Animal Testing Benefits and drawbacks Essay

Keywords: animal testing advantages, animal screening disadvantages

1. 0 Introduction

The Greeks assumed that animals were a lesser form of life because family pets could not think like humans did. Furthermore, this thought was persisted by Christians who claimed that pets were less significant because that they had no heart and soul (Vivisection, 2002). Pet animal testing is the use of live pets or animals for research to be able to better understand the effect of certain substances towards real human health. This request has been broadly completed in many sectors. Numerous family pets have been used for animal trials, such as guinea pigs, rabbits, pups and mice. The issue of animal evaluation has become a worldwide focus these days due to quarrels raised by those who find themselves against pet animal experimentation.

Unquestionably, the practice of pet experimentation has increased tremendously compared to the past. According to Shandilya (2008), it's estimated that 20 million pets are being used for animal experimentation yearly for the purpose of medicine as well as for testing other products. Studies from studies point out that less than 10 percent of pure mental researches use pets or animals as test topics, which do not include animal themes used for cross-over medical experimentation (American Psychological Connection, n. d. , cited in Harding, L. , 2001). However, there are a few who state that animal tests are cruel and immoral, besides violating an animal's rights. This has induced a lot of people to agree with the moves of anti-vivisection organisations credited to brutal treatment towards pets.

Although there are laws and regulations regarding animal tests enforcing the decrease in the utilization of family pets for vivisection, competitors of animal experimenting remain debating about the main topic of legalizing it.

If we view this subject matter from a broader perspective, it can be seen that pet screening should be legalized as it assists scientist in the discoveries of new drugs and treatments to make health and medication better, an animal's life will not hold just as much value as a human's, which is the most exact way to learn the effects of substances on a living organism.

This research paper will make clear why animal screening should be legalized. Research conclusions are confined to america of America, since the subject of animal evaluation is highly debated there and the improvement of this concern in the US is in accordance with other countries.

2. 1 Canine testing assists with the introduction of drugs and treatments.

Currently, humans are often subjected to various diseases that are life threatening, which include existing diseases or new varieties of diseases scheduled to mutations and changes in the surroundings. Hence, researchers will work hard to find cures for all these illnesses. From here, it could be seen that canine testing is essential in the sustenance of human being health. Pets will be utilized to study the result of newly invented drugs, whether it will help in curing the condition.

Speaking of the positive benefits of animal evaluation, this includes the introduction of new medication and treatments. Derbyshire (2004) described that lots of medical improvements used animal assessment; canines were used to develop the production of insulin, whereas primates were employed in the production of a powerful anti-rejection medicine, cyclosporine. Besides this, discoveries of varied vaccines have developed through canine experimentation. From here, it can be seen that canine tests can guide us to discoveries of new knowledge about living organisms.

Many drugs have been invented to fulfill the aim of remedying diseases. However, the side effects of recently invented drugs remain unknown. Therefore, dog trials allows the evaluation of the threat of drugs before getting used upon humans that will greatly reduce the risk before any individuals based studies are completed (About Animal Tests, n. d. ). Drugs that are examined safe may then be used to save millions of valuable individual lives. The future of medical science still depends on animal testing, which clearly shows a need in legalizing dog testing.

There are some people who claim that the consequences of drugs tested on animals might not be the same to humans. Arthritis medicine Vioxx, which induced 140 000 center disorders and strokes in United States of America, was withdrawn from the global market even though it appeared to be safe when analyzed in pets or animals (Archibald, 2004). However, scientists have proven that pets or animals are extremely similar to humans and tests done on them would produce similar results obtained through future human being experiments (About Animal Trials, n. d. ). Hence, undertaking animal evaluation on drugs would enhance the quality of human being life indirectly.

Therefore, to sum everything up, animal trials should be legalized because it assists experts in medical treatments besides drugs finding, improves health and medicine and is able to test the security of drugs. Alternatives of dog testing aren't as plausible because they are not as exact as the results obtained from tests conducted upon animals. Hence, canine evaluation should be encouraged instead of being suppressed.

2. 2 The importance of individuals lives is given priority over creature lives.

Differences existing between humans and pets cause animals to receive treatments which will vary and unequal although both of these are alive. As family pets change from humans as they don't have conscience, they are believed inferior compared to humans when it comes to the value of life. Since the lives of humans are considered more valuable than creature lives, animals will have to be sacrificed in animal experimentation.

The benefits and drawbacks of animal screening were debated with both factors being able to produce solid reasons for their stands. From view of sentiency, it is pointed out that living things are morally equivalent. However, the lives of humans are superior within the lives of pets or animals (Garner, 2005). Specialists have to make a choice between your welfare of humans and the welfare of pets or animals. Which is more important, the life span of a individual or the life of an pet? As Archibald (2004) points out, many people are ready to sacrifice the lives of pet in animal assessment to save individuals lives.

Even though individual welfare is the key matter, the welfare of your animal is still taken into account by minimizing the anguish of family pets when conducting pet experimentations. The Animal Welfare Act have been formed and assessed constantly to safeguard animals and reduce the number of vivisections carried out (Monamy, 2000). Every test involving the use of animals is normally implemented with anesthesia. Together with this, the tests will not be repeated or pets used will be euthanized when brutal treatment is included. Animal tests can be accepted as it allows the improvement of individual life quality minus the suffering of pets (Garner, 2005).

