Using Animals for Testing - Coursework Example

Name Professor Course Date of submission Argumentative Essay on Using Animals for Testing Introduction Throughout the years, animals have been used in various fields. Nonetheless, the issue of using them in medical research has notably attracted public attention since, to most people, it seems unnatural and cruel despite the number of animals used for various purposes and ill-effects. Research indicate that more that 50 million animals are used globally in experiments annually. For the past decades, there have been increasing debates on animal experimentation, which can be categorized into two distinct features: firstly, do animal research yield important knowledge that is not available from other sources and secondly, is it accepted morally to use the animals in a way which harms them. Such questions have created a divide among the people (Linzey and Tutu 114). In medical research, animals have improved dramatically the health of human race. It is important to note that without animal testing, the cure for diseases such as polio would not be existing while most diabetics would be dead from the diseases. Nonetheless, some people rubbish such benefits citing that it is wrong to use animals for testing medicine. It is from that background that this essay will argue for and against using animals for testing in medical research. a conclusion will be drawn based on the findings of the research. Arguments for animal testing Animal testing allow scientist to test and develop new drugs that assist to save human lives. There are animals such monkeys and rabbits that have almost similar genetic compositions and physical processes to human beings. With such features, it becomes easier for the scientists to test the effects of certain drugs on the animals. If the drug under the test produces undesirable results on the animals, then it is evident that it would have negative impacts on humans. Therefore, using animals for testing in medical research assists in development of different treatment methods and finding safer methods of treatments. From such analysis, animal testing is the only accurate method of learning the human body without causing harm to them (Cruelty Free International, 2016). Even though most people tend argue that medical researchers put the lives of animals are risk through using them as test specimen, the main question that has remained unanswered is whether animals life needs to valued more than that of the humans. Based on emotional thinking, there might be some guilt that animals are being hurt; however, while thinking about the numbers of human lives that have been saved from animal testing, it makes the process worth. The animals may not have similar psychology as the humans; nonetheless, animal testing is accurate enough in testing whether the developed substance is safe enough for human consumption. Considering the fact that animal testing has been able to aid in the development of treatment for bacterial infections, which are main causes of death globally, has been able to save many lives. Besides, most people believed that animal testing only assist humans, though it is important to note that animal testing also assist animals in various ways (PETA, 2014). Humans and animals share certain diseases such as high blood pressures, cancer, asthma, and epilepsy; therefore, they need similar medications as humans for treatment, which come from animal testing. Halting animal research is likely to have unfavourable consequence on the health and welfare of the humans considering that there is no alternative viable experimentation. Besides having assisted in the development of medicine, medical history indicate that animal testing has been able to reduce the risk associated with mass-poisoning. Initially, sulphanilamide was drug used in treating streptococcal infections. The producer needed to develop a liquid preparate and discovered that the diethylene glycol had proper features: physical and chemical. However, the manufacturer failed to test for the levels of elixir sulphanilamide before distributing the drug. Due to the presence of diethylene glycol, almost 105 patients succumbed to death. If the manufacturer had tested the safety of the drug for human consumption, then toxicity level would have been observed and deaths prevented. Animal testing is cheap considering the numbers available for medical research. Furthermore, animals are bred and maintained easily and safely to laboratories that are controlled. Based on comparison, the cost of testing on the humans would be highly expensive. It is true that animal testing is a cruel process; nonetheless, it would be very cruel to test the drugs on the people or leave people to die due to inadequate information about the drug. Additionally, there are legal frameworks in most countries that set standards for animal testing and laboratories with proper guidelines that prevent cruelty practices. Globally, there are many people against animal testing. Nevertheless, it is important to note that animal testing to some extent may be upsetting considering that most them are used for experimentation purposes. When people think of animals as creatures that assist in developing treatments to save the millions of people, then the practice may not sound bad at all. Such practices have not only saved the humans but also the animals. An animal that has short life expectancy is not as important as losing a loved one although the groups against animal testing would argue that animals feel pain as well and have families (Murnaghan, 2017). Research from the World Health Organization revealed that HIV is one of the pandemic diseases that claim the lives of many people globally: 28.1 million people with 4.3 million being the number of children under 15 years. Animal testing is one of the practices used to establish breakthrough for finding the medicine that would completely eradicate the menace. Without the existence animal testing, most of the work developed by the scientists would not be in existence. The practice has not only led to the advancement in the patient care system, but also improvement in the animal testing. Improvements in the fields of antibiotics and blood pressure play