No Need for Animal Research Anymore - Case Study Example

Animal Testing Introduction There was a time when products were tested on beings held in unfit conditions in captivity against their will. These tests were done in the way of science and would benefit medical research and, in turn, mankind. These were the tests conducted on Jews in Nazi concentration camps during World War II. When we look back at these events, we can’t help but think about how cruel and unjust these tests were. But what we fail to see is that these kinds of actions have been and are still going on today. Living beings are still held in captivity under unfit conditions and are subjected to tests that cause pain and torture, and usually, death. (Carl, n.d) All this is being done in the name of science, medical research, cosmetics, tobacco and other various forms of consumer products. Why aren’t these tests being so widely condemned? How is this not cruel and unjust? Somehow one species tends to overlook the rights of others when there is benefit. But is it all worth it? Is it even valid? Do we even need animal experimentation in today’s world of advanced scientific simulation and other techniques? Facing the Facts According to studies, the annual number of animals used in laboratory tests, reaches an estimated 100 million. These tests are performed on a wide range of animals that include rats, mice, rabbits, apes, monkeys but also domestic cats and dogs (Carl, n.d). An estimated 1600 chimpanzees are housed in U.S research facilities. Almost 23 million rats and mice were subjected to “experimentation” in the year 1998. These figures come from National Association for Biomedical Research. PETA, on the other hand, says that the figures go higher. Rodents and mice were not even included in the 1996 Animal Welfare act, eventhough 90 percent of the testing is done on them. It wan’t until end of 2000 that they were included in these statistics. Many justify animal testing by crediting it for major medical breakthroughs, including penicillin, chemotherapy for childhood leukemia, hip replacement, insulin, the polio vaccine and heart bypass surgeries. (Fast Facts: animal testing) The most common justification about animal experimentation is that it is a necessary process for the development of medicines, vaccines and cures for human illnesses. Those in favor of animal testing justify the act by asking, what will happen to the research on finding cures diseases such as AIDS, cancer and other heart diseases, if animals aren’t used for medical experimentation? Is animal testing so important, that the research on these diseases will not be able to continue without it? (The Scientific Argument Against Animal Testing) Why We Don’t Need It Animal experimentation is not always benefitial or even valid. There are a number of examples that’s suggest the fact that animal experimentation is invalid. The basic idea is that human and animals are different. Eventhough some of their traits and behaviors may be alike, human illnesses and diseases cannot fully be replicated on an animal and vise versa. Many experts argue that many forms of animal experimentation is not even helpful. Now, many doctors and educated professionals are going against the idea of animal testing. They believe that animals work on different principles than humans and also react differently to drugs. "I have studied the question of vivisection for thirty-five years and am convinced that experiments on living animals are leading medicine further and further from the real cure of the patient. I know of no instance of animal experiment that has been necessary for the advancement of medical science; still less do I know of any animal experiment that could conceivably be necessary to save human life." -H. Fergie Woods, M.D. (The Scientific Argument Against Animal Testing) Ignoring these differences is proving to be quite costly. It is stated in the Journal of the American Medical Association that around 100,000 people lose their lives every year and more than 2 million are hospitalized as a result of prescription drugs used as prescribed. (The Scientific Argument Against Animal Testing) These are the drugs that researchers supposedly thought carried the possible treatment for a particular disease, based on animal experimentation, but failed to realize that humans might respond differently than those animals they tested on. Animal tests are unreliable. An early example of this would be the initial vaccine made to treat polio. Since the vaccine was developed using monkey kidney cells rather than human cells and other alternatives, which were in fact available, resulted in viruses that could cause serious diseases being transferred to humans. And they did. Some viruses that are commonly found in monkey kidney cells were later discovered to cause cancer in humans. These weren’t the only side-effects. It is stated by Deborah Blum, in her 1984 book, The Monkey Wars that, in the late 1980’s, lives of some 59,000 pregnant women were tracked, who had been vaccinated with the salk polio vaccine and it turned out that their children had a thirteen times higher chance of getting brain tumors than those hadn’t been vaccinated. (The Scientific Argument Against Animal Testing) Animal testing is not only unreliable, but also expensive. This cuts down the budget for other better forms of research that would actually aid in finding cures and treatments for diseases. So far, animal experimentation has delayed the war against diseases such as cancer and has not done much in favor of it. If alternatives can be adopted and current techniques can be replaced by alternatives one, then animal testing will have been the most useless and cruel practice ever performed. If we look at the research on AIDS, The progress that has been made in the study has not come from animal experimentation but from human clinical investigation and in vitro research. Animal experimentation and testing continues even though they do not develop the human AIDS virus. Also, the development of the life saving protease inhibitors was delayed by misleading monkey data. We need new ways and a whole new approach to develop human medicines. We can no longer rely on medicine fit for animals. What works for them doesn’t always work for us, and so far, it has hardly worked for us. Applying the data and behavior of one species to another is not only dangerous, but also incorrect. (The Scientific Argument Against Animal Testing) Solution? One word: Alternatives. Here are some alternative techniques to animal experimentation: Autopsies: The most basic of practices. Autopsies have been the key to cracking down almost every disease. This simple technique can play a big role in medical research In vitro: This refers to the testing done in an artificially made environment outside a living organism. Computer: Computers are now capable of simulating and performing complex procedures that were thought to be impossible even a decade ago. Network and model testing, including research on past animal tests can be done through computer technology. Epidemiology: This refers to the controlling and studying of diseases within the human population. Post-Marketing Drug Surveillance: Report all side effects and impacts of medications after it has been released to the public is collected and studied. This could enable health professionals detect and prevent the dangers of unwanted drug reactions. (Argument Against Animal Testing) What can we, as individuals, do to help stop animal experimentation? We can stop buying products that are tested on animals. These products include medicine, cosmetics, tobacco etc. look for products that specify that they have not been tested on animals. Joining animal rights organizations and signing petitions help a lot as well. These people have set up groups for a good cause and they need all the support they can get. Even something as little as our signature can make a big difference, at the end. Even writing to a company that tests on animals can create awareness and a sense of concern. Also, don’t forget to tell people about this and spread awareness. A collective effort can do a lot towards achieving a big goal. (Carl, 5 Ways to Stop Animal Testing) Every living being has the right to live and must not be forced in to captivity and be experimented on against their will. A mouse has as much right to this statement as a human being. Spending money on alternatives will not only save these animals from cruelty, but also help find ways that logically benefit mankind and provide treatment that is made for us, not for innocent animals. Works Cited 1. Argument Against Animal Testing. 20 August 2003. 25 May 2008 . 2. Carl. 5 Reasons to Ban Animal Testing. 24 March 2007. 25 May 2008 . 3. —. 5 Ways to Stop Animal Testing. 30 September 2007. 25 May 2008 . 4. —. Ban Animal Testing Now! 23 September 2007. 25 May 2008 . 5. Fast Facts: animal testing. 25 May 2008 . 6. The Scientific Argument Against Animal Testing. 25 May 2008 . 7. Carlson, Peggy. “Why We Don’t Need Animal Experimentation.” Wall Street Journal 7 Nov. 1995. Rpt. in Elements of Argument: A Text and Reader. Annette T. Rottenberg and Donna Haisty Winchell. 8th ed. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2006. 216-17. Read More