Should Animals Be Used to Test the Safety of Products Such as Cosmetics - Research Paper Example

Should Animals be used to Test the Safety of Products Such as Cosmetics Science has continued to revolutionize the world since time immemorial. It is not possible to establish a concrete scientific finding without testing its viability. In the research of consumable products, the use of animal models has a long history. In the wake of the 20th century, advocacy on animal rights gained ground has raised a lot of controversy and criticism at the same time. This development facilitated enactment of policies to ensure that animal safety precautions are looked into before engaging in any product testing. The most used animals in testing of products include rats, mice, zebrafish and non-human primates among others. The debate is not yet to be concluded, the human right activists have strongly argued in favour of total withdrawal of animal experimentation, this leaves the question of how else can these products be tested without the use of animals. However, the proponents argue that the safety of the animals is taken of and have based their case on the success of the 20th century inventions that were facilitated by the use of animal models. Animal models should continue to be used in testing of products because they are the best testing instruments in the current state of affairs, again their safety is considered. Animal use in testing is as old as history itself. According to Fox et al. (2), Aristotle and Erasistratus in the early days adopted use of animal models in testing of different things. Later on, the use of animal models started gaining popularity among the earlier scholars especially in the early centres of civilization, including the Roman Empire and the Greeks. A Rome scientist called Galen otherwise regarded s the father of vivisection, attempted dissecting goats and pigs. To complement the earlier works of Galen, another physician, Avenzoar who lived in the twelfth century adopted the testing of surgical procedures using animals (Claude 125). Using the animal models many breakthroughs have been seen especially in the development of medical products. The trend continued without clear policies until around the early years of 20th century. A disaster struck in 1937 where a drug released killed more than one hundred people, this aroused the United States government to pass a law that made it mandatory to have a drug tested on animals before its introduction to humans (Ilman 16). The issue of using animal models started raising controversy early in the years after the adoption of vivisection. Standardization of animal testing was initiated by the passing of the Animal Protection Law by the British parliament that was later accompanied by another law, the Cruelty to Animals Act. Animal protection in the United States has made several steps and is said to have been initiated by among other things, a memorial held by medical students over a vivisected dog, the animal activists intensified protests that saw establishment of animal protection mechanisms. Advancements have been made in replacing the use of animal models, refining the testing mechanisms and the reduction in the use of animals (Ilman 16). Animals have the same rights as humans. The animals are subject to the same pain and suffering that the humans go through. They suffer when they are injured, this means that the things that humans go through happen to them too, they fall sick, they die (Fox 2). When an animal develops cancer or some other condition because of being used to test products, they undergo through the same situation that every other person would be subject to. Considering this aspect demonstrates that, it is ironical for humans to think that they are humane when they are part of exploitation to other organisms. The reason why humans have adopted the use of animals is because they can control them and manipulate them the way they want. Nature creates a balance that should be altered through artificial mechanisms. The biological similarity between man and animals used in testing is an advantage to the researchers and a disadvantage to the animal, the fact remains that the animal has no benefit in the research while the man benefits entirely. It is possible to lose the life of animal in the process of experimentation; the life is taken as insignificant because humans have considered their rights superior over those of the other animals. Animals are not any different from humans; the only difference can be related to the level of intelligence. Humans have infringed on the rights of the animals because they lack a right to defend themselves independently. They have no platform to bring out their issues, their only voice is the human right activists who can be corrupted or induced to think otherwise, their stand can be compromised. Again, it is unnecessary to apply the treatments to animals that would benefit them. Products such as cosmetics are not really a necessity for the animals, making it illogical for them to be tested on them. It can only be right if the products meant for them are the only ones tested through them. Again, the effects of the products under test sometimes have a big variation with the effect on humans, a good example is the effects of Eraldin, a drug that was successfully tested on animals but when introduced to humans caused blindness, joint pains and stomach upsets, it was later withdrawn in 1975 (Gaudilliere and Hess 172). A more severe case was seen when Opren, an anti arthritis drug that resulted into several deaths and other serious side effects. Shockingly, Food and Drug Administration has admitted that nine out of ten drugs tested on animals yield varied results in humans (Food and Drug Administration 1). These incidences showed that testing products using animals is not the ultimate solution. The use of animals is therefore, a breach of their rights and should be approached with caution. The animal activists have a point that needs to be carefully analyzed and appropriate action taken. It is very true that the animal rights are very important to them and less important to humans. Humans seem to be aroused by their curiosity to explore various things such as cosmetics development, but a question arises, what are the implications of these products on the humans and the animals they are tested on, do we really need them or it is a strategy to mint money for a few capitalists. Pondering these questions is helpful in understanding the need for regulation of the products that are tested on animals and ultimately finds their way in the market. Literally, animals do suffer when some of the test