Launch Teen Ink Chat
Chat with other Teen Ink's chat is available to Teen Ink members only. If you're aged 13-19, please sign up or log in.
Teen Ink members
Should Animal Testing Be Banned?
March 8, 2012
I think animal testing is cruelty more than science. Animals are not treated well and are often abused by their handlers. Small animals share a shoe box sized cage with at least eight other small animals. That’s no way to live. Imagine stuffing eight human beings into a regular sized bedroom. Where are you all going to sleep or get dressed? Not easy right? Animals will be held down by metal bands or locked in small cages with a hole cut out for the animals head to be trapped into, so they can not move around and be a hassle while being tested on. An ats lab in North Carolina stuffs monkeys in tubes.
Another harsh thing handlers do is take out dog’s vocal chords so they don’t disturb the lab workers. As for death to an animal; the experimenters will euthanize the animal after being tested on or will use the animal again for further testing until they are dead or useless. If you don’t believe the cruel ways animals are treated, go on youtube and search for: PLRS: undercover at a product- testing lab.
Animals are not just objects. They have feelings and can think, just like us humans do. Rene Descartes, a French philosopher and scientist, said people have the right to use animals just as if they were machines. The more similar the animal is to a human the more intelligent and sentient the animal is, so the more immoral and wrong it is to use the animal as a biological object. Descartes also believed only humans have feelings and could think. If this were true animals wouldn’t flinch and whimper when needles are injected in them or when testers put drops of cologne in the animals’ eye.
Scientists use animals for testing products to make humans lives better right? That’s what I thought too. Well, many experiments that were approved to be available to human beings have later been recalled for safety issues or harmful side affects. Is animal testing very reliable? If products have to be withdrawn from stores and human use, then that in it self should say something. Can we trust that animals will have the same reactions to a product as a human would? Not at all, if we get shampoo in our eyes we immediately know to rinse it out and we’re fine. Animals don’t know that and are not used to such products. Therefore animals will have different reactions to things we can easily fix. A mouse and a human being are not the same and will react differently to different things. We don’t expect a human to live in a cage its whole life. We don’t expect a mouse to brush its teeth and know not to swallow the toothpaste. Many everyday products like toothpaste and soap do not have to be tested for. Companies that make those products and cosmetics however do use animals for testing and it’s completely unnecessary.
There are other ways to test without animals. One process is called the Neutral Red Uptake Assay in which jelly like substances called cultures are put into a glass case then human cells are placed in the culture. Chemicals that are being tested are added to the dish. The human cells will either live or die. The cells react by changing a different color. Researches analyze the color with a computer. The computer can calculate how likely a chemical is to kill human cells. There are also artificial organs, eyes, and skin that react just like the real thing would. Plants and bacteria can be used as well. Doctors can also analyze humans without hurting them by examining what they do on a daily bases. In 1951 Britain doctors showed a link between smoking and lung cancer by examining people who smoke compared to people who don’t. No animals or humans are harmed or killed during any of these tests.
Many people argue that testing on animals is the most efficient way to know that our products are safe. They argue that animals produce much faster then humans do so why not take a few of the animals? Those animals are less important and valuable then human beings anyways right? Wrong. Author Peter Singer says “Humans are animals too, and we must respect other species.” And I agree fully. Other arguments are that using animals is the cheapest way; the other experiments are not as accurate as animals and that using animals have been beneficial to human life. Now I’m not going to say that it hasn’t been helpful but there could have been other alternatives.
After what I have read, yes I am very against animal testing. Yes, animal testing is cruelty and in a lot of cases not necessary. I do use stuff that probably has been tested on animals but did it really have to be? Like perfume, in a test, called the Draize Eye test, scientists spray perfume into a rabbit’s eye. Rabbit’s eyes do not easily wash away irritating substances unlike humans eyes do. Animals are not use to the everyday stuff human’s use, so of course animals will react much differently than humans will. Animals are not meant to use perfume, soap or any other everyday object human’s use, so why test on them? This to me and many others is very cruel and wrong. Save America’s animals before it’s too late.
Free example persuasive essay on Animal Experimentation:
Throughout history, animal experimentation has played an important role in leading to new discoveries and human benefit. However, what many people tend to forget are the great numbers of animal subjects that have suffered serious harm during the process of experimentation. Many people are believed to be ignorant or misunderstand the nature of the lives that animals actually live, and are unable to understand the actual laboratory procedures and techniques. Other than the philosophical questions that arise, ethical (moral) questions are the main reason why many animal right activists want it banned in every country. Activists feel that to this day, there should be no good reason why any living thing should be subjected to this cruel punishment and unwanted torture just for serving another being’s needs.
