Persuasive essay in the style of The Daily Mail convincing readers that vivisection is not necessary to advance medically.
One of the biggest issues surrounding medical research can be found in the methods used to obtain this information. A recent study revealed that Oxford University has killed over 200,000 animals so far and 4.12 million tests are carried out every year in total. This is more than just a staggering number; it is representative of the naivety of research centres, the government and citizens all over the world. Despite the argument that animal testing is necessary when developing new medicine and data, it is undeniable that the number of tests carried out annually can, and should, be reduced dramatically.
Alternatives in …show more content…
Animals used in vivisection are ultimately bred specifically for testing and then disposed of, causing pathogenic and hazardous waste. We simply cannot afford to emit hazardous substances that are bad for environment purely to satisfy the false implications that vivisection is the more desirable way to obtain accurate information essential for medical advancement.
Not only does animal experimentation have an extremely negative impact on the environment, but also has an extremely questionable history of reliability. This ultimately stems from the seemingly obvious biological differences between humans and animals. Many health problems including psychopathology, Alzheimer’s and drug addiction are species specific, a factor not considered when initial research took place to investigate these issues. Furthermore various medicines tested on animals have even produced results that do not even vaguely concur with the response from humans. For example Penicillin proved to be toxic in guinea pigs but has been exhibited to be one of the most important tools in medical history. This is not an uncommon occurrence and an opposite reaction is often presented due to the multiple differences both physiological and anatomical between humans and …show more content…
The report was a response to the U.S Envirnnmental Protection Agency (EPA) who requested the NRC to re-inspect the animal-based testing methods. The report clearly states that “[a]dvances in toxicogenomics, bioinformatics, systems biology, epigenetics, and computational toxicology could transform a system based on whole-animal testing to one founded primarily on in vitro methods that evaluate changes in biologic processes using cells, cell lines, or cellular components, preferable of human origin.” Furthermore enforcing the belief that not only can alternative testing methods stop the ruthless killing of hundreds of thousands of animals every year, but advance the world of medical discovery and enhance research all over the
One of the biggest issues surrounding medical research can be found in the methods used to obtain this information. A recent study revealed that Oxford University has killed over 200,000 animals so far and 4.12 million tests are carried out every year in total. This is more than just a staggering number; it is representative of the naivety of research centres, the government and citizens all over the world. Despite the argument that animal testing is necessary when developing new medicine and data, it is undeniable that the number of tests carried out annually can, and should, be reduced dramatically.
Alternatives in …show more content…
Animals used in vivisection are ultimately bred specifically for testing and then disposed of, causing pathogenic and hazardous waste. We simply cannot afford to emit hazardous substances that are bad for environment purely to satisfy the false implications that vivisection is the more desirable way to obtain accurate information essential for medical advancement.
Not only does animal experimentation have an extremely negative impact on the environment, but also has an extremely questionable history of reliability. This ultimately stems from the seemingly obvious biological differences between humans and animals. Many health problems including psychopathology, Alzheimer’s and drug addiction are species specific, a factor not considered when initial research took place to investigate these issues. Furthermore various medicines tested on animals have even produced results that do not even vaguely concur with the response from humans. For example Penicillin proved to be toxic in guinea pigs but has been exhibited to be one of the most important tools in medical history. This is not an uncommon occurrence and an opposite reaction is often presented due to the multiple differences both physiological and anatomical between humans and …show more content…
The report was a response to the U.S Envirnnmental Protection Agency (EPA) who requested the NRC to re-inspect the animal-based testing methods. The report clearly states that “[a]dvances in toxicogenomics, bioinformatics, systems biology, epigenetics, and computational toxicology could transform a system based on whole-animal testing to one founded primarily on in vitro methods that evaluate changes in biologic processes using cells, cell lines, or cellular components, preferable of human origin.” Furthermore enforcing the belief that not only can alternative testing methods stop the ruthless killing of hundreds of thousands of animals every year, but advance the world of medical discovery and enhance research all over the