Against Animal Testing Essay Example

of physiological differences. However, despite this fact, significant funding is still dedicated to animal testing each year.

When conducting specific experiments, animals often exhibit different outcomes compared to humans. For example, penicillin, which has been a life-saving drug for humans since 1928, can cause severe harmful effects and even fatality in cats and guinea pigs. Similarly, while morphine acts as a sedative for humans, it actually stimulates goats, horses, and cats. Additionally, Strychnine is lethal to humans but does not harm monkeys. On the other hand, Belladonna is deadly to humans but harmless to rabbits. As a result, conclusions derived from research involving other species cannot be automatically applied to the human context.

Next, animal testing is both cruel and inhumane towards the animals being tested on. As mentioned in Overton's 2006 article titled "It's not just cruel, it's ineffective," the Animal Welfare Act necessitates laboratories to tally the number of animals utilized in testing. However, this act does not mandate scientists to include mice, rats, and birds in their counting. These particular animals make up about 80% to 95% of the total animals used (p. 5). Consequently, due to their exclusion from the count, millions of these animals may have endured immense suffering unbeknownst to anyone. Every day, thousands of cosmetics and household products are subjected to testing on animals, resulting in severe pain for the animals involved.

Many products require multiple trials, which can involve hundreds of tests on different animals. Animal testing often leads to adverse effects such as insanity, blindness, deformation, insomnia, and severe burns. It is alarming to witness the monthly death of millions of animals and the annual suffering endured by billions.

Animals are living beings who did not consent to experimentation and therefore become involuntary victims. Recognizing animal rights and avoiding unnecessary suffering in the pursuit of human progress is crucial.

The rights to life and protection from forced testing should be extended to animals, just as historically discriminated cultures such as African Americans, Jewish people, Gypsies, and others have been granted these rights. The practice of animal testing is horrific and must be eliminated. There are several facts that strongly support the argument against animal testing. According to an article by Page in 2006 titled "Does animal testing help human medicine?," these enclosed facts provide strong evidence for discontinuing animal testing: (1) Less than 2% of human illnesses (1.16%) are observed in animals. (2) Animal tests and human results agree only "5%-25% of the time" according to the former scientific executive of Huntingdon Life Sciences. (3) Around 95% of drugs that pass animal tests are considered useless or dangerous to humans and are immediately discarded. (4) Despite their irrelevance to humans, there are at least 50 drugs on the market that cause cancer in laboratory animals. (5) A survey conducted among doctors showed that 88% believe that animal experiments can be misleading due to anatomical and physiological differences between animals and humans. (6) Rats are only 37% effective in identifying the causes of cancer in humans.

Flipping a coin would generate more accurate outcomes than animal testing, as up to 90% of animal test results are considered irrelevant for humans. Various factors like diet and bedding can affect the results of animal experiments. For instance, different locations using the same strain of mice have shown drastically different

cancer rates - over 90% and nearly zero respectively. Additionally, conflicting findings that do not align with human conditions can arise due to sex differences among laboratory animals. Shockingly, approximately 9% of anesthetized animals do not recover from the experiment and perish instead. It is estimated that rats metabolize around 83% of substances differently compared to humans. Furthermore, a study in Germany disclosed that drugs deemed safe based on animal tests caused 88% of stillbirths and 61% of birth defects. Moreover, out of over 200,000 released medicines, only 240 are considered "essential" by the World Health Organization, indicating a significant failure rate. A German doctors' congress concluded that medications passing animal testing cause roughly 6% of fatal illnesses and 25% of organic illnesses. These instances highlight the limitations and deficiencies when solely relying on animal experiments. The progress in medical practices has been hindered several times due to vivisection; for example, development in life-saving ectopic pregnancy operations was delayed by four decades because of vivisection techniques.
Furthermore, in a legal case involving manufacturers of Thalidomide, they were acquitted as multiple experts concurred that animal tests are not reliable indicators for human medicine. Another example is the prolongation of blood transfusions for 200 years due to animal studies. Despite a 90-year delay in corneal transplants (20), there remains divided opinion on the necessity of animal experiments, with only 45% agreeing on their importance, despite several Nobel prizes being awarded (21). It should be noted that there are at least 450 alternative methods available to substitute animal experimentation (22). The alarming statistic of thirty-three animals per second dying in laboratories worldwide and one every four seconds in the

UK further underlines the continuous issue (23). Even the Director of Research Defense Society, a group committed to defending vivisection, acknowledged the potential for achieving medical progress without using animals (para 5). The combination of these factors - including differences between humans and animals, inhumane treatment towards animals, existence of alternate testing methods, and numerous problems associated with testing - all support the argument against animal testing globally. The facts provided above along with quotes and examples leave no room for counterargument and further strengthen this viewpoint.

Animal testing is both morally wrong and outdated. It not only harms humans but also inflicts suffering on animals. To ensure a healthier world, it is necessary to find alternatives to animal testing. Countless humans and animals endure deformities and defects as a result of this practice, often leading to their demise. Advocating for the torture of animals is not a path towards progress. It is imperative for society to awaken to this reality and embrace safer alternatives that do not harm millions of individuals every year.