Animal testing has been used in the advancement of medicine, cosmetics and household products since the 19th century. Since that time there have been more than 100 million animal deaths each year and millions more are commonly subjected to force feeding, prolonged periods of physical restraint, neck breaking and decapitation due to animal experimentations (PETA 3). Even after recognition that animal testing seldom provides accurate results in human beings, the torture and speciesism continues. The suffering of animals caused by biomedical and cosmetic research can not be morally justified. We as moral agents have an obligation to protect and reduce harm to all sentient beings. These animals regardless of human interest, deserve equal rights
…show more content…
Many well known cosmetic companies such as Urban Decay, Paul Mitchel and The Body Shop have already jumped on this wagon and are committed to more ethical ways of testing their products. Researchers from Harvard’s Wyss Institute have allowed for such companies to have a choice in whether or not to harm animals in the making of their products. In an attempt to reduce harm and attain more accurate results, Harvard’s Wyss Insitute created “organs-on-chips” which contain human cells grown in a state-of-the-art system. These chips mimic the structure and function of human organs and organ systems and can be used in disease research, drug testing and toxicity testing. The results from these chips have been shown to replicate human physiology, diseases and drug responses more accurately than animal experiments do (PETA 2). Companies such as HµRel Corporation have already started implementing these chips into products that researchers can use. Not only do alternatives like this save millions of lives, both animals and human, but they also supply researcher with increasingly better results than animal subjects do. “The Food and Drug Administration has noted that 92 percent of all drugs that are shown to be safe and effective in animal tests fail in human trials because they don’t work or are dangerous. And of the small percentage of drugs …show more content…
The AWA may sound like a solution to animal suffering but in actuality it provides very little relief or support for animals. In Mar. 2009, the Humane Society of the United States found 338 possible violations of the Animal Welfare Act at the federally funded New Iberia Research Center in Louisiana. This is not an uncommon occurrence. In a 2011 incident at the University of California at Davis Center for Neuroscience, "three baby mice were found sealed alive in a plastic baggie and left unattended" on a laboratory counter, according to the Sacramento Bee. Incidents like this are allowed to continue because the AWA fails to cover rats, mice, fish or birds which amount to 95% of all animals used in research (ProCon). Another system that is insufficiently enforced in most research facilities is the “three Rs” which are the building principles for animal research. The Rs stand for reduction of animals used, replacement of animals for non-animal alternatives and refinement which means animals are properly cared for and any distress is minimized (Understanding Animal Research). This again sounds great for animal welfare but on a large scale this system does very little for the animals. 100 million animals, in the U.S alone, are still killed each year and millions more are harmed in the process. Data shows that we are not doing enough to prevent
Many well known cosmetic companies such as Urban Decay, Paul Mitchel and The Body Shop have already jumped on this wagon and are committed to more ethical ways of testing their products. Researchers from Harvard’s Wyss Institute have allowed for such companies to have a choice in whether or not to harm animals in the making of their products. In an attempt to reduce harm and attain more accurate results, Harvard’s Wyss Insitute created “organs-on-chips” which contain human cells grown in a state-of-the-art system. These chips mimic the structure and function of human organs and organ systems and can be used in disease research, drug testing and toxicity testing. The results from these chips have been shown to replicate human physiology, diseases and drug responses more accurately than animal experiments do (PETA 2). Companies such as HµRel Corporation have already started implementing these chips into products that researchers can use. Not only do alternatives like this save millions of lives, both animals and human, but they also supply researcher with increasingly better results than animal subjects do. “The Food and Drug Administration has noted that 92 percent of all drugs that are shown to be safe and effective in animal tests fail in human trials because they don’t work or are dangerous. And of the small percentage of drugs …show more content…
The AWA may sound like a solution to animal suffering but in actuality it provides very little relief or support for animals. In Mar. 2009, the Humane Society of the United States found 338 possible violations of the Animal Welfare Act at the federally funded New Iberia Research Center in Louisiana. This is not an uncommon occurrence. In a 2011 incident at the University of California at Davis Center for Neuroscience, "three baby mice were found sealed alive in a plastic baggie and left unattended" on a laboratory counter, according to the Sacramento Bee. Incidents like this are allowed to continue because the AWA fails to cover rats, mice, fish or birds which amount to 95% of all animals used in research (ProCon). Another system that is insufficiently enforced in most research facilities is the “three Rs” which are the building principles for animal research. The Rs stand for reduction of animals used, replacement of animals for non-animal alternatives and refinement which means animals are properly cared for and any distress is minimized (Understanding Animal Research). This again sounds great for animal welfare but on a large scale this system does very little for the animals. 100 million animals, in the U.S alone, are still killed each year and millions more are harmed in the process. Data shows that we are not doing enough to prevent