Should animals be used for research? That is the question that should be answered by everyone. There are many arguments on both sides of this issue, but it’s up to you to decide which side should win. This article will not tell you what conclusion should come from your argumentative essay, but instead will provide information so that you can make an educated decision about the topic at hand.
Over the years, nations have debated whether or not animal testing is ethical, and if so, how it should be regulated. Animal rights advocates and organizations have disagreed on this issue across the world. According to philosophers, performing experiments on animals is unethical because they cause pain or harm the creatures. Other choices are available, according to these thinkers, therefore using animals in research should be outlawed.
The reasons why animals should not be used in research
Prices start at $12
Prices start at $11
Prices start at $12
In my view, I am opposed to the use of animals in research. The usage of animals in research has elicited varied opinions among various academics since the discovery of knowledge through science (research). Philosophers are against it, citing a lack of alternative options for toxicological testing on animals and the harsh treatments researchers have subjected these creatures to during medical testing. Unless scientists find additional methods for testing medicines, I believe animal tests are unethical.
These animals are utilized by scientists to test a hypothesis and then modify or reformulate their ideas based on the new facts or information obtained from each study. Animal rights organizations claim that animals are abused in these tests since they are subjected to pain during them (Singer 2). They tend to overlook the fact that animals have moral standing, social and religious significance. Thousands of creatures across the world provide aesthetically beneficial impacts to the environment.
On the other side, researchers are blind to the benefits of animal testing in medicine while focusing only on the positive aspects. They don’t recognize that animals are harmed, and as a result they suffer immensely. The importance of their work to the lives of their family and friends drives them. They see vaccines and medications developed as a result of their research as the inspiration. Because it causes suffering, damages the perpetrators, and is unjustified based on human morality, animal research should be prohibited. Hasn’t man ever wondered if animals experience pain comparable to that felt by humans?
Humans are well aware of their own suffering. You may recognize that a metal rod is hot by holding it with bare hands, for example. It is thought that suffering is mental in nature; to put it another way, it cannot be seen. We feel pain and realize that other creatures experience agony from sights like flinching away from an event or even screaming.
It appears that animals are experiencing pain in the same way as humans, according to philosophers. Animal rights advocates believe that the most significant harm done by studies involving animals is the manner in which the animals are treated, stating that anesthetics for preventing suffering are never utilized.
However, owing to public resistance to the use of animals in research, many people’s lives are saved every year as a result of their death. I believe it is rather courageous for scientists to dispute that taking away a rat’s life is unethical; instead, I think it is an amazing step forward in improving hundreds of millions of people’s lives for thousands of years. Tests on animals are the most frequent toxicological examinations conducted by researchers; the results may assist hundreds of individuals across the cosmos live better (Fox 12).
Non-human animals (animals) are used in research and experiments. Many people take up arms on both sides of the issue, with a variety of reasons to back up each position. Animal study is a contentious issue that generates a lot of heated debates and arguments about animal research and whether it is ethical or not. However, with the use of animals in medical research, such as medicine, there are several advantages for both humans and animals. Many human and animal lives may be saved and prolonged through good treatment.
Abuse of lab animals, as well as those that are used in research and experiments, should be prohibited. These acts must result in stronger punishments and bigger fines to ensure that the public’s negative view of animal testing and research does not grow. The authorities in charge of animal testing and research should always adhere to local laws regarding the rights of the animals, which safeguard them against abuse.
By enhancing penalties and regulations, local authorities can assist in the reduction of animal testing and research prejudice. As a result, the public’s perception of animal testing and research may be reduced, leading to an improved understanding of the advantages of it, as well as a more optimistic view on animal testing and research.
Animal testing is regulated by federal law, the Animal Welfare Act (AWA), since 1966. By engaging with communities and conducting dialogues about people’s views on animal research and testing, local authorities and government bodies may help to dispel the negative image associated with it.
It is true that many people are against animal testing since there are several reports of cruelty to animals in animal research and testing, which are frequently published in the news. Humanity and the animals themselves would probably be eradicated by deadly illnesses if no kind of testing or study on animals were conducted.
The benefits of ethical animal experimentation on animals that comply with the law and rights of the animals have been enormous for humanity as a whole, as well as other species. There are several common illnesses that people and animals share, such as cancer, asthma, and others, which have benefited from ethical animal research.
Animals are not surviving a variety of studies. Animals, like people, have hearts. Researchers have no pity for these creatures, including the ferocious ones. All animals require human affection in order to survive; failure to do so has a high risk of death. Personally, I think testing on animals should be prohibited, but researchers would have to discover something else or someone new to test the goods on in order to ensure that they are safe for human usage. The motives behind animal testing are understandable, and their significance may sway people’s opinions about whether or not such testing should be banned.
Several advantages state that animal research is acceptable, but the other side of the argument does not offer any compelling logic or evidence. The disadvantages have good reasoning and evidence. Animal testing has not proven to be as effective as one of the comments claims. Animals are very different from humans, therefore they are unsuitable test subjects. “Animal testing is inhumane and cruel,’” says one of the cons on the website.
