Animal Research: Right or Wrong - Essay Example

Animal Research: Right or Wrong Animal testing has become a part of experimentation process, especially for consumer products, as animals provide the substitute for the human body in the course of the experiment. Many animals are used in these experiments with an estimate of a 100 million. Of course, there are ethical groups that oppose these experiments, and there are also those groups who are for animal testing. This paper presents two sides of the problem: those who are in favor of animal testing and those who oppose it. I. Opposition Animal testing is not as good as it claims to be. It is not definitive proof when experimental results from animal testing delivers the same effects when administered to humans. There are many medical practitioners who argue that animal testing is based on a false premise since the results from animal experiments may not necessarily be significant to the effects on the human body; human beings, as certain a species, surely react differently to chemicals that are applied to these experimental animals. This makes it difficult for such experiments to be successful. Two of the most famous cases of this type of experiment are the ones involving Thalidomide and Clioquinol. Thalidomide came clean in the animal testing stage, involving thousands of animals, and it was deemed safe to be released to the public even to pregnant women and breastfeeding women. At least 10 000 children had been born with serious birth defects because their mothers had taken Thalidomide when they were pregnant, even if the animal testing proved it to be safe. Another drug is the Clioquinol, which was also tested on thousands of animals successfully but failed when it was used by humans. It was marketed as a drug against diarrhea and it worked well in animals. In humans, though, it actually caused diarrhea. As a result, more than 30 000 cases of paralysis, blindness and deaths occurred to those who took Clioquinol (Archibald). Another drug that was deemed safe for public use was Vioxx, which was used to treat arthritis. It was perfectly fine on the animal testing level, and was even proved to be beneficial for the heart but the results indicated otherwise in humans. It actually induced about 140 000 heart attacks and strokes in the US. Hormone replacement therapy is another thing, which was proven to reduce the risk of heart disease and stroke in monkeys but increases the risk in humans. The Lancet reported that more than 20 000 British women acquired breast cancer as a result of taking HRT, in addition to cases of heart attacks and stroke. These are not isolated cases. As the Journal of American Medical Association reported, there are almost 100, 000 deaths and 2 million hospitalized people who used drugs as prescribed, and they had reactions. According to the British Medical association, 4 out of 10 people are actually expected to suffer severe side effects with the use of prescribed drugs and 1 in 10 occupied hospital beds are actually patients who are made ill by their doctors because of prescribed drugs. It should be noted that these drugs have been safely tested on animals. Ethics and animal rights also appeal to the opposition of the use of animals in an experiment (Festing, 2007). They claim that using animals is an ineffective way to conduct experiments pertaining to human bodies. The suffering that the animals have to undergo is not worthy of the unreliable results that are produced (PETA). II. Why Animal Testing? Of course, if it has not been that successful, why would the scientific community adhere to the practice of animal testing? The animal research industry claims that there are a lot of vaccines and drugs that were discovered due to animal research. Many animal research groups claim that the human life is at stake if animal experimentation is discontinued. Examples of drugs that proved to be successful, along with the use of animal experimentation, were the polio vaccine and anesthesia. The polio vaccine is the ultimate example of the successful use of animal experimentation. Dr. Jonas Salk and Dr. Albert Sabin were the ones who discovered the polio vaccine. They used monkey kidney cells to produce polio vaccines. The discovery of anesthesia was credited to Crawford Williamson Long in the mid-nineteenth century as he observed humans who have taken in ether in ether parties. He observed that these humans are impervious to pain and this made ether a practical tool in doing surgery. They also claim that using animals are important because it advances knowledge and studying animals is a vital part of the research process. Scientists claim that animals and humans have the same basic body functions, and to understand the human body functions, they should study animals first. They observe the animals when they get ill and this leads to an understanding that it is practically the same for the humans as well. Comparing different species and their anatomies in contrast to other animals’ (especially to humans) is a good way to gain understanding and insight when it comes to one’s anatomy (Blue, 2008). They are also used as models when the scientists study a behavior of a certain disease. Since humans and animals share the same kinds of diseases, it is logical that the