Those who are against dog assessment argued that family pets have the right to live peacefully. Pet testing is undoubtedly unkind treatment towards family pets as it violates pet animal privileges as their lives are valuable as well (Le Fanu, 2003). Nevertheless, their arguments are vulnerable because animals lack the sense of common sense, and they are not put through moral claims and animal rights (Cohen, 1986). Hence, they can not be weighed against human life. As long as the animal is experimented upon without pain, the welfare of the pet is not violated. Therefore, it is appropriate to legalize the activity of animal screening as individuals life should be prioritized.

Although there are many who are against animal experimentation, the things asserted aren't h3 enough to discontinue the activity of animal trials. Supporters of pet testing affirm that family pets shouldn't have equal rights with humans as both these cannot be compared. Family pets lack the sense of view, thus human lives always come first before pet animal lives. Animals are considered to be protected so long as animals receive lowest amount of hurting. So animal tests should be legalized to conserve more individuals lives.

2. 3 Animal testing is helpful for studying the effects of chemicals.

Many new chemical compounds are produced annually to meet up with the demand of the global market such as in agriculture, medication and aesthetic products. The credits should get to animal screening. The effect of this particular substance has been analyzed to produce countless helpful products. This can increase the longevity of humans besides bettering the human standard of living.

By conducting tests on family pets, the researcher can gain priceless information from the living specimen. Winston (2006) stated that 70% of the Nobel prizes for physiology or treatments are contributed from animal trials. Hence, it is clearly shown that by carrying out researches on pets or animals by studying the effects of a substance can bring an enormous impact upon the earth. The breakthrough of knowledge will be postponed or continue to be undiscovered if animal screening is not completed.

As stated by Le Fanu (2003), primates offer the best experimental models as they have got 99% similarity in genes with humans. Animal testing can be executed on primates to ensure the safety of some drugs before being analyzed on humans. The opportunity for both organisms exhibiting the same effect is high due to the similarity of these genes. This in turn can decrease the risks experienced by humans when commencing the studies. Hence, family pets are good tools for learning the consequences of various substances.

In spite of the, folks who are towards animal testing claim that it must not be legalized just because animal experimentation leads to medical breakthroughs and the results is more satisfying. This statement is insufficient to justify the drawbacks of animal screening (Derbyshire, 2004). Alternatively, it is proven that the beneficial outcome outweighs its disadvantages, so it is rational to legalize the activity of animal trials. Without studying the effects of chemicals using animal tests, almost all of the major vaccines against disease like polio, rubella and hepatitis B used today would not exist (Derbyshire, 2004). New drugs undertake in vitro research, computer modeling and dog trials before being tested on humans. Thus, every step is essential in this process of studying the consequences before a medicine is introduced in to the market.

In short, the consequences of a material can be review by carrying out animal screening which can provide invaluable information aside from the anatomy of some animals act like humans. Even though canine experimentation its negatives, you may still find many benefits that can gain by carrying out animal evaluation. Thus, legalization of canine evaluation must be accepted. Moreover, it's rather a good tool for education and research purposes.

3. 0 Recommendation

Normally, the usage of pets or animals for animal tests delineated as cruelty towards animals and really should not be legalized. However, it is impossible to ban the practice of canine experimentation due to the benefits brought by pet research towards mankind. Animal screening is a noble action to support the welfare of humans. Since the practice of canine testing cannot be discontinued, the welfare of animals can only be covered by another methodology.

The theory of "Three Rs", that is "refinement", "reduction" and "replacement" can be practiced. The experts are pledged to reduce the number of pets or animals used when executing a research. To utilize the least number of resources to obtain the fastest results, analysts have the inclination of utilizing a smaller number of animals throughout their research. This is an work that exhibited the willingness of mankind to lessen the cruelty into the pets or animals. Besides this, experts were asked to reduce the degree of fighting of the pet. This is achieved by exclude some needless hazardous actions involving the animals. Lastly, choice methods should be utilized whenever possible to replace the consumption of animal trials (Derbyshire, 2006).

For instance, the welfare of family pets can be secured by doing so. The practice of dog experimentation should bargain between the welfare of humans and pets so that tranquility may be accomplished. Animal experimentation still can be practiced, and the laws and regulations should be totally enforced so that it is not violated by irresponsible people.

4. 0 Conclusion

Due to the increased consumption of animal screening, the problem of creature experimentation gets highly debated and remains relentless. After analyzing several points, it has revealed that animal evaluation should be legalized as it can help in the improvement of remedies and health, individuals life is more valuable than pet life, and really helps to learn the outcome of a chemical on a full time income organism. Daily, anti-vivisectionists try to rule out creature screening by looking at this issue from the animal's point of view. Concurrently, supporters of pet experimentation could actually refute their quarrels, by proclaiming the welfare of humans should always come first before pets. They viewed the subject of animal trials from a broader perspective and the long-term advantages which come from animal experimentation. Life is never perfect, some sacrifices have to make to have success for a better future. Nonetheless, animal research should be completed as its advantages will be more significant than the negatives.

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)