There is a controversial debate over many years whether we should experiment on animals in scientific research or not. On the one hand, it is morally unacceptable to experiment on animals for human benefit. On the other hand, it is indisputable that do not experiment on animals would impede our understanding of scientific include health and disease, and consequently affect the development of new and vital treatments, even include commercial type of research. Sometimes animals and humans react in the differently way to the same drug. As we know, animal anatomy is kind of similar but not homologous to human anatomy. Animal testing is cruel and causes stress to the animals. We do not understand what they are talking, but they do talk to each other and do have consciousness and perception. It should be obvious that keeping animals in cages all day and forcing them to undergo painful testing would cause them stress. And thus, animal welfare must be protected by eliminating unnecessary animal testing and improving regulation of animal testing.
One reason why people experiment on animals is to prove the safety of new products, because Food and Drug Administration(FDA) require that cosmetics are safe and new ingredients need to be properly labeled. The animals testing is mostly for toxicity tests to estimate the safety of the products and chemicals and lethal dose (breathe or be injected with that chemical). In fact, FDA is responsible for assuring that cosmetics are safe and labeled. The FD&C Act does not specifically require the use of animals in testing cosmetics for safety. There are many ways can use for proving the safety of the products. These primitive animal test methods are still in use today because this is the way that we are used to do. Other reason is we are able to ensure any risks of a drug are identified and minimized before testing on humans during clinical trials, this helps to reduce side effects and human fatalities. For example, the Thalidomide Disaster shows animal testing is necessary. In the 1950-60s Thalidomide was used to alleviate morning sickness for pregnancy woman. Sadly, this drug was tested on animals, but not all the necessary tests were performed. Many babies died and approximately 15,000 were born with malformation of the limbs and other defects (Wikipedia, “Thalidomide”). Because of this tragedy, it is now a requirement to carry out all tests on pregnant animals. If animal testing is banned there is every possibility that negative effects on control over drug use and development could occur in the future. Consider animal tests are time- and resource-intensive, it is restrictive in the number of substances that can be tested, and in many cases do not correctly predict real-world human reactions. Only questioning the drug for human diseases by using animal testing in the laboratory is unnecessary.
We can imagine what kind of suffering animals going through during the testing. Each year, more than 100 million animals, including mice, rats, frogs, dogs, cats, rabbits, hamsters, guinea pigs, monkeys, fish, and birds are killed in U.S. laboratories for biology lessons, medical raining, curiosity-driven experimentation, and chemical, drug, food, and cosmetics testing(USDA Annual Report).They are living in a small cage, waiting for testing without running and playing, some animal even does not know how real world looks like. They were healthy but have to suffer for unnecessary reason. Testing on animals is cruel and inhuman.
Some animal testing is ineffective because of the difference in animal biology and anatomy, and it is useless. Some people will say scientists have been able to advance their knowledge of human and animal health and disease dramatically by use animal testing to study Perhaps in the past, we used the most primitive methods apply the experiment to the animals. to obtain the safety of drugs or commercial products. I can’t imagine the torture of animals in those days. But now there are sophisticated computer systems, mathematical models, human tissue and cell cultures and more focused clinical studies can also show us what happens to our bodies during disease, animal testing is not essential.
I researched about animals testing in USA and UK, there are some laws to protect the animals from testing, from Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and Public Health Service(PHS) and united states Department of Agriculture(USDA) (Mulcahy el. “Animal Welfare Act and the Conduct and Publishing of Wildlife Research in the United States”). We can note the animal testing has been intervening and regulating by government. Obviously, these studies do reduce the quality of life of these animals, so, thorough regulations are in place to ensure that they are carried out in a humane way. I am very happy to see that public have such awareness to protect animals and the environment.
Like most people, I recognize animal testing will yield scientific results that benefit humans in certain way. But I have to mention that still have some people ignore the law and use legal gaps to manipulate their experiments. Their inhumane approach has received attention and it has been condemned. For instance, there have some high-profile undercover cases reveals the trading test animals in black market, excessive use of animals, ambiguous misuse, many trials are unnecessary…… The exposure of these cases has further raised public awareness and have put the entire industry under pressure to be transparent, accountable, and aggressive in its adoption of reduction refinement, and replacement (3R) principles. (Frasch el. “Gaps in US Animal Welfare Law for Laboratory Animals”). Effective regulation of animal experiments must be monitored by the government.
I appeal to people to help minimize the harm animals may experience while being studied in the laboratory, the animal testing should be regulated and boycotted. Replacing, where possible, experiments using animals with alternative techniques such as cell culture, computer modelling or human volunteers instead of animals. Reducing the number of animals used, by improving experimental techniques and sharing information with other researchers to avoid many unnecessary experiment on animals. Refining the way, the animals are cared for to help minimize any stress or pain, by using less invasive techniques where possible and improving medical care and living conditions. Avoid commercial products from companies that test on animals, more offend to use alternatives.
John Sanbonmatsu “The Animal of Bad Faith: Speciesism as an Existential Project” Critical theory and animal liberation, 2011.
Frasch, and Pamela D. “Gaps in US Animal Welfare Law for Laboratory Animals: Perspectives From an Animal Law Attorney | ILAR Journal | Oxford Academic.” OUP Academic, Oxford University Press, 4 May 2017, www.academic.oup.com/ilarjournal/article/57/3/285/3796586.
Mulcahy, and Daniel M. “Animal Welfare Act and the Conduct and Publishing of Wildlife
Research in the United States | ILAR Journal | Oxford Academic.” OUP Academic, Oxford University Press, 10 Aug. 2017, academic.oup.com/ilarjournal/article/58/3/371/4080222.
Simon Festing, Wilkinson, Robin. “The Ethics of Animal Research.” Freshwater Biology,
Wiley/Blackwell (10.1111), 18 May 2007, onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1038/sj.embor.7400993/full.
United States Department of Agriculture “Annual Report Animal Usage by Fiscal Year”, 2 June 2017.