disease behavior for both humans and animals are the same. These models give scientists the understanding how the immune system works, how the disease manifests itself, who are at risk, etc. Now after understanding the effects of drugs in a body and how the disease works itself, the scientists can know put that understanding into good use by applying the things that they have learned, and they usually use animals with induced symptoms to figure out if their theories are true. These animal models are therefore important since they give out new data that can improve the technology needed for the development of drugs. These are essential since the data that is gathered in these experiments are important since they are used for the improvement of the human health (Animal Research.info). Of course, the broadest claim that the scientists use for animal research is that animal research is done to protect the safety of the people and animals. Animal research delivers the data on effectiveness and the safety of a new compound to be therapeutically used, and they also determine the doses of these compounds that are potent enough to be a drug, which is beneficial to humans. And of course, using animals are more beneficial to using chemicals because chemicals can prove to be damaging to the environment; thus, damaging to more animals in the long run (Animal Research.info). III. Analysis Animal research is actually one of the issues that the contemporary scientists have to face. After the thalidomide incident, more scientists have become wary of the methodology that they use when undertaking such experiments, as they not only endanger animals, they also endanger the lives of people. The US implemented the Kefauver-Harris act in 1961 as an answer to the thalidomide commotion that states that the FDA should receive proof of safety and efficacy for new drugs (Lenz, 1962). Then again, the scientists, even as early as in 1962 knew that animal testing was unreliable, with a report in the Lancet stating: ‘We must face the fact that the most careful tests of a new drug’s effects on animals may tell us little of its effect in humans’ (Lenz, 1962). And scientists admitted in 1964 that laboratories deal with animal research only to satisfy government regulators. Because of animal research and testing, these laboratories can always give evidence that they have undergone intensive tests to ensure the safety of their new drug, and to prove that they have done their best to prevent any untoward incidents from happening. They are actually required to submit reports that involve animal testing, one from a rodent and another one which is a higher mammal. Even if it is clear that the animal testing cannot guarantee safety and efficacy on humans, scientists have to do so because it’s the law. There are also other alternatives to animal testing, like in silico and in vitro testings (Archibald). Although these two methods are usually the two steps new drugs undergo before being used in animal testing, many drug companies these days use them instead of animal testing. In vitro testing is testing via test tubes while in silico testing is done via computer modeling. As contemporary scientists know that humans and animals do not react in the same way, they usually employ volunteer patients to test a new drug (American Physiological Association). They are tested first with microdoses and are observed for a long period of time. This method is the best in finding out the efficacy of new drugs. It is also the safest (Pound, 2004). IV. Conclusion Animal research has been around for a long time. In fact, it has been there so long that people actually see it as an important aspect of the experimental methodology. However, scientific evidence point out that animal testing is not quite reliable as different species react differently to specific drugs. Not only that, animal research is unethical and it should not be an accepted practice. Because of the proven inaccuracies, one can conclude that the use of animals in research is almost in vain. There are other alternatives to animal testing and they are proven to be more efficient, making the use of animals in a modern experimental setup insignificant. PETA (People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals) advocates healthy living so that people would not have to depend on medicine, thus reducing the usage of animals in experiments. References: Archibald, Kathy. Animal Testing: Science or Fiction? Global Action Network, n.d. Web. 11 October 2011. Blue, Laura. How Much Does Animal Testing Tell Us? Time.com, 17 June 2008. Web. 11 October 2011. Pound, Pandora; Ebrahim, Shah; Sandercock, Peter; Bracken, Michael; Roberts, Ian. Where is the evidence that animal research benefit humans? British Medical Journal, 26 February 2004. Web. October 12, 2011. Does Animal Experimentation Save Human Lives. PETA, n.d. Web. 12 October 2011 Festing, Simon and Wilkinson, Robin. The ethics of animal research. EMBO Reports. 2007. Web. 12 October 2011. Guiding Principles for Research Involving Animals and Human Beings. American Physiological Society, 2008. Web. 12 October 2011. Lenz, W.Thalidomide and congenital abnormalities, Lancet 1:271-272 (Feb. 3) 1962. Why animals are used. Animal Research.info, n.d. Web. 12 October 2011. Read More