Although animal experimentation has been around for centuries, the ethical revival of realization on the moral status of animals began in the 1970’s. This problem was a few among many that had been quietly hidden for years until the 1970’s.
Such movements like gaining rights for the oppressed, expressions of antiwar opinions in the U.S.A, and the women’s liberation movement, accompanied the movement for the ending animal experimentation. The animal rights movement has grown more and more complicated through its use of strategy and has successfully brought the issue of laboratory research to the eyes of the public. All forms of media, magazines, radio, television, newspapers, have increased their exposure of animal right protests over the last several years while giving room for groups to produce their own publications. In these publications, activists constantly make the analogy between the work of abolitionists before the emancipation and the efforts of animal right activists. This analogy of racism and “speciesism” was brought about by a philosopher named Richard Ryder in 1985 and brings up the issue of research with animal subjects to be emotionally unpredictable for many people. (Sperling Susan – Applied Ethics in Animal Research Introduction pgs 4-6)
One of the biggest problems and the main reason why animal experimentation should be banned is the large percentage of birth defects that occur. The difference is that humans may also a longer period of fetal development and be more sensitive to birth defects agents than other species. One example of another problem with animal experimentation are that animals can be given nicotine directly as opposed to being exposed to it as a human would for years. Another would be that stress caused by animal handling, whether it be because of lack food or water, may have adverse effects on pregnancy or its ability to mate with the opposite sex. Also these tests are too insensitive and tend to disregard learning or behavioral problems. Our plain existence can influence the behavior of animals and disturb activities such as feeding, care- giving, and mating conduct. (Cognitive and deep ethnology and the great ape project- page 82-86)
There have even been laws that have been recently erected to protect the existence and safety of these animal “victims”. One law known as Kanjorski’s Law states that any substance (that is tested on an animal) that can harm a fetal embryo in development, can call the validity of the tests into question. Several factors can determine the effects on the results based on the different kind of species that are used during experimentation. The genetic difference between species can affect its ability to defend itself or a difference in the placenta may also affect the animal tests. (Birth Defect Research-Why Animal Experiments Are Not the Answer)
In 1986, a German law was passed and was known as the Animal Protection Act. This act forbade experimentation of tobacco products, washing powders, cosmetics, and the testing of weapons on animals. Soon after this law was passed in Germany, many countries started to adopt the law along with new laws such as the ban on LD50 test and the Draize eye irritancy test. Ld50 is a lethal dose that painfully kills nearly 50 percent of the animals that it is injected into, and the Draize test which can cause blindness in rabbits. Places such as the UK define each limit as to having a limit that should not be succeeded, and if done so would be a criminal offense. Every decade, animal experimentation could be looked at in a different light and activists will always be there to defend animal rights. (Orleans, Barbara F. Ethical Themes Governing Animal Experiments pg 140-142)
From the 1960’s to the early 1980’s, teens from eleven to seventeen tried to impress judges of science- fair competitions with cruel live animal experiments. This is just one example of how animal experimentation exists everywhere when supervision is missing. It is also about how laws are not enforced to stop such heinous acts of abuse. The usual projects that the students did were, starving animals to death, blinding the animals, mammalian surgery, and the injection of lethal substances. Although, improvements have been made to convince schools to restrict animal testing.
Federal laws do not exist. Thus there are no provisions in this area that ban dissection or mistreatment, and the National Association of Biology Teachers are not responsible. However, the amendment made in 1985 to the Animal Welfare Act required a group committee to review how the uses of animals were to be used in the some of the college courses at some but not all.
Despite the fact that rats, mice and birds are excluded from the Animal Welfare Act, activist reform groups have just started their mission and are nowhere near the end. (Orleans, Barbara F. Ethnical Themes Governing Animal Experiments) We should make every effort to study separate animals and to learn more about their abilities to feel their torture, psychologically and physically to understand their true feelings. Hopefully in the future, we will no longer have to depend on animals to give us results on safe products. We could also be the ones chained up and experimented on by a higher being in the near future.
You can order a custom essay, term paper, research paper, thesis or dissertation on Animal Experimentation persuasive topics at our professional custom essay writing service which provides students with custom papers written by highly qualified academic writers. High quality and no plagiarism guarantee! Get professional essay writing help at an affordable cost.
4.50 avg. rating (87% score) - 2 votes
Tags: animal experimentation essay, example essay, persuasive essay on animal testing, persuasive essays, science essays