Can it be justified?





Throughout the years, animals have been used in society to support the human race.
This use includes food, clothing or experimental research.
People have begun to realize that the use and cruelty expressed towards animals has gone too far and groups of animal activists are becoming more and more popular.
These activists are continually fighting against researchers who use animals in experiments and are voicing their opinions to put these tests to an end.





Animals have been used to create and refine a variety of vaccines, medications, and surgical procedures.
These animals are also used to test a number of household products to ensure that they are safe for human use.
Annually a total of 225 million animals are used in research and most are exposed to cruel experiments that cause them extreme pain or kill them.
Foreign chemicals are put in the animals eyes and toxic chemicals are applied to its skin.






Is it morally correct to use these animals in research if according to some philosophers all people evolved from similar creatures?
Is animal experimentation the best way of testing products if all results cannot be relied upon?
If alternatives exist, why do some companies still test on animals?
How have these alternatives impacted on the science of testing animals?
Have these alternatives been proven successful?

 The use of animals in research and all experiments performed on them for the benefit of the human race should be put to an end as this process is immoral, unreliable, and the alternatives available render better results.

 Animal experimentation should be stopped because it is immoral and it violates the rights of animal


According to philosopher Tom
Regan, “Animal research routinely and systematically violates the rights of animals and we can no more justify harming or killing a rat than we can justify harming or killing a person.”
All animals should be subjected to the same rights as people since they are living, breathing creatures.



Many people believe that animals should have the right to be treated fairly.
“ Should the principle of nonmalifience be extended to animals? This question maybe met with another question: Can animals be harmed?
If they can be, then what reason could there be for not extending the principle to them? But clearly animals can be harmed.”

 Animal experimentation should be stopped because the results of these tests are unreliable.



The bodies of animals are different from the bodies of humans, and we may react differently to a certain product than an animal would.
For this reason, there have been many different results that vary from lab to lab and have been deemed inconclusive.
On the other hand, tests that were proven successful in animals caused catastrophic results in humans.


In the 1950’s, a drug called thalidomide was introduced in Europe to help treat the symptoms of morning sickness in pregnant women. The drug had been tested in animals before its release and scientists thought it to be safe. The drug, however caused the babies to be born with misshapen limbs and birth defects. Scientists continued to test thalidomide in animals to try and create the same results but were only able to get some of the same results in a particular strain of rabbits.

 Animal experimentation should be stopped because there are alternatives that are more reliable and render better results.



To replace the Draize test, scientists used the membrane that surrounds the embryo in a chicken’s egg.
Human tissues and cells can be used when testing products to see how the products will react with a person’s skin.
By using these alternatives, the number of animals in research has already been reduced and they all have proven successful.

 Scientists have said that the only reason they continue to use animals in research is because they can be easily caged, used at will, and then discarded. Also, some companies will not use new techniques because they fear lawsuits from consumers who are harmed by their products.




Animal experimentation should continue because using animals in research is the only way to really know the true affect of a product on humans.
Animal experimentation has been used for many years and has been proven successful in many cases, so why should it be stopped and replaced with something that we cannot know for sure to be reliable.
Animals do not have the same rights as people because they cannot voice their opinions. They were put on this earth for the use of making the human race the most superior race.



Books
Bloyd, Sunni. Animal Rights. San Diego, California:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers, 1989.



Pringle, Lauren. The Animal Rights controversy. San
Diego, California: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich
Publishers, 1989.
Regan, Tom. Animal Rights, Opposing Viewpoints.
San Diego, CA: Green haven Press, 1996.
Newson, Lesley. Animal Rights and Wrongs. A & C
Black Publishers. 1989. London.





Websites
BBC news. Science & Nature Hot Topics: Animal
Experimentation. 17 Aug. 2004. 27 Sep. http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/hottopics/animalexperi ments/index.shtml
.
Americans for Medical advancement. Fifty Disasters of Animal Testing. 27 Sep. 2006 http://www.vivisection-absurd.org.uk/50dis.html
.
Members against Vivisection. Animal
Experimentation: Cruel and Unnecessary. Nov.
1997. 27 Sep. 2006 http://members.iinet.net.au/rabbit/aniexp.htm
.




Articles
Tatchell, Peter. “Why Animal Research Is
Bad Science.” New Statesman 133.4700(2004):
18-19. Rpt. In Engaging Inquiry: Research and writing in the Disciplines.2004.
Dennis, Carina. “Cancer: Off by a Whisker.”
Nature 17 Aug. 2006. Rpt. In Nature. Vol. 442.
2006. 739-741.

 4 Books
 2 Primary Sources
 3 websites
 2 Articles