Stance Against Animal Testing
“Each year, more than 100 million animals are killed in U.S. laboratories” (“Experiments on animals: Overview”). One hundred million per year is an overwhelming amount considering how little progress is made from animal testing. There is no justifiable reason for making living beings suffer when the biological makeup of animals and humans is so different and there is a plethora of alternatives.
Defenseless animals are put in an overwhelming amount of pain being tested on for mankind’s own selfish benefit which is unethical and immoral. They are subjected to the torture of constantly being poked and prodded with needles, forced to ingest/inhale, their skin being burned off, holes drilled into their skull, being isolated and confined to a cage, along with many other traumatic experiences until their death, in addition to having to deal with the after effects of the procedures being inflicted upon them all for experiments that do not ensure the results will be similar to those of humans. “78,294 animals subjected to “severe pain near, at, or above the pain tolerance threshold of unanesthetized conscious animals” according to the statistics of Canada in 2013. This is an astonishing amount of animals forced to go through agonizing pain for the sake of human research in just one year. “Reports conclude that even the minimal standards set forth by the AWA are not being met by these facilities” This shows that these animals are not even being provided the least bit of comfort or care during these experiments. These animals are being tortured and treated inhumanely for the testing of food, drugs, cosmetics, and medical research when the information being collected is not completely accurate and there are many other alternatives (“Experiments on Animals: Overview” Peta).
Since animals and humans are so different, testing on animals does not correctly show how a drug or chemical will react on a human. Animal’s and human’s organs, nervous systems, cellular makeup, and physical bodies are not similar enough to be considering an animal’s reaction to something anywhere near the same as a human’s might be. “Even if a new chemical entity is deemed safe at animal stage, it only has an 8 percent chance of being approved for human usage” (Ericson) A mere eight percent is not worth taking an animal’s life over. “Currently, nine out of ten experimental drugs fail in clinical studies because we cannot accurately predict how they will behave in people based on laboratory and animal studies” (“Experiments on Animals: Overview). This is only one out of ten experimental drugs being successful based on animal studies. Millions of animals are being made to suffer and die for barely any progress.
There are plenty of new advances in science and technology that provide ways of testing that do not include bringing any harm to animals and give more accurate information. One of these alternatives is called the “chemosynthetic liver”. A veteran chemist, Mukund Chorghade, came up with the idea to start with liver cells and created a chemical compound that is the chemosynthetic liver. The chemosynthetic liver has the ability to run a drug through it and tell the exact results of how it would work going through a living human being, making it easier and faster to catch anything wrong. “In one sample trial, the chemosynthetic liver caught a particularly nasty metabolite that would have set the developer back millions of dollars and countless hours of research. It did so by providing a level of specificity that would otherwise have required about 1,000 rats and 100 dogs” This confirms the staggering difference between using the chemosynthetic liver versus testing on an animal. The method saves not only time and money, but animal lives as well. “Though still in its early phase, the method has already proven viable in 50 similar sample studies.” This verifies that the chemosynthetic liver has proven to be a reliable way of testing so far, and is worth further developing.
In addition to the chemosynthetic liver another way of testing that is becoming more common is computer modeling. “Many researchers now have access to advanced computer software capable of mimicking and replicating many of the functions of the human body. These programs allow researchers to study the effects of any changes to the human body without testing these changes on animals” By using computer models that can predict human body reactions more precise data is being gathered while sparing animal lives. There is also stem cells, which are cells that can develop into any human tissue or structure. “By using stem cells, researchers can create specialized organ tissues to study diseases and other abnormalities without involving any living beings” (“Alternatives to Animal Testing”) Stem cells have the advantage of actually being made into human tissue which is significantly more accurate than testing on an animal while not causing any harm. This just further proves that there is no need to test on animals with the advanced technology we have today.
Since animal testing proves to only have an 8 percent chance of being deemed safe for human usage (Ericson), causes animals excruciating pain and there are alternatives such as the chemosynthetic liver, computer modeling, and stem cells available, animal testing is not needed in this day and age. In conclusion, animal testing is cruel and unnecessary.
Works Cited
“Alternatives to Animal Testing.” Research in Context, Gale, 2016. Research in Context, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=MSIC&sw=w&u=j020902&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CYODOBR772899801&it=r&asid=eee040ce3e96ced50100e71b505e0887. Accessed 3 Feb. 2017.
“Animal Experimentation.” Gale Student Resources in Context, Gale, 2016. Research in Context, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=MSIC&sw=w&u=j020902&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CLPQUWH681386081&it=r&asid=6208c5056307c4d43ea2338d2acc392c. Accessed 3 Feb. 2017.
“Animal Testing.” Gale Student Resources in Context, Gale, 2015. Research in Context, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=MSIC&sw=w&u=j020902&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CVWTFPN342363283&it=r&asid=3563c04c5e6bec653161845916a9d290. Accessed 6 Feb. 2017.
Ericson, John. “Breakthroughs Might Mean the End of Animal Testing.” Newsweek, 28 Mar. 2014, p. 1. Research in Context, go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?p=MSIC&sw=w&u=j020902&v=2.1&id=GALE%7CA362262525&it=r&asid=382274e7e9beddd55d2ce864c779052e. Accessed 3 Feb. 2017.
“Experiments on Animals: Overview.” PETA, PETA, www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-experimentation/animals-used-experimentation-factsheets/animal-experiments-overview/.