been involved more economically …show more content…
In the article “Mapping perceptions of animal experimentation: trend and explanatory factors”. Fabienne Crettaz von roten maps out ideas about the perception that has been placed on the trends of society. Fabienne Crettaz von Roten helps explains the effects that happened because of the contradicting idea about having animal experimentation on animals. Fabienne Crettaz von Roten supports the idea by stating “Contrarily to other countries, there are few results on the public's attitudes toward animal research in Switzerland: the goal of the present article is to fill this gap. In the United States, the National Science Foundation surveys show that between 1988 and 2001 the acceptance of animal experimentation decreased: in 1988, 53 percent of Americans approved animal research; in 2001, only 44 percent approved it (National Science Board, 2002).” ( Von Roten 2008). Van Roten uses data to help represent the idea that people are less in favor of animal experimentation. Van roten helps explain the idea that as time goes on there are less amount of people that want animals to be experimented. Typically when people are in less involved in a idea it means that they do not want a certain idea to be continued. It can be inferred that as time goes on less and less amount of people will want to continue. It would not be a moral thing to continue something people do not like. …show more content…
It could be a scary future indeed, with as many as 30 to 50 percent of all species possibly heading toward extinction by mid-century [2]. Unlike past mass extinctions, caused by events like asteroid strikes, volcanic eruptions, and natural climate shifts, the current crisis is almost entirely caused by us — humans. In fact, 99 percent of currently threatened species are at risk from human activities, primarily those driving habitat loss, introduction of exotic species, and global warming [3]. Because the rate of change in our biosphere is increasing, and because every species’ extinction potentially leads to the extinction of others bound to that species in a complex ecological web, numbers of extinctions are likely to snowball in the coming decades as ecosystems unravel” (The center for biological diversity). Since human activities is part of animal experiments it does imply the fact that animal experimentation is part of human activities. Extinction is something people should not play around with as extinction can affect people as well. If extinction occurs for an animal people lose a big resource people were used to by the animal. The first resource is that some animals are used for necessities that people need. This could reduce the life expectancies that one has because of the resource lost. Animal experimentation seems to be