Essay Title: 


March 24, 2016 | Author: | Posted in philosophy, social sciences

Animal Testing

Animal testing has been a controversial issue for a long time Supporters of animal testing contend that using animals in experiments is necessary so as to be able to determine the safety and effectiveness of medicines , cosmetics and similar products to know effective ways to cure and prevent human diseases and for educational purposes . However it is herein argued that animal testing is not as advantageous as its supporters contend it to be . Animal testing as this will show is unnecessary can result to more harm than good for both [banner_entry_middle]

man and animal cruel , and expensive

Animal testing is unnecessary . Supporters of animal testing contend that experimenting on animals is necessary to develop and advance human life especially with regards to health and quality of living . However , this is not so such that animals need not go through these experimentations and tests so as for scientists to know how to improve ‘ man ‘s way of living . Contrary to claims that using animals is the only concrete way to finding cure for illnesses and improve life standards , there are other methods that are capable of replacing animal testing that do not only achieve the same results but can even be more accurate in the findings . The Scientific Advisory Committee of the European Centre for the Validation of Alternative Methods (2006 ) claims that the use of cell cultures rather than animals in establishing the toxicity of cancer drugs and in identifying contamination increases test accuracy and consumer safety . Other alternatives to animal testing include mathematical and computer models use of organisms with limited sentience such as invertebrates , plants , and microorganisms and human studies , including the use of human volunteers , post marketing surveillance , and epidemiology (Bekoff Meaney , 1998 ,

. 7

Animal testing may cause harm than good for both man and animal . Those who support and are amenable to animal testing contend that the physiques and characteristics of animals are very much like that of humans and as such , the outcome of laboratory tests on animals can predict or produce the same outcomes to humans . There are certain characteristics and organs

Animal Testing Page_ 2

however , found among humans that may be absent with the animals . Rats among the most commonly used animals in research and testing , for example , do not have gall bladders like humans . As such , with different physiological make-ups between man and animals , findings in experiments that use animals may not be applicable to humans . This does not only connote useless sufferings and even death on the part of the animals , it also poses threat to humans as well . A popular case in this contention is the Thalidomide tragedy . During the 1960 ‘s , Thalidomide was marketed and sold as a prescription drug to prevent nausea among pregnant women The drug was first tested on mice , guinea pigs , rabbits , cats , and dogs and since no other side effects were observed in any of the animals tested , thalidomide was declared nontoxic (Stephens Brynner , 2001 ,

br 9 . Unfortunately scientists soon… [banner_entry_footer]

Comments Off on ANIMAL TESTING


This author has published 9190 articles so far. More info about the author is coming soon.

Comments are closed.