Register to read the introduction…
It is used in developing new drugs and approving the safety of drugs. Hence, millions of unhealthy people have been helped indirectly by animal testing. However, animal testing is beneficial for human only and not for the animals used. Most of the animals which give great contribution to the health of world's dwellers are cruelly slaughtered during experiments and not well treated in drug-development laboratories. Animals, like human, also have rights to be freed from suffering and treated well. We, as human beings, must understand that animals are also living beings which feelings should be considered as well. So, is animal testing still appropriate to be used in drug industry? I do not think so. It is inappropriate because most of the testing implemented hurts the animals both physically and mentally, it generates a lot of social problem, and its results are often inaccurate. Also, there is no need to use animal testing in drug industry because
…show more content…
Results of animal testing are relied by drug manufacturers in producing their products. If there is a single problem exists in the results, the whole drugs being produced based on the results will be very dangerous to be consumed. Because animal testing do not always give dependable and accurate results, many drugs actually could have opposite impacts on the human consumers. Instead of curing, they could be damaging. The Thalidomide tragedy in 1960 is one of the cases caused by animal testing inaccuracy. Thalidomide is a drug that is designed as a sleeping aid and an antiemetic to help pregnant women overcome morning sickness. However, it was found causing malformations during fetal development although it had passed the safety tests implemented on animals. Approximately 15,000 fetuses were damaged by Thalidomide, about 12,000 of whom were born with birth imperfection, and only 8,000 of them survived their first year of life. Another example of tragedies caused by failure in animal testing is the Vioxx tragedy. Vioxx was created as a COX-2 inhibitor (Wikipedia, 2005). It was believed to have heart-protective effect because that was the result obtained by "dependable" animal testing. Nonetheless, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) consultant, John J. Pippin, recently revealed that Vioxx had a heart-damage effect on human (PCRM, 2005). The Vioxx and
Results of animal testing are relied by drug manufacturers in producing their products. If there is a single problem exists in the results, the whole drugs being produced based on the results will be very dangerous to be consumed. Because animal testing do not always give dependable and accurate results, many drugs actually could have opposite impacts on the human consumers. Instead of curing, they could be damaging. The Thalidomide tragedy in 1960 is one of the cases caused by animal testing inaccuracy. Thalidomide is a drug that is designed as a sleeping aid and an antiemetic to help pregnant women overcome morning sickness. However, it was found causing malformations during fetal development although it had passed the safety tests implemented on animals. Approximately 15,000 fetuses were damaged by Thalidomide, about 12,000 of whom were born with birth imperfection, and only 8,000 of them survived their first year of life. Another example of tragedies caused by failure in animal testing is the Vioxx tragedy. Vioxx was created as a COX-2 inhibitor (Wikipedia, 2005). It was believed to have heart-protective effect because that was the result obtained by "dependable" animal testing. Nonetheless, Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) consultant, John J. Pippin, recently revealed that Vioxx had a heart-damage effect on human (PCRM, 2005). The Vioxx and