significant roles in animal testing. Through animal testing, the researchers have been able to recognize and understand the growth of species and figuring out the effects likely to emerge in the future. It is evident that animal research has played important role in advancement of medical practice for both the animals and humans. Through animal practices, there have development of treatment for cancer, organ plant, and polio. Arguments against animal testing People violate the rights of these animals while using them research. Moreover, animals deserve basic moral rights like accessibility to respectful treatment. However, using such animals for mere scientific research reduces their inherent values and respect. Animals and people are similar in different ways since they both have feelings, think, and experience pain. Therefore, it is important to treat them and accord the respect as humans (Chicago, 2015). People violate their rights by using them in research since they do have the choice. Researchers subject animals to painful and dreadful procedures. Ethically and morally, experimentation on animals is wrong irrespective of how much the humans benefit from such activities as it involves infringement of animals’ rights. Animals cannot sacrifice themselves for the improvement in the welfare of humans and technology since humans make decisions for them, as they have no capacity of vocalizing their preferences and choices. Moreover, such decisions do not often consider their rights, well-being, and quality of lives. The pains and sufferings that researchers subject the animals are not worth any possible benefit that humans enjoy. Studies define animal pain as unpleasant sensory and emotional experience that originates from a specific area of the body due to damage of the tissue. Moreover, they feel pain in a similar manner that humans do; in fact, the reactions of animals and humans to pain are virtually the same. When the researchers use animals for toxicity testing in the laboratory, they subject these animals to pain and dreadful experiments. The common toxic tests include Draize test and LD50 test, which are characterized by painful procedures that inflict suffering on the animals. For example, in the Draize test, the researchers place the toxic substance on the eye of the animal then monitors any form of damage to the cornea and other eye tissues. Such procedures are painful for animals and might result in blindness, scarring, and death (Lone Star College System, 2005). Testing subjects animals to vomiting, convulsion, and internal bleeding. Unfortunately, the researchers do not put out the dying animals using euthanasia. Testing the products on the animals is unacceptable since there are viable alternatives. Some companies, especially the cosmetics, have resorted to better methods of testing products without the involvement of the animals. Currently, millions of animals used in research facilities spend much time locked in the cold cages within the laboratories making them suffer the pain, loneliness, and desire to be free. Such confinements only allow them to wait fearfully for the next dreadful experiment. People test animals meaninglessly and kill them since there are cheap, fast, and non-animal tests to replace the currently used. Realistic models are emerging to replace the use of animals (Coster 105). For example, human skin models tests are currently on the rise including the EpiDerm test, which replace the skin corrosion method used for rabbits. Besides, some institutions are testing products using cultured human cells grown in the laboratories. Medical research involving the animals dramatically enhanced the health of the human race. Without animals testing, the scientists could not have had the breakthrough to the cure of polio and diabetes. Conclusion Based on the analysis, the debate of animal testing seem to be complicated it involves both personal feelings and rational discussions. The use of animals for experiments is harmful, cruel, and ineffective; however, it is important to note that human life is supreme and of great essence from both legal and ethical perspective. There are other methods used to test drugs that medical practitioners might explore instead of concentrating on the animal option. For many years, the practice of using animals for has been raising several controversial issues. The medical practitioners use animals in research to enhance the safety of the products consumed by humans. People have different feelings about such practices as most people view them us companions while others consider them as a means of advancing medical techniques. Irrespective of how people perceive the animals, globally people exploit them in research facilities and cosmetic organizations. Humans are the beneficiaries of successful tests; however, the pain, sufferings, and deaths these animals undergo are not worth the benefits. As a result, it is inappropriate to use animals in research and to test the safety of products. Works Cited Chicago, I. L. "Petition · Stop Animal Testing: Replace Animals in Research with Non-Animal Alternative Methods · Change.org." Change.org, Change.org, 2015, www.change.org/p/stop-animal-testing-replace-animals-in-research-with-non-animal-alternative-methods. Accessed 5 May 2017. Coster, Patience. Animal Research and Testing. Wayland, 2011. Cruelty Free International. "Arguments Against Animal Testing." Cruelty Free International, Cruelty Free International, 2016, www.crueltyfreeinternational.org/why-we-do-it/arguments-against-animal-testing. Accessed 5 May 2017. Linzey, Andrew, and Desmond Tutu. The Global Guide to Animal Protection. University of Illinois Press, 2013. Lone Star College System. "Save the Animals: Stop Animal Testing." Lone Star College, Lone Star College, 2005, www.lonestar.edu/stopanimaltesting.htm. Accessed 5 May 2017. Murnaghan, Ian. "Using Animals for Testing: Pros Versus Cons." Informed Discussion on Animal Welfare in Animal Testing, Using Animals for Testing, 2017, www.aboutanimaltesting.co.uk/using-animals-testing-pros-versus-cons.html. Accessed 5 May 2017. PETA. "Top Five Reasons to Stop Animal Testing." PETA, PETA, 2014, www.peta.org/blog/top-five-reasons-stop-animal-testing/. Accessed 5 May 2017. Read More