They write beneath the remark that most animals are tested while awake, with no anesthesia to alleviate their suffering. Testing animals might be bearable if they were put to sleep before subjecting them to discomfort. Prior to commercial release, thalidomide, a 1950s sleeping pill that caused 10,000 babies to be born with severe malformations, was tested on animals.
Furthermore, in studies on pregnant mice, rats, guinea pigs, cats, and hamsters that did not result in birth malformations unless the drug was given at extremely high dosages were discovered.” The statement above is evidence that all animal testing may not be accurate results and could be hazardous to humans.
Today, animal testing is one of the most widely and commonly employed methods in the cosmetics and medical sectors. A firm may use this method to see whether any hazardous chemicals in the goods might harm users. Some claim that testing may help consumers get safer and more useful products. Others argue that many animals are subjected to cruel treatment as a result of these studies. While both sides have good arguments, prohibiting animal testing should be supported.
To begin with, animal testing is meaningless. Animals and humans have a wide range of characteristics that make them unique. According to the poll, animals and humans share 1.16 percent of traits. In other words, because some components were harmless to animals, humans might develop illnesses as a result of those elements.
Thamolide, a medicine created to prevent gravidarity in pregnant persons, is an excellent illustration of a responsible instance. Even though it was benign to animals during testing, many congenital abnormalities were caused by mothers who took the pills. This indicates that animal research isn’t always successful since it might distort the effects of the items on people.
Adding to this, animal testing is unethical. God created every species on Earth equal, and we have no right to kill or torture one another’s animals. Animals, on the other hand, get not just skin diseases and high fevers but also cancer and diabetes in severe cases as a result of animal experimentation. According to the poll, many animals commit suicide as a result of the experiment being too painful. This clearly demonstrates that our species exploits animals for our own gain, which should be stopped immediately.
Without performing animal testing, many useful medicines may be developed. A therapeutic for diabetes was invented out of cultured colon bacteria, for example. Even though animal testing is sometimes unavoidable in the process of developing some items, it should be avoided whenever possible.
People have tested on animals for several years. The two main reasons for doing so are to learn more about the animal and to examine drugs and treatments to see if they are hazardous, with the goal of determining whether or not they may be used on humans. As a result, animals should be utilized in animal testing. On a case-by-case basis, animal studies should be considered. The underlying principle, however, is that reducing human suffering is our first concern and the prevention of animal suffering or death comes second.
That is, in order for an experiment to be justifiable, there must be a good probability that it will result in a significant medical breakthrough that would improve human life and suffering. Others believe that animals should not suffer because moral rights and principles of justice only apply to humans. Morality is the creation of social systems in which animals do not participate. Moral rights and principles are reserved for persons who are members of the moral community formed by these social processes.
We humans have moral duties to our fellow human beings, including the obligation to minimize and prevent avoidable human suffering and premature death. Although in principle reducing human suffering is more important, it is possible and correct in practice to maintain animal suffering at a bare minimum. Animal experimenters must aim for the highest levels of animal welfare possible in their laboratories by employing anesthetics whenever feasible and maintaining animals in clean, pleasant, and healthy surroundings.
Supporters of the use of animals in research, such as the British Royal Society, claim that in every medical milestone in the 20th century, animal testing was crucial, with the Institute for Laboratory Animal Research of the US National Academy of Sciences claiming that even advanced computers are unable to simulate intermolecular interactions between molecules, cells, tissues, organs, organisms, and environments.
The arguments in favor of animal testing state that since we can’t fully duplicate an entire living system to conduct tests, there is no perfect replacement for animal testing. Many medicines have severe side effects, but performing scientific research on animals allows scientists to assess the safety of certain medications before conducting human trials.
It is imperative to study how cannabinoids work in humans to further our understanding of pain while also attempting to minimize the risks associated with their use. This may help prevent needless deaths and injuries while providing individuals suffering from debilitating disease or injury with better treatments. Banning animal testing would stifle contemporary medicine, perpetuate human agony, and put human and animal health at risk by allowing pesticides onto the market before they are thoroughly tested for toxicity.
Each year, millions of animals are subjected to painful, miserable, and death as a result of scientific study. Essentially, animal testing has been an important component in the advancement of new knowledge and human benefits. In recent years, animal research has played a significant role in many scientific and medical advancements, particularly in the fields of medicine and immunology.
Although most people feel that animal testing is essential, others are concerned about the animals’ pain and suffering. The delicate balance between animal rights and medical research usage is a contentious issue with far-reaching societal implications. People nowadays are attempting to comprehend and accept these social ramifications based on animals rights in order to better understand them.
Despite the fact that many individuals overlook animals with permanent injuries as a result of experimentation. Many people are unable to comprehend the reality of animal life and the actual laboratory methods and techniques used by these creatures, which is why they try to misunderstand them. Animal testing must be avoided since it is an inhumane way to treat animals, unethical, and there are safer options for testing goods without having to subject them to painful tests.
Companies have subjected numerous animals to many years of testing in order to validate that their goods are safe for people. This has evolved into a horribly cruel method in which many animals are subjected to unimaginable suffering. Animals are harmed because they are confined in cramped cells with hazardous surroundings. In research facilities, there are several important things to consider when conducting animal experiments.