Most people agree that animals have at least some moral status — that is why it is wrong to abuse pets or needlessly hurt other animals. This alone represents a shift from a past view where animals had no moral status and treating an animal well was more about maintaining human standards of dignity than respecting any innate rights of the animal. In modern times, the question has shifted from whether animals have moral status to how much moral status they have and what rights come with that status.
Jeffrey and Lonette Stayton Awards for Writing Using animals in research and to test the safety of products has been a topic of heated debate for decades. According to data collected by F. Barbara Orlans for her book, In the Name of Science: Issues in Responsible Animal Experimentation, sixty percent of all animals used in testing are used in biomedical research and product-safety testing People have different feelings for animals; many look upon animals as companions while others view animals as a means for advancing medical techniques or furthering experimental research.
However individuals perceive animals, the fact remains that animals are being exploited by research facilities and cosmetics companies all across the country and all around the world.
Although humans often benefit from successful animal research, the pain, the suffering, and the deaths of animals are not worth the possible human benefits. Therefore, animals should not be used in research or to test the safety of products. This inherent value is not respected when animals are reduced to being mere tools in a scientific experiment" qtd.
Animals and people are alike in many ways; they both feel, think, behave, and experience pain. Thus, animals should be treated with the same respect as humans. Animals are subjected to tests that are often painful or cause permanent damage or death, and they are never given the option of not participating in the experiment.
Risks are not morally transferable to those who do not choose to take them" qtd. Animals do not willingly sacrifice themselves for the advancement of human welfare and new technology. Their decisions are made for them because they cannot vocalize their own preferences and choices.
Therefore, animal experimentation should be stopped because it violates the rights of animals. Next, the pain and suffering that experimental animals are subject to is not worth any possible benefits to humans. Animals feel pain in many of the same ways that humans do; in fact, their reactions to pain are virtually identical both humans and animals scream, for example.
When animals are used for product toxicity testing or laboratory research, they are subjected to painful and frequently deadly experiments. Two of the most commonly used toxicity tests are the Draize test and the LD50 test, both of which are infamous for the intense pain and suffering they inflect upon experimental animals.
In the Draize test the substance or product being tested is placed in the eyes of an animal generally a rabbit is used for this test ; then the animal is monitored for damage to the cornea and other tissues in and near the eye.
This test is intensely painful for the animal, and blindness, scarring, and death are generally the end results. The Draize test has been criticized for being unreliable and a needless waste of animal life.
The LD50 test is used to test the dosage of a substance that is necessary to cause death in fifty percent of the animal subjects within a certain amount of time. To perform this test, the researchers hook the animals up to tubes that pump huge amounts of the test product into their stomachs until they die.
This test is extremely painful to the animals because death can take days or even weeks. According to Orlans, the animals suffer from "vomiting, diarrhea, paralysis, convulsion, and internal bleeding.
Since death is the required endpoint, dying animals are not put out of their misery by euthanasia" The precision it purports to provide is an illusion because of uncontrollable biological variables" The use of the Draize test and the LD50 test to examine product toxicity has decreased over the past few years, but these tests have not been eliminated completely.
Thus, because animals are subjected to agonizing pain, suffering and death when they are used in laboratory and cosmetics testing, animal research must be stopped to prevent more waste of animal life. Finally, the testing of products on animals is completely unnecessary because viable alternatives are available.
Many cosmetic companies, for example, have sought better ways to test their products without the use of animal subjects. In Against Animal Testing, a pamphlet published by The Body Shop, a well-known cosmetics and bath-product company based in London, the development of products that "use natural ingredients, like bananas and Basil nut oil, as well as others with a long history of safe human usage" is advocated instead of testing on animals 3.
Furthermore, the Draize test has become practically obsolete because of the development of a synthetic cellular tissue that closely resembles human skin.
Researchers can test the potential damage that a product can do to the skin by using this artificial "skin" instead of testing on animals. Another alternative to this test is a product called Eyetex.
This synthetic material turns opaque when a product damages it, closely resembling the way that a real eye reacts to harmful substances. Computers have also been used to simulate and estimate the potential damage that a product or chemical can cause, and human tissues and cells have been used to examine the effects of harmful substances.
In another method, in vitro testing, cellular tests are done inside a test tube. All of these tests have been proven to be useful and reliable alternatives to testing products on live animals.
Therefore, because effective means of product toxicity testing are available without the use of live animal specimens, testing potentially deadly substances on animals is unnecessary. However, many people believe that animal testing is justified because the animals are sacrificed to make products safer for human use and consumption.
Experimental animals are virtually tortured to death, and all of these tests are done in the interest of human welfare, without any thought to how the animals are treated. Others respond that animals themselves benefit from animal research.Animal Testing Essay Examples.
total results. Animal Testing for the Purpose of Medical Research An Argument Against Animal Testing. words.
0 pages. An Essay on Ethics on Animal Experimentations. words. 2 pages. An Introduction to the Issue of Animal Testing in Today's Society. An Argument in Favor of Animal Testing in. Animal Testing (Argumentative Essay Sample) June 5, by admin Argumentative Essay, Essay Samples, Free Essay Samples.
Animal research and development usually begin their trials using rats. If the tests are successful, further tests are done on monkeys before using human beings. For testing, such tiered rounds are important .
If you are looking for custom paper writing services such as the writing of animal testing essay thesis, pro animal testing essay, an essay on animal testing, or only generating an animal testing essay conclusion, you can rely on us for the best.
All the papers you get at webkandii.com are meant for research purposes only. The papers are. They argue that testing animals does not yield accurate results compared to human application; therefore, there is no need to involve animals in testing drugs or products.
Use of animals for medical purposes is seen to be necessary.
Animal research and development usually begin their trials using rats. Animal Testing Essay Examples. total results. Animal Testing for the Purpose of Medical Research.
2, words. 5 pages. An Argument Against Animal Testing. words. An Essay on Animal Research and Testing. words. 2 pages. An Analysis of the Use of Living Animals as as Important Way to Solve a Medical Problem. words. A model essay for students to use as a resource to help organize essays.
Although humans often benefit from successful animal research, the pain, the suffering, and the deaths of animals are not worth the possible human benefits.
have sought better ways to test their products without the use of animal subjects. In Against Animal Testing.