treatments are administered to them, but the lack of other models are some of the reasons that have been given for the inhumane cats against animals. Animals are subjected to some amount of torture but a better alternative to them in testing of human consumable products remains to be found. I agree with the researchers that have ethically applied animals to test products that are of benefit to humans (Frankel and Paul 2). From the onset, use of animal models by individuals such as Louis Pasteur was for a beneficial effect that resulted into a positive development n the field of medicine. Since then, the impact of the research and tests done on animal models has shaped the world of biologically inclined sciences. The products thereof have helped cure diseases and generally improve the living standards. Looking at the medical inventions that have won awards such as the Nobel Peace Prize, most of them have used animals in testing a certain product or behaviour. Research is very beneficial to the livelihood of people; human life as well as those of animals should be dignified, this is the reason why every research is accompanied by an ethical aspect. Ethics in the use of animal models as provide for by various legislations and policies advanced by governments across the world. The United Kingdom provides the best policies to prevent harm against humans, with the ethics committee setting standards that should be adhered to. There is a provision that animals are only used when another suitable alternative does not exist. Animals provide the best option in testing of products so far. Research continues every day aiming to provide solutions to human problems as well as providing an opportunity for humans to advance in their living standard. Animals provide the best models for testing products for use by humans. It is estimated that approximately about 95% of the total genes present in humans are shared with mice, making them ideal for testing products that finds their way into the human cells (Fox 34). Apart from this great similarity, the organ system between humans and other animals is the same, while the anatomy and conformation relates closely with that of the primates. It is highly unlikely that non-animal models such as in vitro methods and computer modelling can be a substitute for the animal models; this is because of the diverse variance between the humans and models in many respects. The pharmacological and toxicological aspects of most of the animal drugs closely relates to that of humans, therefore a product that acts fairly on the animal model is likely to have the similar impact on the animal. New drugs, cosmetics and other human consumable products are very significant for human life. Lack of these can result to considerably poor living standards as well as good health. Human life is incomparable to that of animals, that of humans is more dignified because over the ages humans have been known to slaughter and manipulate animals for their own use. This statement does not support brutality against animals but it is true that the animals have man’s servant throughout the ages. The lives of other animals are also conserved though trials done for veterinary products, they help other animals in getting the right treatment and other therapies (Ilman 20). Animals are a good predictor of whether substances are safe, it is not fair to compare the life of animal to that of a human, and their philology is are not absolutely the same. Other methods of testing products are deficient of convincing systems that can predict side effects conclusively. Research is a core aspect in enhancing the human livelihood. Two categories of products are tested using animal models, the most important of them are the products that have a therapeutic importance such as drugs. Invention of these has resulted into improved well being of the population, it is imperative that the animal models be used in testing of products and in research (Frankel and Paul 1). The only thing that should be considered with a lot of attention is implementing animal rights in a way that discourages curious scientists from exploiting animals in the name of research. With adequate mechanisms in place, animals can be used since their use is very beneficial to humans. The numbers of animals that are used for research are almost insignificant compared to the number of animals that are ruthlessly killed every day, without demeaning the lives of animals it is apparent that the use of animal models is not a crisis that should be given more attention than it should deserve. However, animal used in testing products should be used with caution and extreme care. In conclusion, it is apparent that the best option for use in testing of products for consumption by humans is animals. Animals share several similarities with humans, from the organ system, to the body processes, to the genetic material, aspects that make it possible for the products to have a representative effect as in humans. The other alternatives available are deficient in many forms and do not provide concrete evidence of safety. However, the animal models should be used with care and caution. Concrete policies should be developed and implemented for inhumane treatment against animals used for testing products. Works Cited Claude, Bernard. An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine, 1865. First English translation by Henry Copley Greene, published by Macmillan & Co., Ltd., 1927; reprinted in 1949, p. 125. Food and Drug Administration. FDA Statistics. 2013. Web. December 2, 2013. www. fda.gov/ Fox, James, G. et al. Laboratory Animal Medicine. Orlando: Academic press. 1984. Frankel, Paul and Paul, Jeffrey. Why Animal Experimentation Matters: The Use of Animals in Medical Research. Transaction Publishers, 2001. Web. December 2, 2013. http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=AceJNXAULsUC&printsec=frontcover&dq=why+animals+should+be+used+for+research&hl=en&sa=X&ei=1mucUsLTNrGZ0AXTyYGYCA&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=why%20animals%20should%20be%20used%20for%20research&f=false Gaudilliere, Jean-Paul and Hess, Volker. Ways of Regulating Drugs and in the 19th And 20th Centuries. Palgrave Macmillan. 2012. Web. December 2, 2013. http://books.google.co.ke/books?id=FjoxhE75CzUC&pg=PA172&lpg=PA172&dq=FDA+eraldin&source=bl&ots=Tiw6jOf0zO&sig=Kkr1Yj5I-d8r7RAiUZc-PNIkDuc&hl=en&sa=X&ei=mKqcUqDqOMPnygOvj4LQBQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=FDA%20eraldin&f=false Ilman, John. Animal Research in Medicine: 100 Years of Politics, Protest And Progress. The Story of the Research Defence Society. Research Defence Society. 2008. Read More